After eight years of Rudy Guiliani and twelve years of Michael Bloomberg, the 1% is accustomed to getting whatever it wants in Néw York City. They like to cover their “wants” in deceptive rhetoric suggesting they are doing it “for the kids” or for “civil rights.”
Media Matters here reports on billionaire Murdoch’s vendetta against Mayor Bill de Blasio. Our newly elected progressive mayor is now the target if a full-bore attack by all of Murdoch’s media: the Néw York Post, Fox News, and the Wall Street Journal.
The 1% is already furious that de Blasio wants them to pay about $1,000 a year so that pre-K is available to all. Now de Blasio had the audacity to give Eva Moskowitz only three of the charters she expected. At the same time, he approved 39 of 49 charter applications.
How dare he deny any charter application! Eva’s friends on Wall Street have launched a very elaborate barrage of attack ads against the mayor, accusing him of indifference to the needs of black children.
Why trust de Blasio when you could trust Rupert Murdoch, Fox News, and hedge fund managers to protect the rights of children?
The hedge fund crowd has already forgotten that de Blasio won in a landslide. They forgot that Eva last closed her schools to lead a protest march across the Brooklyn Bridge, accompanied by de Blasio’s Republican opponent, Joe Lhota. They forgot that de Blasio crushed Lhota by 50 points. In other words, he has a mandate.
But that won’t stop the smear machine.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Why did de Blasio approve 39 charters? I thought he was going to limit their expansion.
I think his line all along has been to limit (not eliminate) co-locations. I don’t know that he’s had much to say about charters themselves, one way or another. He brought in a lot of Rahm Emanuel’s transition team, so you know he’s not really opposed to charters.
oh then he is a total fraud.
He was in a tough position. He was reviewing specific decisions on charters co-locations that Bloomberg already made. In other words, he was reversing an executive action of the prior mayor. He had to have a legally defensible basis for his changing the decision already made. I doubt that he will be quite so willing to approve more charter co-locations.
It’s up to de Blasio to remind people he won in a landslide and on the platform he won on — lots of votes for him based on his promise to curb Moskowitz. He is passive in the face of this onslaught. They are getting him ready for the slaughter and instead of coming out swinging he looks weak and ineffective. He should have not given Moskowitz one spot after she stole so much from the schools. And he should call on sanctions for her closing schools they claim are public while using kids for blatant political means. There is a rally at a school that Moskowitz is being allowed to occupy this Friday at 2:30 in Brooklyn — after school because they can’t close them — Imagine if De Blasio closed schools an hour early to allow the supporters of the public school to attend – and the kind of storm that would arouse. In fact that is what he should do and let them stew.
Few people have less visibility into the inner workings of City Hall or Albany than I do. That said, it’s my sense that De Blasio has spent far too much time resting on his “mandate.” I think the air has been going out of the mandate for a while now, and especially since shortly after Cuomo made his pre-K proposal. There are also some signs that De Blasio hasn’t made enough of an effort to make his case to legislators. I don’t know whether that indicates a lack of political know-how, bad staffing decisions, or sheer inertia, or all of the above. But if De Blasio has left the legislature on its own to decide whether to side with him or with Cuomo, he’s miscalculated badly.
FLERP, not true. Follow the money.
Not sure what you’re saying isn’t true or what exactly you mean by “follow the money” in this context, Diane.
I think the only reason Cuomo even made a UPK move was because he was getting upstaged in his “lobbyist for the students” shtick. At every turn, at every opportunity, in every memo…he has made it clear that he feels we spend to much on schools, that the number one priority for him isn’t really students-it isn’t making NY a leader in educating students (which it already is)…it’s making NY a leader in teacher evaluation (entitled and well-lobbied code for “disown and debase the middle class entirely, owe nothing politically to any group other than wealthy financiers and lobbyists). Follow THAT money. The governor waits and picks his position carefully, and school piratizers work quietly behind the scene to pave their way-with him on the defensive line.
He wants to win reflection and win by a wide margin and feels he can’t run strong upstate without a no-new-taxes platform. And ditto for his presidential plans. Cuomo’s UPK proposal was a preemptive strike but also a sign that De Blasio had won on that issue. But the high water mark for BDB’s “mandate” has passed and I think Cuomo has more leverage every day.
Also, I would assume, or hope, that BDB has been using his mandate-leverage to line up votes in the Senate for a compromise proposal that goes with Cuomo’s plan but raises the ante enough to allow NYC to move forward with UPK with the best possible State funding. My fear is that he’s been slow on this front (or worst-case, hasn’t even been laying the initial groundwork yet), and that NYC may end up leaving a ton of money on the table. Because Cuomo appears to be acting like someone who has information that his hand is getting stronger, not weaker.
His “war chest” grows as well as the intricate web that will lock down public education with legislation written by ed-lobbyist when the 2yr moratorium is lifted. All Cuomo needs to do is come out once in a while and pretend he doesn’t like the common core standards, blame the NYSED regents for the failed “rollout”, do a promo spot that keeps his face out their and avoids the high pressure push he was involved in…
You call this a mandate????
Two Enemies of Good Government
Ideologues and Political Rhetoric without Action
Good governing only comes with compromise, and ideologues seem to lack the common sense that they can’t prevail at all times. Simply stated they are incapable of compromise. Rhetoric without action can be worse since nothing is there to be discussed, modified and ultimately agreed. Great pronouncement speeches are soon forgotten without the requisite follow through of action.
We have all witnessed these two shortcomings in our politicians, and unfortunately our well-intended new Mayor of New York seems to embrace both. His Pre-K stance on tax the rich as the only path to offering universal Pre K even though the state has offered to fund it, is an excellent example of an ideologue that refuses to compromise, even when he is getting most of what he wants. He then goes on to embrace the second failing of rhetoric without action by announcing multiple projects and trashing existing ones without any specific plans to launch or improve them. Take your pick, a rejuvenated Sandy, a “reset” of mid-town zoning, specifics on Pre-K, etc.
I for one am also tired of hearing the new mayor was elected with a 73% mandate. Let’s take a quick look at those pesky facts: There are 4.6 million registered voters in New York City. Only 1.02 million actually voted which is only 22.2 % of eligible voters. Of this 22.2 percent he did receive 73% of the vote. This translates, mathematically and factually into 16.3 % of the vote of New York City voters…hardly a mandate.
However, it was clearly a mandate by the unions of New York City. If 75% of the 300,000 union members of NYC voted for DeBlasio and their partner/spouse also voted for him, along with one parent or parent-in-law, that group alone would have accounted for almost the entire vote he received. And, let’s not forget, union members are democrats, they vote regularly, and the new Mayor was promising retroactive pay increases. They totally supported him and if the truth were known, single handedly, elected him. This calculation would leave 3.0 million registered voters who did not cast a vote (shame on them) and gave the Mayor his often-stated “mandate”.
The mayor must start delivering. Compromise on the Pre-K, and you’ll be lauded and known as the Mayor who gave everyone Pre-K not the Mayor who compromised away his tax increase. Release specifics on projects and “resets” that make sense and then follow through.
And, a few more thoughts Mr. Mayor. Those nasty one-percenters are at their desk in the financial district long before your first meeting is scheduled and they show up on time, each and every day. They are not 40 to 60 minutes late for their scheduled meeting and certainly not for their first of the day. You’d be surprised to see how active the “street” is at 6AM or 7AM each morning. Try getting up one morning and checking it out. You’ll find the “other city” you often refer to up and working very hard long before you’ve had your first cup of coffee.
And above all, don’t become the Mayor Ed Koch spoke of in his memorable words: “The people have spoken…and now they must be punished”
Good Luck Mr. Mayor. Everyone really does want you to succeed, as that would be best for the city we all love. But, you’ll have to get up early, show up on time and avoid the two enemies of good government. http://www.gippersblog.com
You don’t count people who don’t vote, and never have. The percentage is the percentage.
Thanks, Ryan
If we counted non voters, then we have never had a legitimately elected mayor, governor or president
Ryan Novosielski & dianeravitch: another example of charterite/privatizer math at work.
In comments here today on a posting re Michiagan Governor Snyder and his attacks on public education, Chiara Duggan points out yet another example of massaging and torturing numbers in mad dog pursuit of $tudent $uccess. In Ohio, in order to de-emphasize the impact and $tudent $ucce$$ of for-profit charters you simply put forth their percentage, 30% of all charters, instead of the actual number of charter students enrolled by them, 54%. *Please see her comments for full context.*
A neat trick. But that begs the question—in days of olde, before there were accountably underlings and numbers/stats, what oh what did they do?
“In ancient times they had no statistics so they had to fall back on lies.” [Stephen Leacock]
Ah, figures…
😎
It’s hard to muster very much sympathy for the Wall Streeters who don’t want to pay the $1,000 a year tax to fund pre-K. j
Especially, when your defense is that they get to work early and on time.
Ever think WHO makes it possible for financiers to be sitting in their desks by 6 a.m. For that, they have to thank janitors, garbage men, parking garage attendants, train conductors and MTA workers, bus drivers, doormen and electricians. And, if they are able to enjoy a morning cup of coffee and a paper, then there are dozens of others to thank, too: Coffee barristas, newsmen, deli owners, and on and on.
Bottom line, the rich of Manhattan are able to enjoy being rich in Manhattan because they are served — and served well — by hundreds of people, every day, who make hundreds of times less than the rich.
Paying for the opportunity of the poor’s children to make it in the future is the obligation that the rich of New York have to pay for being able to ENJOY having made it.
The compromise that you want DeBlasio to make is to accede to Andrew Cuomo’s grotesquely disingenuous offer to find the money to fund pre-K “somewhere” in the budget.
Uh-hunh; yeah, right.
Cuomo can find the money in the state budget THIS year because of the once-in-a-month-of-Sundays surprise of having unanticipated tax revenues. But when the revenue stream returns to normal, funding for pre-K under Cuomo’s fairyland plan will either wither away or siphon away some other vital service from those who need it.
If you study children, you know that one of the worst things that you can do to them is make them a promise than you know that cannot and won’t keep.
Cuomo’s plan invites such child endangerment; DeBlasio’s plants a flag in bedrock saying “Not this time, kids.”
Bully for him.
I am avidly pro-union, a member, active, opinionated, and DEFINITELY NOT a Democrat. These yes-men union leader, handshaker quasi-politician wuss bunnies that have let “shared sacrifice”, “job creator” and “greedy public middle class workers and their benefits” crap fly and go unchallenged…making rotten deals and hoping for a chance to litigate for a lifeline…they forget where unions came from, what they’re about, and what made them strong. Soft handed desk jockeys with their paid for politicians should not win the day over “boots on the ground”.
Mayor DeBlasio is understandably pushing for the pre-K tax because Cuomo’s promise is meaningless. The state is already BILLIONS of dollars short in the education funding it is supposed to be returning to NYC education each year. The state already promised THAT money. But we never get the full amount. Why would we think the new promises are more real?
See for example Bruce Baker’s detailed report on the significant shortfalls in NYS funding for education, based on the amount that SHOULD have been sent to schools, using the formula the state developed to come into compliance with the NYS constitution and the court decision in the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit.
Click to access School-Funding-Fairness-in-New-York-State-An-Update-for-2013-14.pdf
Cuomo has egregiously under-funded the state’s education budget for years.
As noted by the Education Law Center, in New York State:
“The 2012-13 {NYS} budget widened the gap between the 2007 formula and actual state funding for New York’s schools. The shortfall now tops $5.5 billion dollars. As the Board of Regents noted in its November 2012 State Aid Conceptual Proposal, this shortfall, together with the accumulated GEA cuts, brings the total funding gap to over $7.7 billion. Current school funding is below 2008-09 levels. As a result of these reductions and restrictions, essential school resources are disappearing from classrooms in New York City and throughout the state. Districts are being forced to dramatically increase class sizes, eliminate courses and reduce or cut services for at-risk students, along with other vital programs and resources.”
http://www.edlawcenter.org/initiatives/campaign-for-fiscal-equity.html?
Now, we are supposed to believe Cuomo that he will be giving us pre-K without any new revenue?
How about giving us the $5.5, or $7.7 billion he is already supposed to give needy districts AND let us put the new tax into effect. The money is going to come from some place. What other programs are we supposed to give up so Cuomo can promise pre-K without a tax increase? Mental health institutions? Road repair? The state money that it should be sending to the City for Medicaid? Already, the governor is trying to close a hospital in Brooklyn, because he says the state can’t afford to keep it open. The state pre-K money is too little and it is too unlikely to happen.
Mayor DeBlasio must keep up the pressure on state lawmakers.
I am disgusted that journalists are letting Cuomo get by with his magical math without any sort of questioning about how this budget would work and why he can come up with the money for limited pre-K, but not the education money mandated by the Campaign for Fiscal Equity court case.
The landslide that elected DeBlasio has to show up in the public squares en masse to push the new Mayor to live up to his promises and as a show of force which enables the Mayor to keep those promises. If the landslide stays home, the Mayor will be buried by the public relations tsunami Eva and Murdoch are so well-equipped to fashion. Somehow, DeBlasio’s landslide has to become a visible force outdoors to swarm Eva’s busloads, either the Mayor has to make that happen or some other force on the side of NYC kids.
I was probably the only blogger @ gretawire to challenge Van Susteren on that video clip that Media Matters posted. I made sure everyone knew that interview she did with Brill dated back to Sept. of 2011. Diane was very kind to email me saying Brill is on to other things, now, and no longer involved in school issues.
What got me all charged up was the way she patted herself on the back making her viewers think that she knows “everything” about this issue. I told her that her commentary nauseated me! I also challenge her to give her findings about how she was so certain that this charter chain is “working.” No word, yet, on that. And get this one, she never mentions Moskowitz’s name. If you haven’t read Gary Rubenstein’s “How To Define Success” article, then you need to! He has some very interesting findings on the data collected from Success Academy in regards to their attrition rate.
In the second paragraph “she” refers to Van Susteren. I just wanted to be more clear about that.
I think we should all remember that the Fox news owner was responsible for the phone hacking scandal in England where his deputies are going on trial. He is a senior citizen who just became single who supports people like Joel Klein, Ms. Rhee man who is under the impression that he will live forever. He is living a very good life in the States, we should be boycotting the Wall Street Journal and all that he owns, We are not sheep and in the face of hatred ,reasoning shows how ridiculous this man is. We can support the mayor by letting him know he is not in this fight by himself. That is why the Jon Steward show is so successful, he makes these fools look like what they are rich fools who will punch out sooner than later. WE will save public education in NY and if the governor has to go because he cant get on our page then he needs to go also.
I hope so, I really do.
What does “universal pre-K” mean. Maybe its my age, but there seems to be a movement to educate children from “cradle to they
can legally leave public education.
Over the years the growth of education initiatives have grown on a parallel plane with the US Dept. of Education. New programs are the answers to old problems.
And, when they fail, the programs are never disbanded, merely modified.
We hear about the cost of education, yet the cost does not translate into superior results.
Universal Pre-K will be yet another “opportunity” for parents to shift early education, which includes nurturing to the public school system.
Every parent and even the professional educators needs to ask,
why should children leave the nest at such an early age? Isn’t twelve years of public education enough?