Section 1: Fighting Words COmmittees United against Privatization
WRITING RESEARCH ISSUES COMMENTS  PART-TIME
UNIONS OUTREACH EVENTS LINKS EMAIL  HOME

Commentary and Opinion

 home
Stop Privatization Before it Costs You Your Job!

On March 12, 2001, 63 positions in finance, payroll and purchasing were privatized after getting a month notice from the Chicago Community College (CCC) Board. The management of this $1.75 million department was privatized to American Express Tax and Business Services Inc. Dolores Withers, President of local 1708 and employee of the financial aid dept., says that American Express deserves an "F" for the work they have done so far, "They have no idea what they’re doing...there are still 32 vacancies to fill in the department and workers are having to do double and triple the work."

In April, the Board decided that 22 employees, some of them union members, in OIT (Computer systems workers at the downtown office) will also get outsourced. After a twenty minute emergency meeting they voted to contract out this department to Devine, Whitman and Heart for a period of six years to the sum of $32.5 million. Sync Solutions, a subsidiary of DW &H will also land an $11.7 million contract under the Mayor’s program for minority set-aside contracts.
These first layoffs are just the start of a move to privatize throughout the College system.

Chicago City Colleges' new Chairman James Tyree (CEO of Mesirow Financial as well as member of the Mayor's Council of Technology Advisors) stated in an editorial in the March 21, 2001 Tribune, that the city college system, "is a bloated mess in need of fixing." He also referred to the teacher's union (CCTU 1600) as a "20-ton stone crushing the taxpayers, the community and the students." Tyree abstained from voting on the OIT contract; he may have connections to Devine Whitman and Heart that could have been a conflict of interest. Patterning his actions from the corporate world from which they come, Tyree and the Board are taking an irresponsible and dangerous approach to public education after a time when it has already suffered a 30 year decline in funding.

The finance department cuts were said to be in the name of improved quality, but members of the CCTU 1600 teacher’s union say problems in the finance department stemmed from administrative decisions to change computer systems twice in three years, not employee performance. In a letter to the editor, teacher George Otto, asks, "If the colleges are run so poorly, why is not the top management accountable for their misdeeds?" More accurately, this move toward privatization isn't about quality or cost as is sometimes claimed (45% of social service privatization produce no savings whatsoever).

Privatization is useful to the administration as a union busting tool and also as a means to hand over public service money to the corporate sector. When the city announces plans to privatize city employees to cut costs, the city switches from union labor to private contractors, lower paid positions with no security, benefits, or bargaining rights.

Neither is the move toward privatizing union jobs happening in a vacuum:

City Hall already privatized its maintenance operations in 1997, and 1000's of unionized Park District workers lost their jobs throughout the 90's to temporary laborers. Currently, the Fire Department and the CTA are also being considered for outsourcing.

By July 2001, the CCC Board plans to privatize custodial and engineering operations at all campuses. They have also targeted four academic areas: Counseling, Library, Business Department and Computer Information Systems. The College presidents were asked to submit reports evaluating these departments by Feb. 22. (later changed to April).

Adult Educators are also concerned about privatization since they were asked to submit quality review evaluations for each of the campuses by September of this year, a move which preceded each of the privatization announcements in other departments. The Executive Board of 3506 voted unanimously to “take this as a serious threat and to campaign in defense of Adult Education as part of public education, not private profits.”

At the Board meeting in March, 300 City College credit teachers and 100 students from both Olive Harvey and Truman camuses held a protest outside the downtown offices. As well, teachers and staff from locals 1708, 3506, and 1600, along with members of student government have joined together in a coalition to fight privatization, called CCC Unite! Three general meetings have occurred and committees were formed. Students already held teach-in's in order to educate the student body about the threat of privatization to public institutions.

The CCC has a $284 million budget per year, with total assets at $8.5 billion. This valuable and irreplaceable asset must remain in the public trust and not be handed over to private interests. We are the only ones who can stop privatization before it becomes an unfortunate reality, and we must act quickly if we want to protect our jobs and ensure that high quality educational standards at the City Colleges remain intact.
Image by R.W., Text written by Tracy Kurowski

City Colleges for Sale

Chicago has seven City Colleges (CCC). These are public institutions, paid for with taxpayer money. The Colleges have a $284 million dollar per year operating budget. An appointed (not elected) Chair, its Board of Trustees and a Chancellor administer the CCC. A teacher cannot serve in this board. The current Chairman and the Chancellor do not have any background in the field of education; they come from the business and finance sector. Chairman Tyree is the CEO of Mesirow Finances.

According to their website, the CCC serve over 160,000 students in credit, non-credit and adult education programs, they provide courses as wide-ranging as their student body. The educational mission of the CCC is to provide liberal arts education (associate degrees and certificates) occupational education (workforce training) adult education (GED, ESL, ABE), and continuing education (programs that add value to the quality of life). The current mission of the Board is to revamp the CCC by seeking to privatize any and all departments. Tyree is running the colleges as if they are a business; he's bringing "business sense to education" without any regard to consequences or without any real dialogue with taxpayers and with students and teachers.

On February 5, the Board "privatized" the finance, payroll and purchasing department by turning over management of its $284 million operating budget to American Express Tax and Business Services, Inc., to which it will pay $1.7 million. There was no bidding. In April, and in a very speedy meeting, the Board voted to contract out its Office of Information Technology (OIT). In less than twenty minutes, the Board voted unanimously to give the contract to Devine Whitman and Heart for a period of six years for $32.5 million and to Sync Solutions, a subsidiary of Devine Whitman and Heart, who is to receive $11.7 million. Tyree abstained from voting on the OIT contract. No one questioned the legitimacy of this contract even though Tyree sits on the Board and has shares in DW&H. Again there was no bidding. Chancellor Watson states that this transition "will greatly increase our effectiveness and enhance the quality of education for our students. It will also increase our value . . ." But exactly how does contracting out several departments enhance the quality of education for our students? This has not been answered. How does this benefit the students? And how does the loss of public jobs benefit the education of the students?

In this movement of public money and jobs, the only ones increasing in value and profits are the companies that are getting the contracts. Chancellor Watson has asked all college Presidents to evaluate their administrative and instructional services. It is this move that is unprecedented and it would seem to clash with the mission of the City Colleges. With this eminent threat, teachers from various programs, students, clerical employees, counselors, librarians, members from neighborhood organizations have come together to form a coalition to fight privatization. Students at Harold Washington have held teach-ins in order to discuss the threat of privatization with their peers. On May 3, when the Board meets at HW (see article on results of this), students are planning a demonstration. The aim of community colleges as President Truman envisioned them were that they were part of a national system of "free, accessible institutions of higher education".Many concerned teachers, students and members of the community share the same vision and are willing to fight to have their voices heard and keep the Colleges public.
Written by: Leticia Cortez and Rebecca Wolfram

A Brief History of Privatization

"Privatization" refers to the shifting of the production of a good or the provision of a service from the government to the private sector, often by selling government-owned assets. Privatization as an idea is not new, it has been around since 1974 when Chile privatized its pension system. It resurfaced in the 1980s in England under Thatcher. There was a massive privatization of state-owned industries including: British Aerospace, British Telecommunications, British Gas, Rolls Royce, British Steel, and the nation's gas and electric utilities.

Other Western countries followed Britain's example. Japan, France and Germany later began with asset sales of telephone companies, banks, and industrial firms. The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 led to widespread privatization of state-owned firms throughout Eastern Europe. Countries such as Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary sold off billions of dollars worth of enterprises to private investors.

The extent and dollar amount of privatization has increased over the years since the 1970s. According to the International Privatization Update, 2,700 state-owned enterprises were privatized in over 95 countries from 1988 to 1995, raising $271 billion in revenues. Western Europe had the largest share of privatization volume in 1994, with 47.5 percent, followed by Asia/Pacific, 18.0 percent; Eastern Europe, 16.5 percent; and, Latin America, 14.3 percent. In 1997, there was a record-setting $160 billion of total value of privatizations worldwide, surpassing the $89 billion in 1996. This was due to a large number of very large sales, especially of state-owned energy and telecommunications firms in Western Europe, and by the largest privatization in Latin American history: the restructuring, valuation, and sale of the telecommunications firm in Brazil for $19 billion.

Privatization of assets in the past 20 years has been one of the transfers of property in history. During the 1980s, privatization emphasized cost reduction and threatened public employees and managers. The term privatization evoked fear, resentment and intense opposition. Studies of privatization in the 1980s show that the major opposition to privatization initiatives came from employees, especially unionized workers. In response to these findings, proponents of privatization devised strategies to overcome potential opposition. Among these actions were changing legislation and changing the tone by softening their approach and by changing public relation tactics. Reagan mentioned privatization on many occasions, but it wasn't until the 1990s when privatization was put into effect in the U. S. in four cities: Chicago, under Richard M. Daley, Philadelphia, Massachusetts and Indianapolis. The Mayors of these cities and Governor Weld of Massachusetts say that they "adopted privatization as a way to increase and enhance service delivery and reduce the size and cost of government." Size and cost of government, even though privatization does not save anyone any money and the only ones that benefit are the companies that land the lucrative contracts.

The issue of privatization has nothing to do with quality or with cost-savings.
In an unprecedented move Board Chair of the City Colleges of Chicago (CCC) and Chancellor Wayne D. Watson are privatizing several departments at the City Colleges of Chicago (CCC). They have also declared their intentions to look into privatizing the education departments, including Adult Continuing Education, the College Credit Program, and the Adult Education Department that includes the GED and ESL programs. They are trying to do this despite the fact that all of those programs are successful, and are basically going about it without the input of teachers and most importantly, without any student input.Both Tyree and Watson have no background in education. Mayor Daley appointed them. The same Daley who has been privatizing as many City services and departments as he can get away with since the 90s. Daley is even looking to privatize the fire department. Most recently, the CCC awarded an 11 million dollar contract to a business where Tyree sits on the Board.

The corporate reach into U.S. classrooms today is stunning. Big business sponsors everything from lesson plans to football stadiums, from classroom posters to athletic uniforms. A handful of for-profit companies are contracting with local school districts to manage public schools. Critics charge school boards with selling kids to the highest bidder. Meanwhile, in many countries, the defunding of public education is part and parcel of structural adjustment packages that savage the social safety net. Wall Street thinks there is money to be made in the schools and has trumpeted the "education industry" as the next hot investment. Education should be an investment in knowledge not in profit. Unfortunately, profit is what's driving this coming locomotive. They have not evaluated the consequences of privatization nor the complex interplay of economic, social and educational forces.

Ever since Daley started privatizing City jobs in 1989, the standard of living for people working for Chicago has declined drastically. Now he has a five year plan to shut down the public neighborhood clinics. According to a 1997 Chicago Institute on Urban Poverty Policy Report, privatization leads to lower job quality, to wage reductions that place workers below the federal poverty line. Privatization pays those who are doing the privatizing, the companies that get the contracts, not unions, not workers not taxpayers and certainly not students. Leticia Cortez Vice-President AFSME Local 3506

To the 21st Century: From Public to Private
Shouting "outsource Tyree," "outsource Watson," "no privatization, no privatization" close to 400 students, teachers, librarians and clerical staff demonstrated against the City Colleges of Chicago Board’s decision to outsource (privatize) its finance department, including payroll, on Thursday, February 15. In a move that many are saying is uprecedented in its kind and scope the City Colleges turned over management of its finance department to American Express Tax and Business Services Inc.

This move, asserts Watson will "enhance the quality of education for our students." And that the "City Colleges will now be competitive in this new era of change" He speaks of the colleges as if they were stores, or businesses. Tyree has a background in business and none in education. These board members are appointed, they come with their agenda, and try to implement it. Is education a product, are the students the customers as he implies? How does the change of management of payroll, budgeting, purchasing, grants, accounts receivable and payable enhance the education of the over 160,000 students the City Colleges serve? Have there been many complaints from students as to their grants or payments (bills) to the colleges? What warranted the move to privatize this department has not been clearly explained. Does Tyree mean the failure of the new computer payroll systems the administration introduced in one year are the reason? Or is this just a classic move of breaking something in order to have the excuse of having to "fix" the problem by privatizing it In an article from the Tribune,Tyree is quoted as saying the move to privatize these jobs "was not done to save money, (it) was done to improve quality." This is a vague answer. Was this department performing badly, and if so how badly and why? And is this necessarily the answer to the problem. Wouldn’t extended training on the new payroll system save money, and why give out contracts without bids.

The Board of Trustees is entrusted with public money and for them to act so swiftly on this issue leaves many questions unanswered. Tyree is applying his business skills to the education system and perhaps this corporatization isn’t the best for the education of the students. Many people are watching what happens in Chicago, because privatizing any part in the education system is unheard of. This move is unprecedented in its reach and scope. What was reported what that the college presidents have been asked to submit reports evaluating business and computer science instruction, plus library and counseling services. These departments are believed to be next in the list of privatization. Yet on the front page of the CCC’s Tuesday, February 20, 2001, the top news story was about the restructuring of the colleges for the 21st century, and it stated that the seven presidents have been asked by Chancellor Watson to evaluate their administrative and instructional services and to issue a report to the Chancellor in the first week of March. This was later changed to sometime in the summer.
Written by Leticia Cortez Vice-President AFSME Local 3506

THE ADJUNCT PROFESSOR'S MANIFESTO

Written by Robert Klein Engler

A specter is haunting higher education in America and that specter is unionism. Everywhere, adjunct and part-time instructors are making the decision to join unions and to improve their miserable working conditions. From New York City, through Chicago, to Los Angeles, adjunct and part-time faculty are banding together to make their demands known. Even exploited graduate students are organizing on many of the large state college campuses. They are all confronting a class of bureaucrats and educationalists who have been dismantling traditional universities and colleges.Unionism demands an end to this wreckage, and that dignity and honor be restored to the teaching profession.

THE ENEMY
Let's stop being nice about it. When someone is out for your career and the welfare of your family, when someone does not respect your talent or learning, when someone does not give you a decent wage or proper working conditions, that person is not your colleague or your friend. So it is that the enemy these days to a well paying career teaching in higher education, with job security and benefits, is the faceless administrator. This parasite class of empty suits who prowl the halls and make problems others have to solve, are ruining higher education. These managers are the ones who claim open communication but always fall back on their closed minds. They have seized power in our institutions of higher education and want to turn them into factories managed in a capitalist fashion.

The new administrators have risen from once ordering paper clips to now ordering what is taught and read. They have risen from being wise servants to become foolish masters. Truly, it can be said of them, "That the devil is in his hell, and all is wrong with the world." For the most part, these administrators hate liberal education and only want personal power to subsidize their upward mobility. Just look at the consequence of their policies. When the chancellor of a system like the City Colleges of Chicago makes, with perks, more than $300,000 a year, and the system has more than 80% part-time instructors, many with PhDs, who make about $1,700 a course, you tell me where the justice is and where the exploitation lies. We should not shy away from this analysis of higher education and the plight of part-time and adjunct professors because we question the morality of grouping all administrators into the enemy class. Are not some of them conscientious and decent people?

This may be the case at some private institutions, but at many public universities most bureaucrats are only interested in their own careers and not in students or faculty. How can they not see from their high office the consequences of their policies? The theologian Reinhold Niebuhr declared once, "the essence of immorality is the evasion or denial of moral responsibility". If some bureaucrats are conscientious and decent people, then let them prove it by joining with us. Furthermore, the fact remains that as administrators, they are the ones who treat people like abstractions instead of individuals. Are these deans and chairmen and vice presidents interested in families or a woman's standard of living when at their meetings they only talk about the "bottom line?" Are union workers the only ones guilty of relating to people as members of a class and not as individuals? Should we not argue instead that if administrators want to be respected as individuals, then they should treat part-time faculty with the same dignity and respect?

THE COMING BATTLE
There was a time when professors lived in ivy towers and did their research and teaching secure in the knowledge that their college administrators would look out for them and take care of their interests. This was a time where administrators were usually drawn from the ranks of faculty and did have at heart the well being of their institution. Nowadays, in both private and public education, things are radically different. A new class of administrators, educated in the schools of business and education, has taken over most colleges and universities, and just as their counterparts are transforming the profession of law and medicine, so they are transforming the profession of teaching. The interests of these new administrators lie not with the institution but with their own class and their own careers. They want to dismantle traditional departments, get rid of tenure, hire a majority of part-time adjunct professors, and diminish the status of teachers so that their own class of bureaucrats will rise to power and prestige.

These new administrators are generally disliked by all who know them, and justifiably so. Their heads are filled with abstractions and although they claim to know everything about education they know little about teaching or research. These new bureaucrats are the enemy that the part-time faculty members must battle. It is a battle that will change the face of higher education in America, and will be coming soon to your campus. In the balance hangs the pursuit of truth for an entire generation.

THE TACTICS
Here, then, are 10 things we must do as soon as possible to win our struggle. We should not wait and commit the sin that is all too prevalent in academia, the sin of theory that paralyzes praxis. We must remember that various pedagogues have only interpreted the university, while the point is to change it.

1. Unionize all Part-time and Adjunct Faculty. This must begin on all campuses, especially those in the large cities, then move to state organizations and eventually to a national union of college teachers and professors. We should not be seduced by the imposition of the teaching versus research dichotomy that administrators want to impose on their institutions, or the new language of "teaching" versus "learning." Furthermore, it is especially important to organize English teachers, because English teachers are often members of the largest department on campus. In short, we most bring back "union" to the word university".

2. Let Trade Unions Become the Model for Intellectuals. If intellectuals are going to be treated like workers, then they might as well act like workers. Because administrators and managers have turned the profession of college teaching into a low paid, part-time job, professors must begin now to act like workers to get their rights and keep their dignity. The day must come when a college or university wants an instructor for a course in anthropology or history, physics or chemistry, an administrator will call up the union hall and one will be sent over to the campus. Assignments will be determined by qualifications and tenure at the union hall. Professors will have a union card that certifies their credits, transcripts and degrees,

3. Let the Unions Control Hiring. The aim of unionization should always and everywhere be full-time employment with benefits for as many people as possible, even though some part-time faculty will most likely always be needed to replace those on sabbatical or to cover emergency medical situations encountered by full-time teachers. To this end unions must wrest control of the hiring process from the hands of the bureaucrats. This is one of the most important concessions we must win in contract negotiations, and is worth a long and grueling strike. Furthermore, the newly created full-time teaching jobs must go first to Americans, not the plane loads of immigrants coming to this country with newly minted and questionable Ph.Ds, who are willing to still teach for low wages.

4. Let Union Pension and Health Plans Prevail. Part-time professors need affordable health care for themselves and their families. They also need a pension plan that will allow them to retire with dignity after thirty or more years of service. They are not getting these things now when they only make $1,500 teaching one class. A contract negotiated with a college or university must eventually make provisions for health care and retirement. The best way to do this is to have unions work with the state legislators to set up guaranteed retirement programs and health care insurance for all teachers. The standard should be a retirement program and a health care package equal to what state officials enjoy.

5. Work for Parity in Pay for All Part-time and Adjunct Faculty. The eventual goal of unionized part-time and adjunct faculty is to reach salary parity with full-time and tenured professors. If a full-time instructor makes $40,000 a year teaching 4 courses, then a part-time faculty member must make $10,000 a year for one course. Parity in salary must also be linked with an across-the-board salary raise for all teachers and a reduction in class size. All things being equal, no class should be more than 20 students. Hand in hand with this parity must come a contract stipulation for a portion of all administrators to be part-time administrators as well. After all, what is good for the goose, is good for the gander. What kind of institution are we making when 85% of the faculty are part-time and 100% of the administrators are full-time? The ironic thing about the lives of many college administrators is that they are not really needed. Most of the work they ask others to do is busy work, dreamed up to make the administrators feel a sense of worth. Unlike teaching and research which actually accomplishes something, administrators mostly do things that don't need to be done like developing five year plans and mission statements. If administrators actually have a task to do, that task is rather ordinary and can be done by almost anyone. It does not demand high pay and status. At one of the City Colleges of Chicago, for example, they have been looking for a Dean of Students for over a year now. This high paying job is still vacant, but interestingly enough, the college functions very well without the position being filled and no student or faculty member has been inconvenienced by the fact that there is no Dean of Students. Even the secretaries that work diligently in that office are glad there is no boss to oppress them or tell them to do differently what they already know very well how to do. Every administrator's salary, and what they do to earn it, should be clearly posted in public view. This should especially be the case for college presidents. Likewise, parents should know how the tuition checks they write are spent. When 90% of those checks go to pay the high salaries of useless administrators, and only 10% go to pay the salaries of teachers who actually instruct their sons and daughters, parents certainly will join our cause.

6. Insist on Local Control of Unions. The AFT has been hijacked by the forces of Affirmative Action and Democratic Party Politics. It has lost sight of the aim of public education, especially at the university and college level. For the past thirty years Democratic Party policies have prevailed in our urban school districts. These polices have been a failure. Now they are infecting higher education. It doesn't make sense to jump into bed with those you know got others sick in the first place. In addition, the AFT and many of its locals have thrown up their hands at organizing part-time teachers because they say there is no beneficial return to the union in terms of dues collected equal to the amount of effort they expend in organizing. Some locals have betrayed their best members by compromise and concessions in the name of practicality. They have missed the wave on the plight of the part-timers, and cannot see that the future of teaching in higher education is headed in the way of the trade unions and not the white collar unions. Furthermore, many of these unionized teachers are just not willing to make the sacrifice necessary to help part-timers. They argue that there are legal restrictions that vary from state to state that cannot be overcome, or that their union cannot afford to help organize because the budget needed to staff and run a union will be drained. Furthermore, at institutions like the City Colleges of Chicago, full-time faculty members are reluctant to give up their overtime so that they can help the part-timers organize and get full-time jobs. Hey, we have our piece of the pie, they say, so, too bad for the others. These unionized teachers care little for the future of education and a lot for the future of their retirement plans. Other local organizations must form to take the place of the failed unions like the AFT and the Cook County College Teachers Union. On the other hand, some unions like the Illinois Education Association have already come to the aide of part-timers and are to be applauded for their efforts.

7. Reshape the Academic disciplines. Implementation of the trade union model for faculty in higher education is the way to secure the survival of the traditional academic disciplines and the way to insure the advent of new disciplines. Under this model, the traditional departments and disciplines, because of their relation to the union, will help certify the qualifications of part-timers. This power must be negotiated in a contract and removed from administrators and managers. In the City Colleges of Chicago today, for example, there are contractual rules for full-time teaching, but none for the part-timers. An entire department could now be staffed by administrators who go down to the local mission and pick up drunks off the street and then direct them, usually by memos, to teach classes in English or chemistry for a few thousand dollars. With a unionized faculty, the senior members of the union, working hand in hand with graduate schools, will set up procedures for training, certification, and apprenticeship, thus guaranteeing that whoever leaves the union hall to teach is qualified and capable. Furthermore, good teachers need time to develop. They can only mature within the context of an established and supportive department that nurtures talented apprentices.

8. Close the Graduate Schools of Education. It is from the graduate schools of education that the virus that is infecting higher education emanates. We must go to the source and eradicate it. Just as we tell people after a disaster to boil their drinking water, so too we must warn people about the dangers coming by a flood of educationalists. Isn't it odd that as the number of experts in education have gone up, so have the reading scores gone down? Higher education participates in its own demise if it continues to support this parasite discipline. Education is one of the few programs that is all theory but no content. People supposedly learn how to teach history, but the actual history of their country remains a mystery to them. Hand in hand with this attack on the schools of education, we must open another front against the MBAs. Higher education is not a for profit business, although it does share some similarities with a business, in that money must be raised, budgets kept to, and supplies ordered. There are staffing needs beside instruction that must be met, as well. Nevertheless, the purpose of education is to prepare the next generation to become Americans and to maintain the present one in its full citizenship. Higher education profits the country as a whole and not one or two companies or persons. Finally, higher education is also knowledge for its own sake, and this can only be guaranteed by academic freedom and tenure.

9. Guarantee Academic Freedom and Tenure. Many younger faculty members are disillusioned with the tenure systems. They point out that other workers do not have this kind of job security. Here they miss the point. Tenure should not be abolished from higher education, but in fact its ideals ought to be extended to other jobs as well. When a teacher is secure in her job she can also be secure to follow her ideas and ideals no matter where they may lead. Tenure guarantees academic freedom and real critical thinking. Along with tenure must come contractual protection for the faculty to determine and give grades.

poem
Waiting for the Barbarians By Constantine Cavafy (1864-1933), translated by Edmund Keeley
Q.  What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? A.  The barbarians are due here today.
Q.  Why isn't anything happening in the senate? Why do the senators sit there without legislating? A.  Because the barbarians are coming today. What laws can the senators make now? Once the barbarians are here, they'll do the legislating.
Q. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting at the city's main gate on his throne, in state, wearing the crown? A. Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor is waiting to receive their leader. He has even prepared a scroll to give him, replete with titles, with imposing names.
Q.  Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, and rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? A. Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians.
Q.  Why don't our distinguished orators come forward as usual to make their speeches, say what they have to say?
A. Because the barbarians are coming today and they're bored by rhetoric and public speaking.
Q. Why this sudden restlessness, this confusion? (How serious people's faces have become.) Why are the streets and squares emptying so rapidly, everyone going home so lost in thought? A. Because night has fallen and the barbarians have not come. And some who have just returned from the border say there are no barbarians any longer.
Q.  And now, what's going to happen to us without barbarians? They were, those people, a kind of solution.   

This page is for our own forum where we can rant and rave. (We are working on it.)  

When it is installed, comments are posted and others respond, creating a "thread".  You can respond to the thread or you can get off the topic entirely and start your own thread. It will sort of look like this....
Welcome to the COUP Venting Machine
date subject author
3/26/01
 FYI, there is a meeting on Friday Joehill@hotmail.com
3/26/01 Why is it at Truman? I live on the South side. daMayor@yahoo.com
3/26/01 Should I bring coffee? motherjones@home.com
3/26/01 And Apple pie Joehill@hotmail.com