Campaign News

Five students are suing the state for a better education — for some.

In September, five anonymous students filed a suit against the state in Suffolk County Superior Court alleging the cap on the number of charter schools in Massachusetts unfairly denies them their right to a quality education. The students had entered charter lotteries, but failed to win coveted spots in one of the public-ish schools. Instead, the students say, they were assigned to attend schools in their home districts that had been deemed “underperforming” by the state.

Since No Child Left Behind, school reform has been more concerned with helping some children find ways out of the traditional public school system than improving education for everyone. Charter schools are a symptom of this escapist philosophy, which is unfortunate because the idea of a charter school education is a good one.

Typically founded by nonprofits and members of the community, charter schools often concentrate education around one subject. Locally, these concentrations include the arts, social justice, and Mandarin. Students enroll in charters through a blind lottery that anyone can enter. Placing students in schools that encourage their passions is excellent education. And it produces some positive results. For example, in 2013, Credo, an independent education research firm, analyzed the impact charter schools have had on Massachusetts. In math and reading, researchers found that charter school students perform better in the subjects compared to those in traditional public schools.

The problem with charter schools is the education provided comes at the cost of traditional public schools. Charter schools are publicly funded, but work independently of a hometown district. Last year in Massachusetts, participating school districts paid charter schools $369.7 million to educate students. Charters receive per-student fees from sending districts — money that would otherwise stay in the home school’s till. Children fleeing an underperforming school district take money with them that is needed to improve the local education system.

I’m not proposing students be forced to attend failing schools. A student should have the choice to attend the school that best fits her educational needs. I am asking the state’s politicians to take a hard look at how charters are managed, funded, and how students are enrolled – because the current system is inadequate. Earlier this month, Gov. Charlie Baker proposed a bill that would increase the number of charter schools in the state. The bill would permit 12 new or expanded charter schools each year in districts performing in the bottom 25 percent on standardized tests. Massachusetts already has 81 charter schools with a waiting list of 37,000 students. A bill to expand the cap on charter schools in the state passed the House last year, but floundered in the Senate.

Here’s what needs to happen with charters:

Improve special education and non-native English speaker recruitment: While charters typically serve about the same number of low-income students — and more students of color — as traditional public school systems, they enroll far fewer non-native English speakers and students with special education needs. The Credo audit found that in traditional Massachusetts public schools that send children to charters, 17 percent of students received special education services, whereas in charter schools this population made up 12 percent of the student body. Traditional public schools had 10 percent English language learners in the student body, while charters had 6 percent.

Submit to School Committee authority: Charters don’t play by the same rules as traditional public schools. The schools aren’t subject to the authority of an elected school committee and have a legal pass around some of the state’s educational and special education requirements.

There’s good reason for more oversight. Private management of charter schools. A new report claims more than $200 million in fraud and wasted taxpayer funds has been lost to the charter school sector (“The Tip of the Iceberg: Charter School Vulnerabilities To Waste, Fraud, And Abuse” by Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools and the Center for Popular Democracy). It’s hard to say whether this same kind of scandal could occur in Massachusetts. Charter schools need to, at the very least, be subject to more public scrutiny and submit to the budgeting and policy authority of a local, elected school committee.

Analyze funding strategy: Charter schools should not be succeeding at the cost of the education of students in underperforming districts. Something must be done that will allow students to pick the education that is best for them without penalizing struggling schools.

The student plantiffs suing for their right to attend charter schools say the state charter cap unfairly denies their right to a quality education, but that right cannot come at the cost of the rest of Massachusetts’ students.•

Source: Valley Advocate

Brick-and-mortar retailers hoping to fend off Amazon.com Inc. need to deploy the one weapon that could set them apart: top-notch customer service, provided by actual humans.

But making that goal a reality relies on something they’ve not really invested in -- well-trained employees with the kinds of wages and regular hours that make them want to stick around.

Read the full article here.

Sky Valley Chronicle - April 1, 2015 - According to organizers, it's going to be huge. Fast food workers across the country, evidently unmoved by the Reagan era inspired trickle-down theory of economics plan on striking in hundreds of U.S. cities on April 15, tax day in efforts to secure a $15 an hour wage and the right to form unions without retaliation from employers.They say they'll be joined by more than 60,000 people across the country as well as others in 35 countries around the world and that this time workers from new industries will be standing with them – from home care and child care workers, to adjunct professors, to Walmart employees. One report calls the planned action a "series of global labor strikes with protests on college campuses." According to April15.org "Millions of underpaid workers can’t support their families or make ends meet on hourly wages that haven’t kept pace with the bills – or their employers’ profits. On April 15, fast food cashiers and cooks, retail employees, child care workers, home care providers, airport workers, and all of us who believe they deserve better are showing up in cities across the country to say ENOUGH."The April 15 strike action will include rallies and marches on 170 university campuses. CBS News notes that, "Expanding the labor movement to college campuses hearkens back to successful social movements that included pressure from university students, such as the 1980s divestment campaign against U.S. corporations that invested in apartheid-era South Africa. While college students have long served as a vocal social force in American history, though, there's a growing group on campuses seeking higher wages: adjunct professors."The same report quotes Tiffany Kraft, an adjunct professor in Portland, Oregon as saying, "The universities I work for pay me next to nothing and treat me like I'm expendable. I joined the Fight for $15 to demand higher wages and more respect for our role as educators." CBS reported that adjunct professors typically earn about $20,000 to $25,000 per year and get no health benefits or job security, even though "they hold doctorates or other advanced degrees."In many communities brick layers, construction workers and auto mechanics with no college degrees earn that and more.Terrence Wise, a Burger King worker from Kansas City, Missouri, and a national leader for the Fight for $15 push told the Associated Press "This will be the biggest mobilization America has seen in decades," and will feature some 2,000 groups including Jobs With Justice and the Center for Popular Democracy.

SourceYou can find out here where an event near you will take place.

We’re in the thick of the second post-Citizens United presidential campaign, and it’s already clear that allowing unlimited funds to influence political elections was a terrible idea. 

Half of the funds supporting presidential candidates from both parties comes from a mere 158 families — a miniscule percentage of America’s 120 million households — as documented by a recent New York Times investigation. Largely white, older, male, and Republican, they are also unrepresentative of what our multicultural society looks like.

As a result of this narrow group of donors controlling what’s on the political agenda, America has a fundamentally undemocratic system in which working class people and people of color are left on the margins, silenced in a political debate, they can’t gain access to — because they don’t have millions to share.

America has become a tyranny of the few, and Americans are fed up with the broken system. Last week, voters in Maine elected to increase funding from $2 million to $3 million for the Clean Elections Fund, which provides government grants to candidates who agree to limit their spending and private fundraising. It might be a long time before Citizens United is overturned. In the interim, it’s important that other states introduce similar legislation challenging existing financing models.

The tyranny of the few is two-pronged, however. Not only are our elected leaders being held accountable to wealthy donors instead of the people of our nation, the least privileged of this nation are simultaneously facing strong barriers to voting. 

Our antiquated voter registration system results in roughly 62 million eligible voters not registered, either because they never registered or their registration information is incorrect. In a 2008 Current Population Survey, blacks and Latinos cited “difficulties with the registration process” as their main reason for not registering to vote. Whites disproportionately reported not registering because they were “not interested in elections or politics.” Barriers to voting registration are in many states especially well in place for people of color, workers and youth, who are targeted by voter suppression laws.

We could put an end to the error-ridden old-fashioned manual voter registration and step into the 21st century with automatic voter registration. Other states could follow the example set by California and Oregon, which are linking voter registration to the Department of Motor Vehicles. Through linking voter registration with public offices such as the DMV, revenue agencies, the Postal Service and others, the United States could secure over 56 million more voters, as a report from Center for Popular Democracy shows. 

So to sum up: people of color and working class Americans aren’t just unable to place millions of dollars with politicians who will take care of them in Congress, they aren’t even able to vote for leaders who might serve their interests.

The outcome? Our America has become an oligarchy run by a tiny and overly privileged section of its population, whose lives and wishes for our nation are in stark opposition to the lives and dreams of the average American. 

This is borne out in our legislation. Despite overwhelming public support for policies such as taxing those who earn more than $1 million a year, and laws that address inequality, workers’ rights, and protection of the middle class, we see the footprints of corporate powers all over our legislation. 

We need to act fast by passing laws that disrupt this undemocratic cycle. We must break Congress’ dependency on big money and return the power to the people, but we can’t only rely on our lawmakers to change our nation. 

It will take a lot of work, but we can’t allow for this undemocratic oligarchy to go on. Let’s not leave the future of our country in the hands of the wealthiest, let’s instead bring back democracy to our nation.

Source: Common Dreams