We’re onto the phony education reformers: Charter school charlatans and faux reformers take it on the chin
2015 will forever be remembered as the year the political establishment was shaken by the populist-driven presidential...
2015 will forever be remembered as the year the political establishment was shaken by the populist-driven presidential candidacies of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. But it should also be remembered as the year another established order was forever altered by change, dissent and revelations of its corruption.
For years, an out-of-touch establishment has dominated education policy too. A well-funded elite has labeled public education as generally a failed enterprise and insisted that only a regime of standardized testing and charter schools can make schools and educators more “accountable.” Politicians and pundits across the political spectrum have adopted this narrative of “reform” and now easily slip into the rhetoric that supports it without hesitation.
But in 2013 a grassroots rebellion growing out of inner city neighborhoods from Newark to Chicago and suburban boroughs from Long Island to Denver began to counter the education aristocracy and tell an alternative tale about schools.
The education counter-narrative is that public schools are not as much the perpetrators of failure as they are victims of resource deprivation, inequity in the system and undermining forces driven by corruption and greed. In other words, it wasn’t schools that needed to be made more accountable; it was the failed leadership of those in the business and government establishment that needed more accountability.
The uprising has been steadily growing into an Education Spring unifying diverse factions across the nation in efforts to reverse education policy mandates and bolster public schools instead of punishing them and closing them down.
2015 became the year the uprising reached a level where it forever transformed the hegemonic control the reformers have had on education policy.
Most prominently, No Child Left Behind, the federal law that’s been driving education policy since 2001, was replaced with a new law, the Every Student Succeeds Act, thatreverses many of the edicts of NCLB or leaves them up in the air for states and courts to decide.
Also, comments made by establishment presidential candidate Hillary Clinton will reverberate through the election in 2016. Specifically, at a town hall held in South Carolina, broadcast by C-SPAN, Clinton responded to a question about charter schools by saying, “Most charter schools, I don’t want to say every one, but most charter schools, they don’t take the hardest-to-teach kids. Or if they do, they don’t keep them.” A week or so later, Clinton transgressed the status quo again by remarking, in a conversation with members of the American Federation of Teachers, “I have for a very long time also been against the idea that you tie teacher evaluation and even teacher pay to test outcomes. There’s no evidence. There’s no evidence.”
Organizations and individuals connected to wealthy donors to the Democratic Partywere appalled, but the truth is out, and skepticism about education policy prescriptions touted as necessary “reforms” to the system has now left the fringe and become mainstream.
The bigger, more important story emerging from 2015 is that the American public is increasingly at odds with a reform movement that seeks to remake schools into an image promoted by wealthy private foundations, influential think tanks and well-financed political operations such as the American Legislative Exchange Council(ALEC).
The evidence against the education establishment’s case piled up as the year rolled on, and the narrative of public education policy will never be the same.
Blows to the Testocracy
Take the issue of standardized testing. The idea that school improvement should be about enforcing uniform measures of test score outcomes across the nation had a particularly bad year in 2015.
As Seattle classroom teacher and public school activist Jesse Hagopian explains in an article for the National Education Association, standardized tests became the focal point of widespread scorn and dissent.
More than 620,000 public school students around the U.S. refused to take standardized exams. Also, numerous states ended high school graduation tests, and dozens of universities and colleges reduced or eliminated test requirements for their admissions process.
The backlash to standardized testing prompted changes in federal policy as well, including the revision of NCLB. As Hagopian writes, “ESSA deposes one of the cruelest aspects of the test-and-punish policy under NCLB: the so-called ‘Adequate Yearly Progress’ annual test score improvement requirement that labeled nearly every American school failing.”
Also, as Hagopian notes, President Obama, acknowledging the growing resistance to testing, “announced in October that ‘unnecessary testing’ is ‘consuming too much instructional time.’ This announcement came as a surprise given Obama’s support for policies like Race to the Top that contributed to the proliferation of high-stakes testing. The reversal of rhetoric was a result of the mass opt-out movement and will surely embolden authentic-assessment activists in the coming year.”
“Pressure from parents, students, teachers, school officials, and community leaders began turning the tide against standardized exam overuse and misuse during the 2014-2015 school year,” declares a report from the National Center for Fair and Open Testing (FairTest.org).
FairTest’s report highlights “assessment reform victories” in numerous states where officials suspended or significantly revised testing policies and created “alternative systems of assessment and accountability” that “deemphasize standardized tests.”
Think Progress, the action center of the left-leaning Beltway think tank the Center for American Progress, also reports on the overturn of the testocracy in its review: “these education protests got results in 2015.”
Noting the growing opt-out movement in Colorado, New Jersey, Indiana, Michigan, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Oregon and Wisconsin, the Think Progress writer highlights New York in particular, “where 20 percent of students opted out of tests in 2015. The number of New York students opting out quadrupled from [2014].”
Reform Is Losing the Left
New York in particular provides an example of how education reform may fare in the near future, at least in left-leaning states where leaders have been persuaded by big-money donors to crack down on public schools and educators.
Led by Governor Andrew Cuomo and his former state education chief, now currently acting U.S. Secretary of Education, John King, the Empire State had been a model for reform ideology, being among the first to implement the Common Core and its associated tests and pursuing a harsh new model for evaluating teachers, in which 50 percent of teachers’ performance rating was tied to students’ test scores.
But recently Cuomo made “a complete about face” on education, observes a recent op-ed in a New York press outlet. The writer – Billy Easton, executive director of the Alliance for Quality Education, a progressive New York state organization – notes that Cuomo had made his test-based teacher evaluation system the “top legislative priority in 2015″ and had claimed it was ”one of the greatest legacies for me and the state.”
But the evaluation system had angered teachers and parents and helped spur the test boycotts noted above. Seeing his public approval numbers plummeting, Cuomo engineered, according to Easton, a redo on the evaluation system that prompted the state education authority to place a moratorium on test-based teacher evaluations.
Easton believes Cuomo’s actions in New York are likely too little, too late – arguing that he has been “the author of his own demise on education issues.” That may be, but far more likely, other Democratic Party governors are bound to notice how reform policies like those carried out in New York have now lost the left and are rapidly growing out of favor with the public at large.
Of course, in states and districts where test-based teacher evaluations are already established in the policy landscape, teachers will likely feel the effects of these systems for some time. So the fight over teacher evaluations will go state by state in the years ahead.
But as new reports continue to call these flawed and unfair evaluations into question, there will be more examples of these systems being overturned.
Reform Fads Don’t Work
Using test scores to evaluate teachers – one of the pillars of the reform movement – is not the only policy idea going out of favor. Using the scores to evaluate the viability of local schools is running into more opposition as well
In Tennessee, also an early adopter of reform fads, leaders had put into place a system that used student scores on standardized tests to pronounce schools as “failing” and provide the rationale for the state to take over management of the schools by an appointed board. What follows these takeovers, invariably, is that the agency, whose officials are handpicked by conservative lawmakers, transfers the schools to privately operated charter management organizations.
In Tennessee, the state takeover agency is called the Achievement School District, but the model is being adopted under other guises by many other states.
Now Tennessee’s much-lauded takeover program has run into “political trouble” according to a recent article in Education Week.
“Several Democratic state lawmakers,” according to the article, “will propose bills this upcoming legislative session to either shut down the turnaround district, which mostly is based in Memphis, or severely limit its authority to take over schools.”
The legislature’s Black Caucus, the representatives of the communities most often targeted by the takeovers, are helping to lead the pushback.
In Memphis, where the ASD has charterized more than two dozen schools, parents are leading the fight as well. As Chalkbeat Tennessee reports, members of the district’s neighborhood advisory councils have called the takeover process a “scam” and claimed the method for taking over their neighborhood schools “was rigged in favor of pairing struggling schools with charter operators.”
But the trouble with the ASD isn’t purely “political.” The takeover effort is also in trouble because it doesn’t work. The EdWeek article points to a recent Vanderbilt University study that showed district-led turnaround efforts had performed better than the the ASD. The study concluded, “Until the state-run district can begin to show academic progress, it shouldn’t be allowed to take over more schools.”
These events and others prove 2015 marks the year that standardized testing – and all its associated uses for unfairly judging teachers and schools – has now become a policy pariah. So what will reformers rally around now?
A Year of Charter School Scandals
For sure, charter schools provided reform fans with some cause to celebrate in 2015, as more than 500 new public charter schools opened during the school year, enrolling nearly 3 million students nationwide, according to charter industry reports.
As a recent report from a consulting group that works with the charter industry found, 2015 was a year in which charter schools reached impressive new benchmarks. These schools are now the most rapidly growing form of schools in America, with enrollments expanding by an average of 12 to 13 percent annually over the past 10 years. Charters now educate one in 16 children nationally and, in a number of big cities, now rival traditional school districts as the major provider of public education. Three of the nation’s five largest cities enroll more than 20 percentof their students in charter schools.
What’s growing particularly rapidly are large charter school chains, which have expanded at roughly twice the pace of the charter industry overall, increasing their student enrollments by 25 percent annually.
But charter school expansions come with a significant negative to the reform movement. As the numbers and influence of these schools grow, so do the scandals associated with them and so do the divisive fights in communities where these schools are proliferating.
The scandals and malfeasance associated with charter schools rose to levels in 2015 beyond what emerged in 2014.
Early in the year, a report from the Center for Popular Democracy looked at charter school finances in Illinois and found “$13.1 million in fraud by charter school officials … Because of the lack of transparency and necessary oversight, total fraud is estimated at $27.7 million in 2014 alone.”
One example the CPD report cited was of a charter operator in Chicago who used charter school funds amounting to more than $250,000 to purchase personal items from luxury department stores, including $2,000 on hair care and cosmetic products and $5,800 for jewelry.
In April, another report from the Center for Popular Democracy, along with the Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools (AROS), uncovered over $200 million in “alleged and confirmed financial fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement” committed by charter schools around the country.
Authors of the report called $200-plus million the “tip of the iceberg,” because much of the fraud “will go undetected because the federal government, the states, and local charter authorizers lack the oversight necessary to detect the fraud.”
Then, in October, the Center for Media and Democracy published a new reportrevealing that the federal government has spent over $3.7 billion in taxpayer money on charter schools with virtually no accountability for the funds.
According to the report, the federal government, state governments and charter authorizers have generally not provided the public with ready information about how federal funds for charters have been spent. Attempts to trace federal grant money to recipients are apt to encounter “substantial obstruction” from states reluctant to reveal how charter money is spent and how state government handles charter oversight.
The report contends, “Unlike truly public schools, which have to account for prospective and past spending in public budgets provided to democratically elected school boards, charter spending is largely a black hole.”
In Michigan, for instance, where four out of five charters are run by for-profit management companies, CMD found “ghost schools“ that had received millions in federal funding but either never opened or were quickly closed with no account for the money. Some charter operators in the state have been accused, and convicted, of crimes, including felony fraud and tax evasion. But most often, no perpetrators of the malfeasance are brought to justice.
Interspersed among these massive reports are news stories from local press outlets, too numerous to count, about charter school frauds, financial and academic, that boggle the mind in their outrageousness.
In May, an Ohio paper began its news story about Ohio charter schools, “No sector – not local governments, school districts, court systems, public universities or hospitals – misspends tax dollars like charter schools in Ohio.” Reporter Doug Livingston wrote, “State auditors have uncovered $27.3 million improperly spent by charter schools, many run by for-profit companies, enrolling thousands of children and producing academic results that rival the worst in the nation.”
Charter school malfeasance in the Buckeye State has gotten so bad it’s even drawn the attention of FBI investigators.
More recently, Florida press outlets reported the state has given about $70 million to charter schools that later closed and returned virtually none of the money to taxpayers. While the state is able to recover computers and other equipment these schools purchased with taxpayer money, the far more substantial costs for purchasing and improving property and making lease payments stays in private pockets after the schools close.
Why Charter Schools Won’t Save Reform
Scandals will continue to dog charter schools because of the way they are organized and operated. As a recent policy brief from the National Education Policy Center explains, the very structure of the charter school business introduces new actors into public education who skim money from the system without returning any benefit to students and taxpayers.
In one of the more bizarre schemes the authors examine, charter operators use third-party corporations to purchase buildings and land from the public school district itself, so taxpayer dollars are used to purchase property from the public. Thus, the public ends up paying twice for the school, and the property becomes an asset of a private corporation.
In other examples, charter operators will set up leasing agreements and lucrative management fees between multiple entities that end up extracting resources that might otherwise be dedicated to direct services for children.
These arrangements, and many others documented in the brief, constitute a rapidly expanding parallel school system in America, populated with enterprises and individuals who work in secret to suck money out of public education.
Meanwhile, charter expansions continue to be met with increased community resistance wherever they roll out.
In Nashville, Tennessee, Jefferson County, Colorado, and across South Florida, every new charter school expansion is now met with fierce opposition from the community.
As the Los Angles Times reported in September, a plan devised in secret by a billionaire and his foundation would pay for the capital costs and lobbying to force through a plan to convert as many as half of the city’s schools into charters. The community has responded with outrage.
In what is likely to be an important legal precedent, the supreme court of the state of Washington found that charter schools are unconstitutional because they aren’t truly public schools.
Now calls for charter school moratoriums are becoming practically ubiquitous in state legislatures and local district school boards.
The mounting controversy surrounding charter schools is a strong indicator that if education reform proponents collect all their policy eggs in the basket of “school choice,” they are missing the main reasons why their movement is spurring increased resistance.
What Reform Fans Don’t Get
Indeed, resistance to the education reform agenda is not as much a rejection of its various policy features as it is a rejection of the philosophy that drives it.
This philosophy puts little stock in democratic governance of schools, believing instead that really smart people, armed with the right data and algorithms, are what it takes to determine education policy from New York to Nevada.
This core philosophy makes infinite sense to folks with backgrounds in law, business management, finance, or economics, but tends to rub educators and parents the wrong way because of its failure to acknowledge that teaching and learning are primarily relationship-driven endeavors and not technical pursuits.
To teachers, it makes about as much sense to base their actions exclusively on a data set or a marketing principle as it would for husbands and wives to conduct their marriages on that basis or for parents to raise their children that way. Sure, knowing some objective “things” about how students are doing is important, but there’s way more important stuff to attend to.
And parents will grow ever more skeptical of the false promise of “school choice” because it doesn’t deliver what they really want: the guarantee of good neighborhood schools that are free and equitable to all children.
But too few reformers get this. Instead, what we can expect in 2016 is for the current education establishment to use the considerable financial resources at its disposal to mount yet more marketing and public relations efforts, while the pushback from grassroots public education advocates will grow even stronger, and political leaders will be increasingly pressured to decide where they stand.
Source: Salon
Don't Tinker with Md.'s Charter School Law
The Baltimore Sun - January 12, 2015, by Betty Weller and Verjeana Jacobs - The headlines in other states warning...
The Baltimore Sun - January 12, 2015, by Betty Weller and Verjeana Jacobs - The headlines in other states warning against weak charter school laws are mounting. In May, a report from the Center for Popular Democracy and Integrity in Education found that unscrupulous charter school operators in 15 states had lost, misused or wasted more than $100 million in taxpayer money.
A yearlong investigation by the Detroit Free Press found that Michigan's weak charter school law resulted in the state spending $1 billion annually on schools with little transparency, consistently poor results and questionable financial practices.
And in September, community groups in Philadelphia released a report finding that charter school officials had defrauded students and schools of at least $30 million since 1997.
Most recently, Ohio's Republican governor, John Kasich, spoke about the dire need to strengthen state regulation of charter schools to stem poor performance and financial mismanagement.
Fortunately, Maryland has not experienced these problems, thanks to the state's strong charter school law. Since 2003, Maryland's Charter School Act has promoted high standards, real accountability to students, parents and communities, and sound financial management.
That this track record of success has been questioned recently by The Sun is deeply troubling ("More choices for parents and students," Dec. 21).
It makes little sense to label a law "weak" because it holds charter schools to the same high academic and financial management standards as other public schools.
Maryland's charter school law has protected us from the "worst-case scenarios" of financial mismanagement, persistently failing schools and conflicts between local communities and charter school operators that have plagued states with weaker laws than ours.
Ensuring local school board oversight and highly qualified teachers in the classroom are hallmarks of Maryland's charter school law. We need to protect Maryland's strong charter school law to ensure that charter schools are run well, and that all students, whether they're in a charter or a traditional public school, receive high quality instruction.
Source
One vote will turn America’s path away from liberal socialism
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17, 2015 – What difference will my vote make? Too many will say: I am only one person. When asked why...
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17, 2015 – What difference will my vote make? Too many will say: I am only one person. When asked why they do not exercise our constitutional right to vote for our governmental representatives they wonder if their one vote makes a difference.
But that is foolish as history has shown that “one person” can prevail.
It was one brave soldier standing alone during a mass protest who stopped a column of armed tanks in China on Tiananmen Square in 1989; one frail man named Mahatmas Gandhi who was the driving force behind banishing the British Empire from India; one conservative, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, who was the black community’s conscience when it needed someone to articulate the horrors inflicted upon blacks by a racist Democratic South.
Even before these 20th century [peaceful] activists, back in the 1860s, there was one conservative black Frederick Douglass. Douglas stood out as a champion of an enslaved people, the fight for their civil rights.
Frederick Douglass made it his life’s mission to rally others to join in with him in the liberation of his oppressed people. Born a slave, he died a millionaire in today’s terms.
Other men and women of courage, conviction and destiny have made a difference: Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, Booker T. Washington, Thaddeus Stevens, Charles Sumner.
Today America is in need of such sons and daughters, born of virtue, courage and conviction to take the smallest action. They need to vote.
Many see that the United States is drifting towards the edge of ruination. At the helm is a president who happens to preside over our moral and economic collapse while pressing on relentlessly with the left-wing agenda. Same-sex marriages, illegal aliens, an under-employed America and a potential $19 trillion deficit do not bode well for our future and this country’s stability.
Barack Hussein Obama has met with numerous world leaders, many of them not so friendly to this country, either then or now.
Yet, in his adopted home city of Chicago, where gangland shootings take place regularly, where body bags fill up, by the hour, where black on black crime runs rampant, this president has yet to seriously address the issue.
As the first black president, he could have met these gang leaders at a presidential sponsored summit to appeal to them on a personal level, and to impress upon them how dangerous and detrimental their life of crime is impacting their own neighborhoods in a negative way.
How bad is it in Chicago? Just over the Fourth of July weekend of this year, alone, 10 people were killed and 55 wounded by gunfire. Shootings rose by about 40 percent during the first three months of this year, according to March statistics released by Chicago Police Department. The mayor, Rahm Emanuel, seems clueless on how to decrease these figures.
Make no mistake; this is largely black on black crime. Yet, when a white person, or a white cop, kills a black anywhere in America, the president cannot get to the podium fast enough to denounce it; neither can race baiters such as Jackson and Sharpton.
This is when the clueless come out with signs chanting “Black Lives Matter.” They ignore the subject of innocent black fetuses being aborted, thanks largely to the efforts of Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger and uninformed blacks who work for and support this organization.
Though serving his last year in office, the president has opted to focus on, and press for, immigration reform. This is an agenda that will further impact the black community in a negative way in terms of employment opportunity.
African-Americans who have achieved higher-education degrees, a key investment leading to the middle class, still find themselves more likely to face long-term unemployment than their white, Hispanic and Asian counterparts, according to the Center for Popular Democracy.
Some believe the president’s end game is granting amnesty for over 30 million illegals and resettling hundreds of thousands of Muslims here in the United States. Not surprisingly, his party supports this president’s efforts while the Republican leadership does not.
And the Supreme Court — they have been missing in action for the past three years when it comes to defending, preserving and upholding the United States Constitution and the laws of the land.
So you ask, What can we do about it?
Americans can express their dismay and anger by voting in the next primary and election. Only then can we make a difference. History has shown that one man can effect positive change. Conservatives in this country number around 45 million strong, so if all would step up and vote, there’s immense power in those numbers.
Up until now, politicians, Sunday morning news pundits and Washington bureaucrats have an open microphone to sway voters, thanks to 24-hour news programs.
It’s time for Americans to really listen to what is being said and recognizing what is unrealistic, not sell low-information voters a bad bill-of-goods.
Forbes writes (We’ve Crossed The Tipping Point; Most Americans Now Receive Government Benefits):
..perhaps 52 percent of U.S. households—more than half—now receive benefits from the government, thanks to President Obama. And Mr. Entitlement is just getting started. If Obamacare is not repealed millions more will join the swelling rolls of those dependent on government handouts.
Conservatives have long dreaded the day when the U.S. crossed the halfway mark because of all the implications for individual and fiscal responsibility. As Benjamin Franklin reportedly said, “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” They learned that from the 2008 election and turned out in big numbers again in 2012.
One popular agenda being pushed by Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton is free college tuition – Bernie wants it at every academic institution, Clinton is calling for free public colleges.
Remember what Franklin said above:
“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”
And college tuition is off the charts, most can agree. So maybe free college tuition is a great idea; however, no one is explaining who is going to pay for the professor’s salary, buildings, campus maintenance, food, books and the necessary technology infrastructure necessary to support a child seeking the college experience.
Look at the reasons parents choose private over public schools. They want a better eduction, higher test scores, smaller class size and more. If parents see that many [not all] public schools fail their children, why would we want to see college follow that same model?
And how many of those students taking that free college will be looking not for education but a continuation of the high school experience and a delay of entering the work force. College should be something a student works for with grades, service participation, sports and learning to be a well-rounded person – a lesson that begins in the home.
Now it is our turn to voice our opinions at the ballot box, for conservatives, independents and libertarians to band together to make a difference in saving this republic. Even if the person presented by the GOP is not the person you want over others,
…we still need to vote for the party otherwise, liberals and progressives continue to rule the day.
The path will not always be smooth and easy. Most things worthwhile ever are. Just remember this.
As former military men, George Washington fought the good fight, Andrew Jackson fought the good fight, Ulysses S. Grant fought the good fight and Theodore Roosevelt fought the good fight while serving in the armed forces.
Professional military leaders such as Adm. Chester Nimitz and Gen. George S. Patton fought the good fight, as well, and all of these men did it against overwhelming odds and all of them prevailed.
Some say, and truly believe, that the American political system is rigged, that the powers that be, like powerful fathom puppet masters, have often manipulated the results of elections so that it does not matter what the voter does, they still pull the strings.
It doesn’t matter who the president is when Valerie Jarrett is pulling the strings.
There is some truth in every urban legend, but it will take voters to weed out these myths and uproot these puppet masters and make the necessary changes to insure the integrity of our political system and our republic. We must all make a stand.
This is a nation with a history of breeding courageous fighters, and right now America needs fighters.
The next generation is counting on you showing up at the polls. including your children and grandchildren. Your decision to get involved and vote will impact their future in many ways.
That is why now is the time America. Not next time, but now!
Unless conservatives from all corners vote to change the ownership of the White House, there may not be a next opportunity to save America.
Source: Communities Digital News
Skinny Girl's CEO Bethenny Frankel charters multiple planes to bring supplies to Hurricane Maria survivors
Skinny Girl's CEO Bethenny Frankel charters multiple planes to bring supplies to Hurricane Maria survivors
Bethenny Frankel is turning the full force of her efforts on the disaster in Puerto Rico post Hurricane Maria. As...
Bethenny Frankel is turning the full force of her efforts on the disaster in Puerto Rico post Hurricane Maria. As reported by People, the Skinny Girl CEO, B Strong charity spearhead, mother, and Bravo reality star combined a Twitter crowdfunding campaign with her own resources to raise the money necessary to charter four planes full of water, canned goods, diapers, baby food, medical supplies, and more.
Read the full article here.
What Will a Trump Administration Mean for Supporters of Public Education?
What Will a Trump Administration Mean for Supporters of Public Education?
We don’t know very much about President-Elect Donald Trump’s ideas about education. Although, during the campaign,...
We don’t know very much about President-Elect Donald Trump’s ideas about education. Although, during the campaign, Trump briefly presented a plan for a $20 billion block grant program for states to expand market-based school choice, and although he has hinted that he will reduce the role of the U.S. Department of Education and particularly its civil rights enforcement division, there has been no substantive explanation or discussion of these ideas.
One thing we do know for sure, however, is that every branch of our federal government will be dominated by Republicans—the Presidency, the Senate, the House, and the Supreme Court.
A new President whose plans we do not know. The absence of checks and balances. Federal public education policy that has for years been undermining support for the institution of public education. Those of us who believe improving the public schools is important have good reason to be nervous, even afraid.
After all, in 2000 and especially after we were distracted in September of 2001 by the attacks on the World Trade Center, we were unprepared to speak to the federal test-and-punish education law, No Child Left Behind. We failed to connect the dots between an accountability-driven, poorly funded testing mandate and the destruction of respect for school teachers and the drive for school privatization that lurked just under the surface of federal policy. And in 2008, we didn’t anticipate the collusion of government technocrats and philanthro-capitalists that emerged when the federal stimulus gave billions of dollars to the U.S. Department of Education for competitive experiments with top-down turnarounds to close and privatize schools and attack teachers.
Advocates for improving public schools—particularly the schools in the struggling neighborhoods of our cities where poverty is concentrated—were unprepared. We struggled to define what it all meant. Why had accountability replaced nurturing children as the mission of the schools? How are achievement gaps affected by opportunity gaps? What did it mean that everyone had come to define school quality by test scores without any attention to the capacity of communities to provide the necessary conditions for teaching and learning? How had it happened that everybody was suddenly focused on so-called “failing” schools? Why did everyone suddenly feel that it was appropriate to blame and castigate school teachers who were said to be protecting adult interests instead of putting students first? And how had it happened that so many people prized the innovation that was supposed to come with charter schools unbound from bureaucratic regulations, and yet those in charge no longer worried about strengthening the oversight necessary for protecting children’s rights and the expenditure of tax dollars? How had so many people come to accept that the market would take care of all this?
We watched with dismay as all this came to pass, but we were unprepared to name it, unprepared to think through how it all worked, unprepared to do something about it.
But there is an important development these days among advocates for public schools—the people who agree that we need to promote equity and justice in education’s public sector. Advocates today share broad consensus around the following priorities:
• driving long-denied public investment to improve the public schools in our poorest communities where family poverty is concentrated, and correcting inadequate and inequitably distributed school funding;
• addressing family poverty that, research has demonstrated again and again, is likely to undermine children’s achievement at school;
• ensuring that public dollars are not diverted and that charter schools do not operate as parasites destroying their host school districts;
• supporting school teachers as a strong, stable cadre of professionals;
• reducing reliance on standardized testing and eliminating high stakes punishments including turnarounds;
• rejecting privatization of education and ensuring strong oversight by government of the institutions that serve our children and spend our tax dollars;
• eliminating widespread overuse—especially in the schools serving our society’s poorest children—of the practices of suspending and expelling students and the widespread obedience-driven discipline practices imposed on poor children when more privileged children attend schools where they are encouraged to question and engage.
At the national level, organizations supporting justice and equity in public education are now unified across a range of constituencies and sectors to endorse and work for these values and priorities. Here are just some of the centers of advocacy these days:
• The Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools is a broad coalition of unions—the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers, and the Service Employees International Union; civil rights and community organizing groups–Advancement Project, Alliance for Educational Justice, Center for Popular Democracy, Journey for Justice Alliance; and academic, philanthropic and justice advocacy groups—the Annenberg Institute for School Reform, the Gamaliel Network, and the Schott Foundation for Public Education.
• The NAACP and Black Lives Matter have recently come together in the civil rights community to challenge privatization and lack of oversight as charter schools have expanded.
• The Network for Public Education is an alliance of advocates including school teachers, activists, and bloggers in support of strong and inclusive public schools and in opposition to unregulated charter schools and to over-reliance on high stakes testing.
• The National Education Policy Center, located at the University of Colorado, publishes academic research and reviews research from other agencies on education policy.
• The Education Law Center, and its Education Justice program, and Public Advocates and other school law attorneys are working for school funding equity and civil rights protection.
Last week the education writer, Jonathan Kozol, reminded us about what most of us now know how to articulate but what, ten or fifteen years ago, we would have struggled to say: “Slice it any way you want. Argue, as we must, that every family ought to have the right to make whatever choice they like in the interests of their child, no matter what damage it may do to other people’s children. As an individual decision, it’s absolutely human; but setting up this kind of competition, in which parents with the greatest social capital are encouraged to abandon their most vulnerable neighbors, is rotten social policy. What this represents is a state supported shriveling of civic virtue, a narrowing of moral obligation to the smallest possible parameters. It isn’t good… for democracy.”
Today we are well-aware of the organizations that have persistently undermined support for public education and at the same time pressed for an unregulated school marketplace as the alternative: the Hoover Institution; the Heritage Foundation; the American Enterprise Institute; the Thomas Fordham Foundation; Michigan’s Dick and Betsy DeVos and their many far-right organizations; New York hedge fund managers spreading their billions across New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts via the dark money Families for Excellent Schools; the New Schools Venture Fund; the Center on Reinventing Public Education at the University of Washington that promotes portfolio school reform; the Gates, Walton, and Broad venture philanthropies spending billions promoting charter schools; the U.S. Department of Education under Arne Duncan that granted billions of dollars—without much oversight at all according to the Department’s own Office of Inspector General— to states to expand charter schools; and the American Legislative Exchange Council that promotes school privatization across the states via its large membership of state legislators.
The same election that brought us President-Elect Donald Trump also brought evidence that today’s public school advocates have become organized and effective. Question 2 to expand the growth of charter schools went down to resounding defeat in a Massachusetts referendum, and Georgia Governor Nathan Deal’s plan for state takeover and charterization of Georgia’s struggling public schools was also soundly defeated at the polls. Voters responded to protect the idea of public education when the stakes for public schools were clearly defined by well organized and well informed advocates.
During a Donald Trump administration we must stay organized, raising our voices persistently to name and frame our concerns with precision and passion. A public education system is the best institution to meet the needs of all kinds of children and protect their rights through law. Our public schools are, of course, imperfect. It is our responsibility to pay attention and ensure that our schools work for all children. Democracy makes our role as citizens possible and requires engaged citizenship.
Looking back on his life as an education professor and advocate for education, Bill Ayers suggests something that will be particularly important for us to remember under the presidency of Donald Trump: that public education is the institutional embodiment of the values that define our democracy. “Education for free people is powered by a particularly precious and fragile ideal. Every human being is of infinite and incalculable value, each a work in progress and a force in motion, each a unique intellectual, emotional, physical, spiritual, moral, and creative force, each of us born equal in dignity and rights, each endowed with reason and conscience and agency, each deserving a dedicated place in the community of solidarity as well as a vital sense of brotherhood and sisterhood, recognition and respect. Embracing that basic ethic and spirit, people recognize that the fullest development of each individual—given the tremendous range of ability and the delicious stew of race, ethnicity, points of origin, and background—is the necessary condition for the full development of the entire community, and, conversely, that the fullest development of all is essential for the full development of each. This has obvious implications for education policy.” (Demand the Impossible, p. 161)
By janresseger
Source
Capitolwire: Report, Teachers' Unions Want Legislature to Mandate Stricter Audits of “Cash Cow” Charter School Industry
Capitolwire - October 1, by Christen Smith - A report released Wednesday insists meager state oversight has allowed...
Capitolwire - October 1, by Christen Smith - A report released Wednesday insists meager state oversight has allowed charter school officials to defraud taxpayers out of $30 million over the last 17 years.
And “that's just scratching the surface of the problem,” says Ted Kirsch, president of the American Federation of Teachers' Pennsylvania chapter.
“It's only talking about what's being reported and there are other things that haven't gotten to the surface yet and they are still being investigated,” he said during an interview Wednesday. “The (fraud) problem is a lot more widespread.”
The Center for Popular Democracy, Integrity in Education and Action United authored the 15-page report last month in which it calls for a moratorium on new charters while the state Attorney General's office investigates all 174 charter schools for potential fraud. The report also pushes the General Assembly to mandate annual fraud risk assessments capable of detecting and preventing waste and abuse.
“While the state has complex, multi-layered systems of oversight in the charter system, this history of financial fraud makes it clear that these systems are not effectively detecting or preventing fraud,” the report reads. “Indeed, the vast majority of fraud was uncovered by whistle-blowers and media exposes, not by the state's oversight agencies.”
The report's index details allegations of fraud against 11 separate charter schools across the state. At least nine of the charter school officials mentioned in the report have pleaded guilty and received prison sentences.
“It’s time for lawmakers to stop providing charter industry players a blank check with little oversight and no accountability,” said Lily Eskelsen García, president of the National Education Association, the parent organization of the Pennsylvania State Education Association. “...For students in all types of schools—traditional, charter or magnet—the key is having a sound structure for oversight and accountability, while providing educators with autonomy to create great learning environments for their students. Let’s work with families, educators and community members to make sure all students can attend great schools that meet their needs.”
“What's lacking here is a process to hold the charter operators accountable,” Kirsch said. “We need some laws that govern the accounting procedures and how money is handled by charter operators. These people are making a lot of money. It's a cash cow.”
Tim Eller, spokesman for the Department of Education, criticized the report Wednesday for “failing to mention” the state uses the same accounting practices for both public schools and charter schools.
“All public schools, including charter schools, are subject to audits by the state Auditor General,” he said. “The Auditor General is charged with ensuring that public entities are using taxpayer dollars for their intended purpose.”
Auditor General Eugene DePasquale said he couldn't confirm the report's $30 million figure, but said “we have found waste in the system,” particularly related to the issues of lease reimbursement and special education funding.
The auditor general uncovered “$1.2 million in improper lease reimbursements” in an August 2013 audit of Chester Community Charter School — Pennsylvania's largest. He said Wednesday lease reimbursement fraud represents about half of the charter cases his office has uncovered.
The audit found that Chester Community Charter School's founders sold the original building to a non-profit organization for $50.7 million, then created a for-profit management company to run the charter school, all the while collecting illegal reimbursement payments from the state for the buildings.
When asked about the report’s proposals regarding more oversight, DePasquale said: “If we had more resources, certainly we could audit more schools. That's absolutely true. But we need partners at the Department of Education to respond when we do find issues.”
DePasquale also suggested the General Assembly pass charter school reform that would address fraud involving lease reimbursements.
Two separate pieces of legislation — House Bill 6188 and Senate Bill 1085 — included measures to improve transparency and accountability in charter schools, but both bills have been stalled in the opposing chambers since budget negotiations wrapped up in July.
“House Bill 618 which passed the House in September of 2013 was basically loaded with accountability measures related to governing audits and academic performance,” said Steve Miskin, spokesperson for House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, R-Allegheny. “We are hoping the Senate passes it.”
Senate leadership did not respond to requests for comment Wednesday.
“If the widespread allegations mentioned in the report prove to be true, then those guilty should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law,” said Bob Fayfich, executive director of the Pennsylvania Coalition of Public Charter Schools, in a statement released Wednesday. “However, the report draws sweeping conclusions about the entire charter sector based on only 11 cited incidents in the course of almost 20 years, while ignoring numerous alleged and actual fraud and fiscal mismanagement in the districts over that same time period, which dwarf the charter school allegations in terms of alleged misuse of taxpayer dollars.”
Fayfich says the coalition supports mandating more stringent audits in the name of accountability, but doesn't think the public sector should be exempt.
“If the authors’ recommendations are to conduct a fraud audit of every charter school based on the actual and alleged misdeeds of a few, and initiate a moratorium on all charter schools until those audits are complete, then, in the name of intellectual integrity, the same recommendations should apply to traditional public school districts,” he said. “Fraud and fiscal mismanagement are wrong and cannot be tolerated, but to highlight them in one sector and ignore them in another indicates a motivation to target one type of public school for a political agenda.”
Renee Martin, acting communications director for the Attorney General Kathleen Kane, said Wednesday a copy of the report “has been shared with our attorneys.”
The Fed should not raise interest rates until wages go up
Shawn Sebastian, Fed Up Campaign co-director, and Marshall Steinbaum, Roosevelt Institute research director, discuss...
Shawn Sebastian, Fed Up Campaign co-director, and Marshall Steinbaum, Roosevelt Institute research director, discuss agreeing with Trump about the Fed raising interest rates and why wages haven't risen.
Watch the clip here.
Charter Schools are Cheating Your Kids: New Report Reveals Massive Fraud, Mismanagement, Abuse
Salon - May 7, 2014, by Paul Rosenberg - Just in time for National Charter School Week, there’s a...
Salon - May 7, 2014, by Paul Rosenberg - Just in time for National Charter School Week, there’s a new report highlighting the predictable perils of turning education into a poorly regulated business. Titled “Charter School Vulnerabilities to Waste, Fraud and Abuse,” the report focused on 15 states representing large charter markets, out of the 42 states that have charter schools. Drawing on news reports, criminal complaints, regulatory findings, audits and other sources, it “found fraud, waste and abuse cases totaling over $100 million in losses to taxpayers,” but warned that due to inadequate oversight, “the fraud and mismanagement that has been uncovered thus far might be just the tip of the iceberg.”
While there are plenty of other troubling issues surrounding charter schools — from high rates of racial segregation, to their lackluster overall performance records, to questionable admission and expulsion practices — this report sets all those admittedly important issues aside to focus squarely on activity that appears it could be criminal, and arguably totally out of control. It does not even mention questions raised by sky-high salaries paid to some charter CEOs, such as 16 New York City charter school CEOs who earned more than the head of the city’s public school system in 2011-12. Crime, not greed, is the focus here.
In short, the report is about as apolitical as can be imagined: It is narrowly focused on a white-collar crime wave of staggering proportions, and what can be done about it within the existing framework of widespread charter schools.
The report, co-authored by the Center for Popular Democracy and Integrity in Education, makes the point that the problem of charter school waste, fraud and abuse, which it focuses on, is just one symptom of the underlying problem: inadequate regulation of charter schools. But it’s a massive symptom, which has so far received only fragmentary coverage.The report takes its title from a section of a report to Congress by the Department of Education’s Office of the Inspector General, a report that took note of “a steady increase in the number of charter school complaints” and warned that state level agencies were failing “to provide adequate oversight needed to ensure that Federal funds [were] properly used and accounted for.”
But, the report noted, it’s not just the federal government that should be concerned. Reform efforts are underway in several states; Hawaii even repealed its existing charter school law in 2013, and put strict new oversight measures in place, and “Even the Walton Family Foundation, an avid charter advocate, launched a $5 million campaign in 2012 to make oversight of charters schools more stringent.”
“We expected to find a fair amount of fraud when we began this project, but we did not expect to find over $100 million in taxpayer dollars lost,” said Kyle Serrette, the director of education justice at the Center for Popular Democracy. “That’s just in 15 states. And that figure fails to capture the real harm to children. Clearly, we should hit the pause button on charter expansion until there is a better oversight system in place to protect our children and our communities.”
The report explained that the problem has its roots in a historical disconnect between the original intentions that launched the charter school movement and the commercial forces that have overtaken it since. At first, the report noted:
Lawmakers created charter schools to allow educators to explore new methods and models of teaching. To allow this to happen, they exempted the schools from the vast majority of regulations governing the traditional public school system. The goal was to incubate innovations that could then be used to improve public schools. i The ability to take calculated risks with small populations of willing teachers, parents, and students was the original design. With so few people and schools involved, the risk to participants and the public was relatively low.
But the character of the movement has changed dramatically since then. As charter school growth has skyrocketed (doubling three times since 2000), “the risks are high and growing, while the benefits are less clear,” the report continued, adding:
This is not an uncommon occurrence in our nation’s history. In the past—in some cases, our very recent past—industries such as banking and lending have outgrown their respective regulatory safety nets. Without sufficient regulations to ensure true public accountability, incompetent and/or unethical individuals and firms can (and have) inflict great harm on communities.
The report found that “charter operator fraud and mismanagement is endemic to the vast majority of states that have passed a charter school law.” It organized the abuse into six basic categories, each of which is treated in its own section:
• Charter operators using public funds illegally for personal gain; • School revenue used to illegally support other charter operator businesses; • Mismanagement that puts children in actual or potential danger; • Charters illegally requesting public dollars for services not provided; • Charter operators illegally inflating enrollment to boost revenues; and, • Charter operators mismanaging public funds and schools.
Perhaps most disturbingly, under the first category, crooked charter school officials displayed a wide range of lavish, compulsive or tawdry tastes. Examples include:
• Joel Pourier, former CEO of Oh Day Aki Heart Charter School in Minnesota, who embezzled $1.38 million from 2003 to 2008. He used the money on houses, cars, and trips to strip clubs. Meanwhile, according to an article in the Star Tribune, the school “lacked funds for field trips, supplies, computers and textbooks.”
• Nicholas Trombetta, founder of the Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School is accused of diverting funds from it for his private purchases. He allegedly bought houses, a Florida Condominium and a $300,000 plane, hid income from the IRS, formed businesses that billed even though they had done no work, and took $550,000 in kickbacks for a laptop computer contract.
• A regular financial audit in 2009 of the Langston Hughes Academy in New Orleans uncovered theft of $660,000 by Kelly Thompson, the school’s business manager. Thompson admitted that from shortly after she assumed the position until she was fired 15 months later, she diverted funds to herself in order to support her gambling in local casinos.
Others spent their stolen money on everything from a pair of jet skis for $18,000 to combined receipts of $228 for cigarettes and beer, to over $30,000 on personal items from Lord & Taylor, Saks Fifth Avenue, Louis Vuitton, Coach and Tommy Hilfiger. But the real damage came from the theft of resources for children’s future.
“Our school system exists to serve students and enrich communities,” said Sabrina Stevens, executive director of Integrity in Education. “School funding is too scarce as it is; we can hardly afford to waste the resources we do have on people who would prioritize exotic vacations over school supplies or food for children. We also can’t continue to rely on the media or isolated whistle-blowers to identify these problems. We need to have rules in place that can systematically weed out incompetent or unscrupulous charter operators before they pose a risk to students and taxpayers.”
Stevens was not just expressing a nebulous hope. The report also offered a set of proposals on how to go about reining in the abuses. Initial suggestions on how to respond to each kind of abuse are presented in each of the six areas mentioned above, but there is also a comprehensive framework integrating them into a coherent whole.
The report’s first proposal is that all states should establish an oversight “Office of Charter Schools.” It “should have the statutory responsibility, authority, and resources to investigate fraud, waste, mismanagement and misconduct,” including the authority to refer findings for prosecution. It should have “an appropriate level of staffing” so that “The ratio of charter schools to full-time investigators employed by the Office should not exceed ten to one.” It should have the power to place distribution of charter school funds on hold. And it should have the authority to intervene in funding or other decisions made by charter authorizing entities if they are violating state or federal law.
A second proposal is that states amend their charter laws to “explicitly declare that charter schools are public schools, and are subject to the same non-discrimination and transparency requirements as are other publicly funded schools.”
A third proposal is to require public online availability of each charter school’s original application and charter agreement.
Not surprisingly, a number of proposals target those running charter schools. Specifically, regarding charter school governing board members, the report proposes: 1) Require them to live in close proximity to the school/s physical location. 2) Require boards to be elected “with representation of parents (elected by parents), teachers (elected by teachers) and in the case of high schools, students (elected by students).” Other board members should be “residents of the school district in which the school/s operate.” 3) Require board members to file full financial disclosure and conflict-of-interest reports, similar to those required of traditional school district board members — and post them online on the school’s website. 4) Hold board members legally liable for fraud or malfeasance occurring at the school or schools that they oversee.
More broadly, charter schools — and the oversight entities that authorize them — should be publicly transparent in the following ways: 1) A full list of each charter school’s governing board members, officers and administrators with affiliation and contact information should be available on the school’s website. 2) Minutes from governing board meetings, the school’s policies, and information about staff should be available on the school’s website. 3) Charter schools should be fully compliant with state open meetings/open records laws. 4) Charter school financial documents should be publicly disclosed annually, on the authorizer’s website, including detailed information about the use of both public and private funds by the school and its management entities. 5) Charter schools should be independently audited annually, with audits published on the school’s websites. 6) All vendor or service contracts over $25,000 should be fully disclosed. No such contracts should be allowed with any entity in which the school operator, or any board member, has any personal interest.
If most of these sound like simple common sense, that’s pretty much just the point. There are plenty of issues around education that are controversial. Protecting ourselves, our children and their future against a massive white-collar crime wave should not be one of them.
Source
Pittsburgh to host progressive activists, leaders at National People’s Convention
Pittsburgh to host progressive activists, leaders at National People’s Convention
In Seattle’s 2013 election, Nick Licata broke the city’s record for the most votes received citywide for a city...
In Seattle’s 2013 election, Nick Licata broke the city’s record for the most votes received citywide for a city councilor in a contested race. That same year he was named the country’s Most Valuable Local Official on The Nation’s list of most valuable progressives.
During his time on council, Licata sponsored and passed legislation like paid sick leave and supported a plan to raise Seattle’s minimum wage to $15 an hour, two social-justice objectives sought by activists around the country. At the end of last year, the veteran Seattle city councilor retired after 18 years in office.
That’s not the end of Licata’s social-justice crusade, however. This week he’ll visit Pittsburgh to attend two conventions on social-justice issues and share insights from his recently released book, Becoming a Citizen Activist.
“My primary mission right now,” says Licata, “is to work with both citizens and elected [officials] to recognize that no matter what happens after November, it’s critical that we maintain an activist space at the local level, because we’ve shown at the local level we can accomplish things, and we can continue to accomplish things no matter who is president.”
Pittsburgh and other cities haven’t seen as much progress on paid sick leave and the Fight for $15 as has Licata’s native Seattle. Pittsburgh City Council passed a paid-sick-leave bill last year, but a judge struck it down in December as unenforceable. And while the city and some employers have raised their minimum wage to $15 an hour, a mandatory minimum wage citywide is a ways away.
But Pittsburgh must be doing something right because it was selected to host those two social-justice conventions. The People’s Convention will bring more than 40 national activist organizations to the city, while the Local Progress Convening will see the arrival of hundreds of progressive municipal elected officials.
“Pittsburgh was identified as a place where [the] movement is very real,” says Erin Kramer, executive director of social-justice group One Pittsburgh. “There’s more workers organizing per capita in Pittsburgh than any other city in the country right now. There’s something happening in Pittsburgh right now, and folks want to come see it and learn from it.”
The pairing of the events isn’t an accident. They’re both sponsored by the Center for Popular Democracy, a group that works to build alliances between progressive organizations and politicians. Participants say collaboration between the two bodies is integral to ensuring progressive laws are passed and enacted.
“It is very important for elected officials who are trying to advance social change to have a direct understanding of the specific concerns of communities,” says Ana Maria Archila, co-executive director of Popular Democracy. “And it’s very important for community members to have relationships with elected officials. We know in the places where working families are winning we need both the pressure on the outside and the strategy on the inside.”
Jimmy John’s employee Chris Ellis has worked in the fast-food industry for more than two decades and has become a leader in the local Fight for $15. At the People’s Convention next week, he’ll have the opportunity to meet leaders from movements in other cities throughout the country.
“[I hope to learn] better organizing skills not just for the Fight for $15 movement but for all movements in general,” Ellis says. “I’m the type of person who sees myself trying to organize other fights, because once this fight is over, I’m looking for other fights.”
The interconnectedness of social-justice issues is widely recognized by activists. The People’s Convention will focus on topics like workers’ rights, health care, gun violence and education — issues that One Pittsburgh, which is part of the hosting committee, has been working on for more than a decade. The idea is to collaborate on these issues to build momentum and produce results.
“In Pittsburgh there’s lots of progressive work on half-a-dozen different issues at any given time, and increasingly those organizations are building partnerships with each other,” says Kramer, from One Pittsburgh. “We’ve been getting together to learn from each other and build our campaigns together. What I think folks are increasingly realizing is whether it’s housing, minimum wage or education justice, it’s really the same people who need to come together to build power to build a city that works for all of us.”
The event will develop strategies for appealing to lawmakers, but will also address barriers in cities where the majority of elected officials are already supportive of social-justice movements.
“Increasingly, we find ourselves literally preempted from solving problems at the local level by state legislatures that are unfriendly to the solutions we would propose,” says Kramer. “A good example is where we passed paid-sick-day legislation for tens of thousands of people in Pittsburgh and immediately it goes in front of the court because the restaurant association [the Pennsylvania Restaurant and Lodging Association] objects. The reason we don’t have a $15-an-hour minimum wage for the vast majority of Pennsylvanians is because you can’t do that at the city level.”
Combating these barriers that stifle progress at the municipal level — and particularly, developing strategies for fighting lawsuits against progressive laws — is something that will be discussed at the Local Progress convention this weekend as well.
“It’s the strategy,” says Licata, a Local Progress co-founder. “It’s smart on [the opposition’s] part, and I think that’s what we’ll see in other cities — corporate strategy to try to limit [these laws]. What I would like to see as we see more of these lawsuits being filed is Local Progress use our network to work on national strategies to fight these corporate challenges through the court system.”
To ensure laws fall within a city’s jurisdiction, Local Progress has also been holding workshops to examine the power that states hold over local municipalities. And they’re also looking into legislation that is being passed to further limit cities’ rights.
“As a rule of thumb, cities are creatures of the state,” says Licata. “Over half the states limit the authority of cities, and one of the ongoing battles we’re having that impacts local politics is the whole issue of states limiting citizens’ rights. We’ve been fighting on that. It’s a major concern.”
Ultimately, as a former activist turned politician turned activism author, Licata says the intersection of the two events and collaboration is important to ensuring that things like paid sick leave and a $15-an-hour minimum wage are realized.
“People at the People’s Convention and the politicians at Local Progress are literally the same people. A lot of the people at Local Progress were activists,” he says. “When someone gets elected to office, people who got the person elected to office think he or she will take care of the problems, and the person who gets elected thinks, ‘Oh, I have to act differently.’ But you have to continue organizing and use the power you get as an elected official to amplify your organizing.
“Government is a tool. It’s not an end-product. I think getting into office does give you more power, but you want to distribute that power so other people have access to power. The main ask of progressive politicians who want to build communities is to disperse the power that was given to them to as many people as possible.”
According to Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto, who as city councilor joined Local Progress nearly a decade ago, the group can counterbalance those organizations that are trying to get conservative legislation passed.
“Certainly we’ve learned from other cities through these organizations,” says Peduto. “We hear a lot about ALEC [American Legislative Exchange Council] and how it is a network that is putting state legislatures into very conservative, Tea Party-type of policies, and it networks nationally. Well, this is the answer, and these organizations have become the network that helps progressive policies to work their way into implementation in city halls. And the fact that they chose Pittsburgh to do it shows that we are a part of that network and one of the areas that the rest of the country looks towards.”
Like Peduto, event organizer Popular Democracy hopes its network of activists and politicians will have the ability to shape the future of the country.
“It’s a really important moment politically because our nation is at a crossroads between the politics of hate and xenophobia and the politics of opportunity and interdependence,” says Popular Democracy’s Archila. “We are in the process of a presidential election where the issues that matter to the working-class community are really centrally positioned in the debate. How the solutions are advanced will depend on who is in motion. And we will have in Pittsburgh thousands of people who are in motion across the country and who are helping define the debate for what’s possible in their cities.”
By Rebecca Addison
Source
Labor Activists Applaud First Statewide ‘Fair Scheduling’ Law
Starting next summer, companies in Oregon will have to give workers at least seven days’ notice about when they’ll have...
Starting next summer, companies in Oregon will have to give workers at least seven days’ notice about when they’ll have to work, according to legislation signed Tuesday by Governor Kate Brown. A handful of major cities have passed “fair scheduling” laws, but Oregon is the first state to do so and the biggest victory on the issue so far for labor activists.
Read the full article here.
3 days ago
3 days ago