I have recently read that Senator Elizabeth Warren is a supporter of school vouchers. This made people who despise public schools, like certain hedge fund managers, tingle with joy. At last, a progressive who is as contemptuous of public education as they are! At last, someone who will support their efforts to dismantle our nation’s precious democratic institution whose doors are open to all.
About a month ago, I visited Senator Warren in her office in Washington, and she said without reservation that this was untrue.
She told me that she was, like me, a graduate of public schools. Without public education, she said, she would not be where she is today.
I gave her a copy of “Reign of Error,” which she promised to read.
Since I am writing this on an iPad from Louisville, I can’t figure out how to add the photo of me and Warren, holding the book. But I will tweet it.
I hope to hear from her again. More on this when I do.
Hedge fund managers, don’t be so sure of yourselves. You can’t buy everyone.
Reblogged this on Kmareka.com and commented:
Please tell me that Elizabeth Warren is not going to be bought by the Corporate Education Reform movement. That would just be too depressing for words.
I will look for the photo and save it.
As for the hedgeucators, get a new hobby. You are clueless and you are harming our children, our teachers and our schools. Be gone! Shoo fly.
“…the hedgeucators…”
Love it, Linda! Spot on!
Unfortunately, opening up (plundering) new markets, and the reservoir of revenue these markets possess, is more than just a hobby for the hedgeucators. It’s what gives their life meaning
Thanks Diane for clearing this up quickly, and I hope, finally. Tilson is full of bull as always. And Warren is my first choice to run for Prez in 2016.
I always welcome diverse opinions on your site, but sometimes find myself clenching my teeth.
Have a safe trip and don’t overdo in Louisville.
I am an honors grad of Catholic elementary and secondary schools, with a couple of summers in a great public school. After teaching for several years I have worked for decades defending public education and vigorously opposing vouchers and all other gimmicks for diverting publc funds to nonpublic schools. It’s good to hear that Warren, who I think is great, is on our side. — Edd Doerr (arlinc.org)
We must identify those elected representatives who support the democratically run public schools that belong to the people—who are willing to stand up against President Obama, Arne Duncan, Bill Gates and the gang of Hedge Fund profiteers who want to hijack democracy in the name of (fake education) reform and profit from the almost $700 billion in annual taxes that supports our public schools.
If Elizabeth Warren is one of the US leaders who supports the transparent, democratically run public schools, then maybe she should run for president in 2016.
The public schools are not broken. They don’t need to be reformed and turned over to for-profit (or non-profit), secretive and opaque, private sector corporations that will treat our children like products on a Ford factory assembly line.
Most on this blog are grateful that you have access to people in high places and have the wit to use those connections for a cause worth fighting for. You have the clarity of thought and speech that Elizabeth Warren has. I hope you can get her to read your book and amplify the message that our schools should not be viewd as profit-centers, or our children as merely human resources to exploit.
I read this with dismay in the New Yorker profile by Jill Lepore. I am hoping she did not write these words but that they were inserted by a ghost writer.
It will take time for us to see where she stands until she cuts through the fog of rumor in the air.
Ken, you’re right. Senator Warren is the one who can cut through the fog of rumor, and speak out clearly. Her problem is that if she does so, she breaks with the Obama administration’s drive to hand public education over to corporate control.
She spoke clearly on banking and finance, so what’s the impediment here? I’m fine with discussing it, if she wants to articulate support for more open access to public schools, as long as she means open and public. The word “vouchers” doesn’t necessarily connote diversion of public funds to private enterprises. However, the only role for the federal government in such a conversation is oversight to guarantee that the civil rights of children and communities aren’t violated in such arrangements.
The sticking point is, will she oppose the lobbyist-driven promulgation of laws and regulations, which use test-based “accountability”, to divert public resources to corporate control? American children, and teachers, and local schools are being punished by corporate interests, with an eye on financial control of our education expenditures through ,mandated data-driven policy making. The same Wall Street lobbyists Senator Warren says she’ll fight, have set Pearson, Microsoft, Xerox, IBM, K12inc, and Wireless Generation over our public schools, by federal and state mandates.
It’s no longer tolerable for politicians to pretend they are unaware of the corporate drive for control of public education. That’s all she needs to say: “I oppose those current administration policies which force public schools to answer to corporate control. They are unconstitutional.”
Warren herself made the case for vouchers in her 2003 book THE TWO INCOME TRAP. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2012/01/26/elizabeth-warrens-quiet-support-for-public-school-vouchers
Well, I guess no one can be right about everything. But it is extremely disheartening (and so wrong).
Being wrong isn’t what bothers me, it’s the not admitting that she herself put forth that argument – this isn’t just something hedge fund types are making up to discredit her. She needs to be asked directly about the position from 2003 and she needs to answer directly. Saying she “supports public schools” isn’t enough for me. Even GWB claimed that much.
I think this one’s gone down the memory hole. Maybe her daughter will fall on this sword.
Dienne,
You are right about the blanket statement “supporting public schools” is not enough. One must be very vigilant when thayt statement gets tossed out to the masses . . . .
It sounded like something Gates, etc would have wrote. What a bunch of bs. It makes me very skeptical of her. The whole idea that a voucher is some type of miracle worker is a joke. It still fails to address the overall issues with poverty.
Absolutely correct. And it won’t be corrected, because powerful people in this country make huge amounts of money from exploiting people of African descent in America in addition to people of color in other parts of the world that don’t have the weapons to protect themselves. This is the real game that is taking place.
Agreed. Next time you have to press her on what she was thinking when she wrote about it in her book.
Elizabeth Warren is not immune from being a flip flopper, but I have been following her for several years, and she has been very solid about middle and working class concerns and values. She alone – the lone wolf – called out during a hearing that NO ONE save for Bernie Madoff has been brought to trial for economic crimes against humanity, especially for the crash caused by deregulation and exotic mortgage instruments and derivatives.
These people surrounding her and barely able to speak and come up with some accountability should be HUNG in public, and I’d be personaly happy to kick the chairs.
Popcorn and JuJu beans, anyone?
Anyone who has persisted as much as Warren – including Bernie Sanders – is a hero in my book.
Diane, if you are reading this and can respond, have you ever had a meeting with Senator Sanders? He is thunderous and fearless. . . . . You two are a political match made in heaven.
My roundtable of superheroes (known and lesser known):
Bernie Sanders, Robert Reich, Elizabeth Warren, Bill Moyers, Amy Goodman, Juan Gonzalez, Stephen Krashen, Diane Ravitch, Leonie Haimson, Mercedes Schneider, Bob Shepherd, Michael Fiorillo, Carol Burris, Brian Jones, Julie Kavanaugh, Norm Scott, Noel Wilson, and Louis Weiner.
We must all continue to become our own superheroes and unite together to fight these injustices . . . . .
And Robert Rendo…..I will unite with you any day of the week.
Robert, those are awesome people that you listed. They all deserve accolades from everyone. Each one has fought for social justice for our kids and for public education However, I’m just wondering if Louis Weiner is supposed to be typed as Lois Weiner because she, too, is a superhero.
Lois it is . . . . . . Sorry for the typo. I am a great speller and a lousy typist.
Robert, Sanders also has chosen to remain silent on the question of corporate education control. so, how fearless is he, really?
Sanders at least has an excuse. The corporate takeover has not affected his state of Vermont.
Chemtchr, where is your true critical thinking about this one politician?
Has being exposed to chemicals affected your memory?
Quick; call OSHA . . . . . .
I am not going to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
If you look at all of Sanders’ advocacy about taxation, healthcare, universal childcare, more vacation time, unions, and social security, to name a few, you would see a bigger and more accurate picture of Bernie.
Please follow his advocacy closely, because so much of it is focused on equity and financial justice for the middle class. He compares our society directly to western Europe and glaringly cites the inequitable differences. He openly refers to himself as a socialist democrat.
Not at all bad for an American.
He is not perfect, nor am I smitten by any of my dream team. They do not overlap 100%, but they are the real thing.
Bernie has commented against the corporate reform movement and has not been silent at all if you really survey all his speeches and press conferences, but indeed, he has not made education his center piece compared to his advocacy for taxing the wealthy and raising the $113,500 cap on taxing income for social security. Bernie has been outspoken about reform in his state and does not want vouchers, charters, or APPR with test scores.
Bernie has been fearless on not privatizing SS and on implementing universal healthcare, unlike the deceitful ACA, a veritable gift to the insurance companies. Bernie’s state will be the first to have a state-wide universal healthcare system that is being phased in by 2017. You don’t hear a lot about it because he and the governor are trying to keep it under wraps and protect its incubation and infancy before the corporate controlled media attempts to rip it apart and lie about it. It will not be a perfect system, nor will it be financed the same as they do in Europe, but it will be universal and financed through taxation. It will contract out to private insurance companies, but with far more regulations and restrictions on their overhead and profit than the ACA, and still many services and products will be offered through in-house state run facilities and not private vendors. It pushes the healthcare delivery system much further away from profit interests and slams them closer to the interests of the patient.
Some say Bernie only cares about his own state, but why not take advantage of a robust history of state sovereignty and perhaps develop a model for the rest of the country.?The fact that Vermont has not been nearly affected by RttT is a testament to the history, culture and independence of Vermont.
I am going into the acceptance of Randi Weingarten as a (temporary) ally kicking and screaming solely because of her power and clout, and i agree with Diane, although sometimes I feel like telling Diane that she has never felt the impact directly of Weingarten’s leadership style. For the first time in my knowedlge of Diane’s advocacy, Diane has stated the Weingarten has made many mistakes. Not that I think Diane has to be perfect either, but I trust her sagacity at 75 compared to mine at a considerably younger age.
That said, I am accepting Bernie Sanders as an ally because of his solid merit and honorability, not to mention his power and clout.
Chemtchr, it would be in your informed interest to take him on as an ally. Please consider the physical propoerties and whole molar mass of the elements you are weighing before you conclude or mix formulas. Potions of incomplete information can be caustic.
Personally, I’d like everyone to be as perfect as you, but I have to utilize who I can get within reason . . . . .
I’ll even take you. Who wouldn’t? . . . .
I just got home from work.
I send Bernie Sanders money, Robert. Of course he’s an ally. So is Warren. They aren’t fearless, though, and what i’m pointing out is that taking a position on corporate education control is scarier to politicians than “standing up to wall street”. If they are running for higher office, their advisors will be telling them no to take on corporate education “reform”, because the big papers will kill them.
If either runs, Senator Warren or Sanders will get my vote. If they speak out, they’ll have my voice and every dime I can send, too.
Randi, though, is not an ally at all.
Chemtchr,
How was work yesterday?
Thank you for your response, and I woul like to remind you that again, I admire, agree with, and respect your articulation on politics and education always.
I loved your articles on Eduweek on Bill Gates, as featured by Anthony Cody, with whom I have spoken to on occasion. Congratulations on their publication.
My contention is that it is right and more than noble to be a purist, but is it so pragmatic?
That is a difficult and pivotal question.
Sometimes, I feel that if I am losing so much, i may as well as put myself in the center of my own purism, the one that sees only truth. Other times, if I see gains, I think I have to politick things somewhat in order to make bigger gains and keep my eye on the prize of true social and economic justice.
This is a struggle for people like me.
My thoughts and awareness of the truth are pure and stand alone. But the circumstances out there motivate me to think outside my own purism sometimes. . . . not to be compromised or corrupted, but to approach this horrible plutocracy with strategy.
I cannot believe the damage caused by the Koch brothers, but I am far more terrified of American hopelessness and apathy. Everday, i have to find some realistic optimism to tell myself that we are not going to turn into China, Brasil, Russia, Columbia, or Mexico, with a handful of billionaires quietly controling the government on nearly every level.
John Arnold, Paul Ryan, Bill Gates, and the Koch brothers are all veritable monsters. It was terrifyiong to listen to Arnold at a keynote address in which he affirms that Ronald Reagan was far too liberal a president for this country. I am not a fan of Reagan, but this goes to show you the extremism and disconnect of Arnold, ALEC, and others like them.
Please keep writing; I’ll keep reading.
But maybe you should consider – and I know your time is precious – writing things like “Bernie Sanders is not so fearless because _______________ but he has managed to achieve _________________ and advocates _________________.”
Otherwise, you leave a certain impression on your readers that is not based on the holistic view you may have of Sanders and others. Why explain only part of your thought process when you can put all of it out there?
Would that not lead to better communication with readers on this blog? . . . . .
I must say, Robert, that I very much appreciate the company you put me in, there! Now, if I could just remember where I left that cape. Maybe it was that great party at Berlusconi’s.
I hope you beat him up . . . .
I have looked at pp. 34-35 of her book where she lays out this plan of parent “choice” (i.e. competition between schools for the easiest to teach children). It seems to me that a guarantee that all public schools receive equal funding — with schools with needier populations receiving more funding and more support for teachers — would solve the problem of schools being tied to real estate speculation more fairly and efficiently. Warren’s “solution” is not worthy of her (maybe she used a ghost writer here, too). In any case this was written over ten years ago when the failure of vouchers was not as conclusive as it is now.
She is a hero in my book — or was until now. Maybe she should stick to policy proposals about issues that she knows — banking and consumer protection.
Character demonstrates when one can admit they are wrong. I was wrong about CC-all of it. I now know, thanks to Diane Ravitch and many others who could explain the truth.
“Written during the housing-value boom, Warren identifies the competition for slots in “good” public schools as fueling the rise in real estate prices. While home prices were rising across the board, families with children were outpacing the rest of the public in paying more for homes, because, Warren argued, a home in the right location was the price of getting into that coveted school. Over-paying for houses required great financial sacrifices from families, and created the potential for severe hardship if housing prices fell—which of course they did, effectively wiping away the savings of millions of Americans.”
Well, maybe she can clear it up, but I think she did support vouchers in 2003.
I’ve read quite a bit of her work on bankruptcy and debt in the legal realm and I agree with most of what she says there, but I have no idea why she thinks a voucher for children to attend “any” public school would have any effect on home prices, or lead to people borrowing less for homes, or lead to equity in the public education system.
We actually have open enrollment in Ohio now (it’s not 100%, districts can opt in and out) and the effect on lower income and minority districts is terrible. It is so terrible the state changed the language in the report to “soften” it, because they’re denying the facts.
Open enrollment may offer an opportunity for a small number of children to get to a “better” district, but what it’s done in Ohio is make struggling districts worse. It’s made public education worse for MOST children.
I’m baffled by why Warren would believe it would somehow magically even out, and the children would be evenly distributed. Her theory seems to ignore geography, for one thing. How does she think low income kids with parents who work long hours are going to get to the next county? The whole country doesn’t look like Boston, Massachusetts. In a lot of places we’d be talking about quite a bit of travel time.
Yes it was a fantasy approach to education. It made no real sense.
I think you’re right, Chiara, that the policy she described wouldn’t address the problems she was discussing. I can’t make out if it was a careless policy suggestion, or careless pandering to the school-destruction industry.
If you’ve been a long-time supporter (I have), then you probably got her new book announcement in your email this afternoon.
http://fightingchancebook.com/
You can sign up to get a free chapter online when it’s released on the 22nd. This is an essential step towards a 2016 presidential launch, I think. This voucher imbroglio has clearly been launched by corporate education control proponents as an attack on her and on us (Russo had it in an eyeflash), not as an argument for a voucher program.
Senator Warren… Elizabeth, are your people reading this? Speak up, please. There’s all this crap flying, and we can’t hear you.
Sad to see again. One hopes a politician is keeping quiet out of caution, and then finds they were already bought, all along.
Chemtchr, Warren may not be reading, nor may her aids be reading it because there are so many things and sources of voices out there to read, despite the popularity and page hits of the Ravitch blog.
My suggestion is that you cite this post and write directly to her office or pick up the phone and pose this very concern using ths blog as reference.
You have great merit in your questions but pragmatically speaking you can’t expect that her people automatically read this blog.
Pick up the phone . . . .
Does anyone know if Martin O’Malley supports public schools? I’m hoping there’s at least one candidate in 2016 who does.
I need early info 🙂
Someone send this to Senator Warren, or she can come to Ohio!
We try every ed reform scheme in this state. There’s nothing so reckless or dumb that we won’t try it. We’re where bad ideas come to fail yet live forever!
“A Beacon Journal study of more than 8,000 urban students who take advantage of open enrollment shows these students perform better on tests, are twice as likely to be white and seven times more likely to not be poor.
A call for action
During 2013 state budget negotiations, the legislature sought to appease Sen. Tom Sawyer by requiring the governor and Ohio Department of Education to assemble a task force of local school chiefs and treasurers to sort through the information and recommend changes in the program. A Democrat from Akron, he has long called for a comprehensive study.
They met three times. Many said they were given insufficient time or information.
Nevertheless, they presented in late December a list of recommendations to the governor, House speaker and Senate president.
The thrust of their work focused on discrepancies in funding. Stronger language addressing the adverse effects on minority and poor students was either toned down or removed from an early draft.
Among other suggestions, the task force recommended more study of the program.”
In other words, the results were so bad they cleaned up the language for political purposes.
“Adverse effects on minority and poor students”
http://www.ohio.com/news/ohio-s-open-enrollment-shifts-360-million-and-72-000-students-across-districts-1.470365
Parents would have to have a car to take their kids to the school. Having a school nearby is much easier for parents of little means. It is such a simplistic idea to think that that would be a solution. I was wondering if this idea actually leads to more segregation too?
The article is interesting. One of the districts featured in the article has lost students from wealthier neighborhoods to a county school that is not wealthier, but whiter. The people are sending their kids to the county school to avoid minority children. This was never a problem in this district until the laws were created in Ohio. The other district is not superior but has a much, much higher percentage of white children.
“to a county school that is not wealthier, but whiter. The people are sending their kids to the county school to avoid minority children. ”
It’s so nutty to me not to think of what happens to the OTHER school. I honestly don’t understand why people are being so obtuse about this. Warren is thinking of the one child leaving the one school, but good God, there’s a “losing” school on the other side of that!
There are X amount of children in a given geographical area. If the motivated and mobile and better-off parents pull their kids out of a school, that school CHANGES. It’s a fundamental denial that this is system, and you know it doesn’t matter if they deny it or they ideologically oppose “school systems” It’s still a system. They can call it a “portfolio” or whatever other name they come up, but it’s still a system. The idea that everyone just chooses their ideal school and all schools magically become even-steven is just crazy. How in the world would that ever happen? What are the odds?
And then it’s a spiral, right, because the “losing school” has less funding so cuts programs which makes it less desirable and makes it a bigger loser.
Then what does she do? Now she’s just replicated the original problem, except it’s much more complicated and fragmented, and so she’s actually made it worse.
It’s the robbing Peter to pay Paul. I am always amazed at how people have such foolish ideas that we all pay for. I am amazed at the poor ideas that come out of the Obama admin and people like Warren. I think it is funny how many are from the Ivy Leagues, yet our leadership is just plain poor. I really wish leaders educated from different places all over the country would have more access to the highest leadership.
I learned of Warren before she was ” famous” because she studied and wrote on bankruptcy and debt. At the time she was really the only “serious” person in the legal community addressing WHY people were filing bankruptcy and why they were so deeply in debt.
I remember sitting in a bankruptcy CLE (continuing legal education) and she was the ONE scholar in the materials we were given that was pro-debtor. It was like 20 to 1. Her work really stuck out, because the economy was humming along on all that borrowed money, and no one really wanted to hear that it was built on sand, but of course it was, and that became clear in 2009.
I think we need a disavowal of her former position rather than a blanket statement of support for public schools. Someone else we know discovered that they don’t work and changed her stance.
This.
This is why Warren should be our first woman president, not Hillary.
Oh please we don’t need a first woman president any more than we needed a black president. Identity politics is for the novice. Time to grow up.
What we need is a mass movement of people. Quit looking for politicians to help you- they won’t. Least of all any president from either of the big business parties.
How about a president and politician whose content of character is virtuous? You are are right about gender and ethnicity.
MLK was right also . . . .
Are all the same people who were stupid enough (and yet claimed they “understood politics”) to vote for Obama in 2008 (and 2012) going to fall for the same crap again in 2016? How many of you people who voted for Obama took the time to actually check his record before doing so? And then you claimed “disappointment” or “betrayal” when it was quite easy to predict what an Obama presidency would look like and look what we got.
Do we have to go over all of this again and review every bit of Warren’s record to prove she is as craven as the rest of the mainstream Democrats?
Sorry but any of you who support Warren or any Democrats are just as ignorant as those who support Republicans and in some ways worse as you claim you know better. You (the Democratic faithful) are more part of the problem than those Red Teamers you constantly complain about.
In America, the ovens will not be disguised as showers; they will be marked “Voting Booth.”
I voted for President Obama both times and I don’t think I am stupid as you claim. I did look at his record and I felt that he was the better candidate both times. McCain or Romney would have been far worse for Education than anything Obama or Arne have been doing. We have a two party system and there are no viable choices except for the Democrat and Republican candidates, so you have to go with the one that you feel will do the best for the issues that mean the most to you. And when it comes to public education I can only think of a few times in my past 40 years of voting where I would have even considered a Republican.
The real education battle is in the states and that is where we must concentrate most of our efforts to combat privatization.
As far as Senator Warren is concerned, Diane says she is pro-public education and I will take her word for that.
Teresa,
Here is what you supported when you voted for Obama and the Democrats. Just as evil as anything the Republicans would do.
Stop supporting evil.
Here is a short list of some of the the ugly things Obama and the Democrats will be remembered for:
WARS fully funded and EXPANDING- see AFRICOM.
Trillion Dollars given to friends and campaign contributors on Wall Street. No Strings Attached
Military Spending INCREASED
Trillion+Dollars given to the Health Insurance Industry.
Kill the possibility for a REAL “Public Option” or REAL Universal
Health Care for at least another generation, and begin the
“Entitlement Reform” defunding of Medicare (-$500 Billion)
Block ANY re-regulation of BIG BANKS and Credit Cards
Protect the Bush War Criminals and Torturers from JUSTICE
Expanded Drone Assassinations
Marginalize Pro-LABOR advocates and co-opt the Anti-WAR Movement
Reinforce the worst Police State provisions of the Patriot Act
Expand government surveillance
Protect the very richest. Tell the Working Class that they CAN will be forced to compete with 3rd World Slave Labor
EFCA (Employee Free Choice Act) killed in the crib
More Anti-LABOR “Free Trade”
Jobless Recovery
NDAA / Expansion of Government Power.
Bernanke.
Geithner.
Holder.
Monsanto @ FDA.
Llink Social Security to the Deficit via the Payroll Tax “Holiday”
Push for cuts to Social Security / Medicare
Push the Fiscal Cliff meme.
Push the 1%’s Austerity Plan.
Coordinated the crackdown on Occupy via Obama’s Homeland Security.
Attacked Whistleblowers, a-la Bradley Manning & WikiLeaks.
Shielded BP for its Gulf Disaster
Push through the Trans Pacific Partnership
Push the meme that Corporate Taxes are Too High
“Deficit Commission” which was set up by Obama and stacked with pro-corporate /
anti-99% zealots including Republican Alan
Simpson as co-chair
Continue beating the drum for war with Iran
Kills 120 In Yemen
Obama Ordered U.S. Military Strike on Suspected “Terrorists”
Expands Military Involvement in Africa
Education plan that boosts privatization, victimizes teachers
Puts Pesticide Pusher in Charge of Agricultural Trade Relations.
Indefinitely imprison detainees without charges
Honors George H.W. Bush for Public Service.
Obama:
— embraces militarism, imperial wars, and lawlessness like his predecessor;
— keeps looting the federal Treasury for Wall Street;
— targets whistleblowers, dissenters, Muslims, Latino immigrants, environmental and animal rights activists, and lawyers who defend them too vigorously;
— illegally spies on Americans as aggressively as George Bush;
— wants public education privatized as another business profit center to destroy a 375 year tradition;
— disdains the public interest in times of growing economic duress;
— backs so-called reform that will ration care and enrich insurers, the drug cartel, and large hospital chains;
– Militarization of Mexico
– Furthers Bush administration’s 2005 Energy Policy Act in spite of critical campaign rhetoric; it was secretly drafted and provides billions in industry subsidies;
– Expanded nuclear power; lax industry regulation; billions in subsidies, and numerous other benefits to promote a dangerous technology;
– Privatized healthcare despite the benefits of universal single-payer he rejects as well as real reform;
– Repressive immigration legislation targeting Latinos, including militarized borders, police state raids, roundups, imprisonments, and deportations.
Michael, I don’t often agree with your views of public education .. . IF you are te Michael I am thinking of (there was a “Michael from Long Island” who is not kind to public education and is anti-Ravtich. Are you him?).
But I will say that I shake hands with you when it comes to our mutual opprobrium for this horrible sniveling angry president.
Not that I approve of the GOP either . . . .
Robert,
I’m not that other Michael that you are referring to. I’m not from Long Island and am a staunch advocate for public education both in words and actions.
However I’m NOT someone who will even tacitly support any candidate or individual who also lends their support to Empire EVEN IF that person supports public education.
I am not a single issue voter nor one who participates in the fraud of “identity politics.” The issues that are confronting us today require a complete removal from either bug business party and the establishment of 3rd, 4th, 5th parties. This will require mass action and mass mobilization on all fronts. It IS possible and those who lend any support to Democrats are part of the problem and the much bigger hypocrites. I say this not rhetorically but with the most in-depth and various experiences over the course of 3 decades of deeply involved political activity.
What is happening with the privatization of education is only one facet of what global capital is doing. It must be seen in this light. To narrow the view is to miss the proverbial forest and will ALWAYS result in failure of what may be noble aims.
Regards,
Mike
“What is happening with the privatization of education is only one facet of what global capital is doing.”
They are also rolling back women’s rights and returning to the era of racism. I’m sure we could add to that list.
Michael,
You are right in so many ways.
Can you just be as passionate without being mean to other writers.
I agree with you about the mass apathy in this country and a need for a third, fourth, and fifth party, and it is hard to vote for a candidate based on one issue when one is looking, as you are and should, at the whole gestalt.
Yet, I feel we must pick and choose the battles we can readily achieve and gain power little by little.
I am inferring that a revolution is what’s needed to accomplish what you suggest, and I hope we never go that route.
Yet, I do think that grassroots building and fortiifcaiton over time is the most powerful tool of democracy we have. At least, it’s a peaceful method.
But I agree with you in so many ways about removing these horrible, disgusting people who represent big business far more than the average person. Such politicians need ot be kicked in the political cojones . . . . . no?
Obama didn’t have a record to check.
And did the country really have a choice? A vote for either candidate was a vote for NCLB and private Charter schools. There was no choice.
Obama had a voting record in Illinois as a state legislator and as a senator from Illinois. I didn’t like everything he voted for and sponsored, but I felt that he had more potential than the GOP candidates. We can’t just shake our heads and say they are all terrible.
Was there enough information to reveal that he was a neo-liberal?
Lloyd, you state that there “was no choice”, and you are RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Most people on both sides of the aisle are rotten to the core. There are severe exceptions, but not too many . . . .
Lloyd,
Obama most certainly did have a record. There were also plenty of warning signs and plenty of people who wrote about these things at length.
Below you’ll find a small sample size of Obama’s actual voting record- facts that the so-called astute liberals chose to avoid. I know first hand this material and much more (a list of Obama’s advisers and their records e.g.) was presented to hundreds of liberals/progressives and they did not want to hear it. They had found their messiah and there would be no critical thinking on the matter. Every bit as ignorant as the Bush cultists.
The matter of his actual policy and political record has always been avoided by liberals who bowed down to him. If Obama was such (as many “progressives” seem to need to believe) an “antiwar” candidate, why has he offered so much substantive policy support to the criminal occupation and the broader imperial “war on terror.” Here are some highlights from a summary of Obama’s U.S. Senate voting record from way back:
“1/26/05: Obama voted to confirm Condoleezza Rice for Secretary of State. Rice was largely responsible…for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent victims in unnecessary wars…Roll call 2”
“2/01/05: Obama was part of a unanimous consent agreement not to filibuster the nomination of lawless torturer Alberto Gonzales as chief law enforcement officer of the United States (U.S. Attorney General).”
“2/15/05: Obama voted to confirm Michael Chertoff, a proponent of water-board torture… man behind the round-up of thousands of people of Middle-Eastern descent following 9/11. By Roll call 10.”
“4/21/05: Obama voted to make John ‘Death Squad’ Negroponte the National Intelligence Director. In Central America, John Negroponte was connected to death squads that murdered nuns and children in sizable quantities. He is suspected of instigating death squads while in Iraq, resulting in the current insurgency. Instead of calling for Negroponte’s prosecution, Obama rewarded him by making him National Intelligence Director. Roll call 107”
“4/21/05: Obama voted for HR 1268, war appropriations in the amount of approximately $81 billion. Much of this funding went to Blackwater USA and Halliburton and disappeared. Roll call 109 ”
“7/01/05: Obama voted for H.R. 2419, termed ‘The Nuclear Bill’ by environmental and peace groups. It provided billions for nuclear weapons activities, including nuclear bunker buster bombs. It contains full funding for Yucca Mountain, a threat to food and water in California,
Nevada, Arizona and states across America. Roll call 172 .”
“9/26/05 & 9/28/05: Obama failed and refused to place a hold on the nomination of John Roberts, a supporter of permanent detention of Americans without trial, and of torture and military tribunals for Guantanamo detainees.”
“10/07/05: Obama voted for HR2863, which appropriated $50 billion in new money for war. Roll call 2 .”
“11/15/05: Obama voted for continued war, again. Roll call 326 was the vote on the Defense Authorization Act (S1042) which kept the war and war profiteering alive, restricted the right of habeas corpus and encouraged terrorism. Pursuant to his pattern, Obama voted for this. .”
“12/21/05: Obama confirmed his support for war by voting for the Conference Report on the Defense Appropriations Act (HR 2863), Roll call 366, which provided more funding to Halliburton and Blackwater. ”
“5/2/06: Obama voted for money for more war by voting for cloture on HR 4939, the emergency funding to Halliburton, Blackwater and other war profiteers. Roll call 103 .”
“5/4/06: Obama, again, voted to adopt HR4939: emergency funding to war profiteers. Roll call 112 .”
“6/13/06: Obama voted to commend the armed services for a bombing that killed innocent people and children and reportedly resulted in the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi… Michael Berg, whose son was reportedly
killed by al-Zarqawi, condemned the attack and expressed sorrow over the innocent people and children killed in the bombing that Obama commended. Roll call 168 .”
“6/15/06: Obama voted for the conference report on HR4939, a bill that gave warmongers more money to continue the killing and massacre of innocent people in Iraq and allows profiteers to collect more money for
scamming the people of New Orleans. Roll Call 171 .”
“6/15/06: Obama, again, opposed withdrawal of the troops, by voting to table a motion to table a proposed amendment would have required the withdrawal of US. Armed Forces from Iraq and would have urged the convening of an Iraq summit (S Amdt 4269 to S. Amdt 4265 to S2766) Roll
Call 174 ”
“6/22/06: Obama voted against withdrawing the troops by opposing the Kerry Amendment (S. Amdt 4442 to S 2766) to the National Defense Authorization Act. The amendment, which was rejected, would have brought
our troops home. Roll Call 181 ”
“6/22/06: Obama voted for cloture (the last effective chance to stop) on the National Defense Authorization Act (S 2766), which provided massive amounts of funding to defense contractors to continue the killing in Iraq. Roll Call 183.”
“6/22/06: Obama again voted for continued war by voting to pass the National Defense Authorization Act (S 2766) for continued war funding. Roll Call 186 .
9/7/06: Obama voted to give more money to profiteers for more war (H..R. 5631). Roll Call 239 ”
“9/29/06: Obama voted vote for the conference report on more funding for war, HR 5631. Roll Call 261 .”
“11/16/06: Obama voted for nuclear proliferation in voting to pass HR 5682, a bill to exempt the United States-India Nuclear Proliferation Act from requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Roll Call 270 .”
“12/06/06: Obama voted to confirm pro-war Robert M. Gates to be Secretary of Defense. Gates is a supporter of Bush’s policies of pre-emptive war and conquest of foreign countries. Roll Call 272 ”
That is just a small sample, I could list much more for you.
Keeping with his consistently pro-war imperial rhetoric if you remember Obama used his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech to reiterate his threats against Iran.
The “withdrawal from Iraq that Obama campaigned on only removed combat troops. In the names of “diplomatic protection,” “counter-terrorism,” and the “training and advising of Iraqi Security Forces” (translation: OIL protection), it leaves U.S bases and forces in Iraq for an indefinite period. However much they claim to oppose
permanent military bases in Iraq, Obama and other leading Democrats within and beyond Congress embrace an American military presence in Iraq for decades to come.
The troops to be moved out of Iraq under Congress’ proposed legislation would not actually “come home.” Obamas “antiwar” plan re-deploys GIs from Iraq to other parts of southwest Asia, reflecting the belief that U.S. forces have been over-focused on Iraq in a way that is dysfunctional for the broader and (Democrats think) noble project of U.S. dominance in the oil-rich Middle East Antiwar and anti-imperial sentiments have never been a part of Obama’ actual policies or record.
It is the liberals and progressives who are deluded on this matter. Obama has always been pro-war, pro imperialism.
And with this voting record, no one used it against him in his run for President.
Michael,
That was EXCELLENT!
I am keeping you post when I cite evidence to put down this horrible deceitful disgusting president of ours who has made progress for only much smaller parts of the population.
I consider myself a democrat, but the label is fading. Independent mindest is what I will have from now on when i vote on any level.
Obama is loathesome because he posed as one thing, made no mention of his voting record on others, and fooled people with his rhetoric and even appearance.
Obama is no liberal or progressive save maybe for the LGBT community . . . . .
Still, I do think it was critical in some ways to have a person of color (I hate that expression, which is thrown around in American writing left and right) as our president.
Too bad most of his politics are rotten and the same as most any old white Anglican boy’s club . . . . . .
I voted for Obama, and I am extremely stupid.
I voted for Obama in 2008. I was stupid then but I genuinely thought that he would be there for education and for the teachers. In 2012 I was not going to be stupid, so I went with the Green Party. I knew that it was a long shot but there was no way I would give Obama my vote ever again. Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, go Green!
Me too, FLERP!
Me three . . . .
Yes, we do need to review her record. If she is still espousing the same beliefs she had on vouchers over ten years ago, then it would take a lot to convince me to support her. I know she has been progressive on many issues that are important to this country, but public education will no longer exist if we don’t fight for people who understand what is at stake and truly support public education. I am not ready to dismiss her for statements she made ten years ago. I couldn’t support Diane’s blog if that were the case. It hasn’t been ten years since your conversion, has it Diane?
Michael,
Don’t you think your comments were just a bit over the top? I’m reminded of some of the things I’d hear every day in my first and second year college classes from self-appointed “experts” that epitomized the definition of “sophomoric”.
How else to respond to truly bizarre and ridiculous statements like:
“Do we have to go over all of this again and review every bit of Warren’s record to prove she is as craven as the rest of the mainstream Democrats?”
(Actually, anyone who reviews every bit of Warren’s record would find she’s a far less compromised and more progressive voice than your average Democrat. What specific thing can you cite in Elizabeth Warren’s record—outside of this one section in a book that is a decade old—to back up your ludicrous claim?)
“In America, the ovens will not be disguised as showers; they will be marked ‘Voting Booth.'”
(This one doesn’t deserve being dignified with a response. People who make flippant comparisons to the Holocaust don’t merit personal nor intellectual respect.)
FYI, Michael, presidential elections aren’t about choosing some flawless ideal of a human being who is everything we’ve ever dreamed of in one person.
And the failure to find such a perfect political ideal shouldn’t be watered down to say, “Ah, they’re all exactly alike and entirely the same!”
No, they’re not.
Presidential elections often come down to two people, neither perfect, but one of whom is clearly better than the other, despite his own many flaws and imperfections.
When I voted Barack Obama the second time, I had no illusions about him being the great savior or anything like that. I justified my vote as one of self-protection and social protection; any way I looked at it, Mitt Romney would have been much worse in every area.
A vote for a certain candidate doesn’t mean you buy their whole package—or anything about them. It often means that the alternative was clearly worse.
It’s called “Welcome To The Real World Of Politics”—and life.
If you can’t make fine distinctions between candidates maybe you’re right to imply that “some people”—like yourself—shouldn’t be voting.
Reading this nonsense you’ve written makes me think that you’re either 19 years old or a Republican troll, hoping to decrease turnout for this year’s critical elections.
Which is it, “Michael”?
“Presidential elections often come down to two people”
I agree with your criticism of Michael, but I have to respond to this. So long as people believe that there are only two choices, we are, well, to put it more bluntly than is probably best in Diane’s living room, screwed. Both major parties are wholly-owned by the corporations. The Democrats may or may not be the “lesser” of the two evils, but they are definitely the more effective of the evils. I don’t think the Republicans could have gotten away with NAFTA, welfare “reform”, or assassinating U.S. citizens. Until and unless we can create a viable third party, neither of the two major parties has any reason to listen to the voters rather than the donors.
Puget Sound Parent,
Yours is the typical tripe from a very low level political conscience. It’s sadly predictable as it seems hard for a lot of people to imagine a world outside of the manufactured consent of Red Team/Blue Team illusion. In short reading your silly comment it’s obvious you not only don’t understand what voting in national elections is but you are in full support of Empire as you voted twice for a pro-imperialist candidate. You did have options and you chose a pro Wall St. pro-war, pro-privatization, pro big business neo-liberal candidate.
What you call “the Real World of Politics” is in fact a complete illusion you have bought into.
You also don’t understand how the system works at all. I’m sure you won’t admit that to yourself but I’ll explain it to you anyway. However it is obvious you are self indulgent as you voted “for yourself” rather than for the greater good. Typical liberal ideology- hypocrisy. I’m sure the children in Af/Pak/Yemen who have been murdered by Obama aren’t assured by your enlightened self interest.
As for the personal matters no my comments were understated. Those who supported Obama are accessories to murder and have responsibilities to bear just as it was for those who supported Bush. I know literally hundreds of people who I protested with during the Bush years who are now nowhere to be seen even as Obama commits one crime after the other.
And no I’m a socialist which I understand is impossible for you to comprehend as you have yet to even develop an understanding of any of these political matters beyond what you have been programmed to believe. Long before I was 19 I understood that both parties were of the criminal class and you have yet to get there. Take this as an opportunity. I won’t hold by breathe as you live in the “real world” that has been created for you. And you can’t even see conditions getting worse year after year with seamless transitions from both parties. That “real world” is one you support each year with your words and votes.
Now here is some assistance for you and then I’ll address your canard about “perfection.”
Supporting Democrats is a serious political disorder, like alcoholism or returning again & again to an abusive spouse who repeatedly lies to you. It’s easy to fall off the wagon, to make excuses & rationalizations for it.
Even many whose views are developed enough to recognize such truths as the fundamental rottenness of the 2-party system & the complicity of Democrats in all of the Republicans’ major crimes, are still unable to draw the logical consequences of these insights. (Those so naive that they still conceive of Democrats as being the “opponents” of Republicans are another case altogether.)
The central point is this: capitalist society permits the Democrats to be one of the 2 allowed parties for a very definite reason. It’s not because the Democrats “serve the people.” It’s because in a subtle but effective way, they help the capitalists keep the populace under control by providing them with the illusion of possible change. TPTB don’t want the people “served.” They want them managed, or controlled.
It is the job, the central social function of the Democrats to always be dangling before the people’s noses vague pseudo-hints of possible change, so as to keep them from bolting from bourgeois politics altogether. It is the Democrats’ intention to never deliver meaningful change, but rather to keep dangling hints of it alluringly forever. This produces control — a populace habituated to remain safely within the
lines required by ruling class interests.
This is why the Democrats NEVER paint a picture of US history that’s the slightest bit accurate — they want a brainwashed population every bit as much as the Republicans do. This is why they NEVER are willing to set forth an honest socioeconomic analysis of why things are as they are — they much prefer that people not understand such things.
As long as a large chunk of voters can be deceived by the seemingly “nicer guy” act of the Democrats, there is no hope whatever of coming to grips with the core problems of our society. The most dangerous trends — environmental destruction, grotesque social inequality, and an uncontrollable propaganda/war machine —
cannot even be approached within the framework of bourgeois politics, because they all serve ruling class interests. This is what is really being protected, when people opt to support Democrats just because they seem less blatantly cruel on TV.
Puget Sound Parent.
You said the following,
“Presidential elections often come down to two people, neither perfect, but one of whom is clearly better than the other, despite his own many flaws and imperfections.”
A word about the “perfectionist” propaganda that you have tossed around here.
Those of us on the Left have heard for decades now sentiments such as “what will ever make you happy?” and “you are a purist” and “no one agrees with you” and “that may be what YOU want, but you need to be practical” and “OK if you reject them, who do YOU think would be the right person? What is YOUR choice then?” and “it is easy to criticize, but do you have any positive suggestions or do you just like to whine and complain?” and other similar statements.
“Not revolution, but evolution” people said when Clinton was elected, and we were harangued to see Clinton as some sort of wonderful new direction from the Reagan years. “We” got NAFTA.
There are a number of implied assumptions behind this “not perfect enough for you” line of assault – and make no mistake, it is an assault, designed to silence people and terminate consideration and discussion.
To say that the “latest-greatest” Obama (for example) was being rejected by us “perfectionists (who were right all along as you see) because he was not quite perfect is to imply that he was kinda sorta there, or “in the right direction” or presumed to be an ally. What is being pointed out was not that Obama and The Dems failed some perfection test – an imaginary test that suggests that he/they are mostly OK but have a few flaws that only perfectionists would notice, and a test that the people being accused of using it are not using – but rather that these people (Warren and Sanders included) are not at all, in any way, remotely, or vaguely aligned with any of the working people and that the notion that they are aligned with us is all a carefully created and totally false illusion. What are presumed to be “flaws” – which a few of us are supposedly unwilling to overlook in our stubbornness and obtuseness – are actually accurate glimpses through the camouflage at the whole picture, not minor peripheral and insignificant flaws.
Beyond the question of whether or not any particular person is perfect, I also reject the assumption that we are all looking for a person to begin with, and that looking for a person is the essence of politics.
Looking for a person is the problem, not the solution. Insulting, frustrating, and silencing the most perceptive among us is what is destroying the possibility of a strong Left emerging, and is the tawdry and amoral House Negro work that keeps the ruling class in place. THAT is the problem, and that is a LONG way from the snide and demeaning accusations that critics of Obama, Sanders, Warren and others are being a prissy little perfectionists, carping and fault finding for the sake of irritating people or being a party spoiler.
This “you are being a perfectionist” propaganda is infinitely more destructive to the Left than anything that ever comes from the right wingers, and is one of the most important bulwarks of ruling class power.
This is not nit-picking. It is not “being negative.” It is not being a “purist.”
This is the whole battle.
We have tried being polite, reasoning with people, documenting the truth, respecting and considering people’s complaints that we are being too harsh, too radical, that we are making attacks, that we are alienating allies, that we are hurting “the cause.”
None of that has worked.
The years slip by. Conditions grow worse and worse, The danger grows and grows. The ruling class gets stronger and stringer. Polite nicey-nice “can’t we all get along children and play nice?” is bringing no positive returns and there is nothing to lose by speaking the truth as harshly as needs be to get the message across.
Maybe the bottom line is whether or not we all seek the same depth of changes in our society. There is no doubt in my mind that whether under the control of Democrats or the Republicans, the number one beneficiary of political decisions, be they foreign policy or domestic, will be large industries/the extremely wealthy – that is, the general protection of the status quo, and the continuation of a capital-before-people mentality, the right of the US to impose its will on nations for the benefit of its corporations.
Michael – do you think you could make your points to Puget Sound Parent without the juvenile insults? You’re not helping your case.
Dienne,
Re-read PSounds comments. Then read mine.
I’m not punching per se I’m punching back. Big difference.
Also read some of the others. The insults are only thinly veiled and no it doesn’t bother me a bit, heard it all before. But look who is actually documenting factual records.
Also examine what I have documented here. That’s just a drop in the bucket. I could post tenfold and more of what I’ve put just in this thread. We’ve got a lot of folks in denial and about to do the same thing. The car that swerved towards us and it is coming back again. Speaking the truth as harshly as necessary is vital at this juncture.
Regards,
Mike
Obama is a tool of the oligarchy and of the military-industrial complex. People who think that there is a difference between the Repugnicans and Dimocrats simply haven’t been paying attention.
Noam Chomsky recently said in an interview from his back yard in Cambridge that Obama’s presidency had been the worst for civil liberties in our history. I agree.
I just Tweeted this from a post that appeared this morning from ProPublica titled: The Resegregation of America’s Schools
One racist result from war on Public Ed
The Resegregation of America’s Schools
Thanks to white Billionaire Oligarchs
http://bit.ly/1j7wYWK
Many people living in poverty did not buy homes during the housing bubble, they rented then and they rent now. Her voucher “solution” seems to be for the middle class parents who bought a house they really couldn’t afford. Maybe people should take some responsibility for their financial choices and live in a town/neighborhood they can afford.
They may be surprised to find out the “bad” schools aren’t so bad after all.
I personally, do not want my tax dollars going to aid people who think my neighborhood school isn’t good enough for their children.
As someone on this site ha said in the past, at least if we had elected McCain or Romney we might have the help of the Democratic party in fighting these deforms. Now, we have dems supporting RttT, CC$$, etc. just “because.”
I signed NY Teacher’s petition the other day and I’m sickened by Sen. Sherrod Brown’s response. Yup, he too has drunk the CC$$ kopk-aid :'(. I hope Warren, Brown et al can be properly educated. I intend to keep trying if Diane will.
I did the same in NYS and the response letters made me sick – and these are supposed pro-education Congressional leaders.
Chuck Schumer’s form letter response contained every BS talking point I’ve ever heard. It could easily have been written by Arne Duncan or Bill Gates.
I emailed him back to say he has lost my vote, lost my respect, and lost my affiliation with the democratic party.
Chuck Schumer is a disgrace to democrats and to all people.
He is a fraud . . . .
And his mother was a teacher!
They are ALL in bed together frolicking in a very large pile of cash.
Love you, Diane. But not sure that I trust Warren. Want to believe she’s sincere, but she’s waffled on some stuff and seemed, at one point, to camp with the likes of Monsanto. From my vantage point, she’ll have to prove herself beyond a promise to read your book. Obama made similar such empty promises to educators in ’08. No doubt he’d already taken ridiculous sums from profiteers of corporate education.
She will also be sucked into the black hole that formed in 2010 when democracy collapsed in on itself (as a result of the Citizens United ruling). The Plutocracy left in the wake of democracy’s destruction will force Warren and all other principled politicians to say things and act in ways that will make even their most ardent supporters cringe.
Elizabeth Warren is one of the few sane and courageous voices calling for much-needed reform and accountability in banking and finance. Don’t sell her short.
She has transgressed. She must atone!
Indeed.
Yeah, right.
If Diane Ravitch can defend Randi Weingarten, I’ll certainly stand by Elizabeth Warren.
“TAKANO TAKES ON EDUCATION: New House Education & the Workforce member Mark Takano tells Morning Education that he’s homing in on several areas with his new committee appointment: overtesting in K-12 public schools, making college affordable and keeping for-profit schools in check. (He said thinks the administration’s gainful employment draft rule could have been stronger.)
— One of his first tasks as a committee member: Reviewing a charter school bill introduced Tuesday by Chairman John Kline and ranking member George Miller. He said he’s “rather agnostic about charter schools. But one thing I know is that public schools take on the challenge of everybody.”
Who is this person in the US House who dares to challenge the status quo? 🙂
He’s certainly right that Arne Duncan’s for-profit college rule “could have been stronger”
Obviously a diplomatic way of putting it….
I think this just goes to show that we have a lot more to do in informing people. As hard as it might be to believe, I think we have to remember that not everyone’s life revolves around education.
Warren is one of the good ones, but our leadership has been brainwashed on the education issue. If anyone can turn a position around, it’s Diane. Howeve, even if Elizabeth wises up, it’s still an uphill battle. It would be one down, ninety nine to go – and that’s just the Senate.
The more politicians speak on topics I’m familiar with (like CCSS) the more I’m convinced how completely uninformed they are, just a lot of really bad lip service and re-heated talking points. What can you expect when they have all been sucked into the black (money) hole that formed when democracy collapsed in 2010 (Citizens Unite ruling).
I agree NY teacher – and this realization is more than scary.
The candidate who comes out most strongly on the anti-Common Core issue will tap into an enormous reservoir of public support. We’re at a tipping point on this.
Yes.
I’m on Elizabeth Warren’s email list and I received an email today indicating that she’s coming out with a new book next week called “A Fighting Chance,” so we’re likely to find out very soon what her position today is on public education: http://www.fightingchancebook.com/
Unless, like Obama, her book is a collection of luke-warm platitudes devoid of specifics and carefully worded to obscure any actual policy intentions.
I think that Elizabeth Warren’s former stance on charters, etc. underscores one of the challenges the pro public schools, anti-privatization movement faces. And in her case, I truly hope she’s learning about what’s going on with education and that it truly IS her FORMER stance.
But it’s not just Warren. It’s virtually every well known national political figure. It’s the fact that we defenders of public schools have, until very recently, been disorganized, unable to articulate a clear and compelling counter narrative, sold out by the leadership of our “natural allies”—the UFT and NEA—frankly “asleep at the wheel” when it comes to fighting back against privatization of our schools.
Here’s a harsh fact: We don’t have any prominent national figures who are identified as Pro Public Schools and anti-Corporate Takeover of education. Can you think of one single senator or governor or house member who is clearly against charter schools, vouchers, and the corporate takeover of our schools?
Until we frame our story and develop a clear, simple, well-articulated counter narrative, we’re going to be faced with a constantly uphill fight, while the privatizers continue to insist that they’re the “good guys helping poor kids”, a message that has, until now, drew people from all across the ideological spectrum.
We have to personally visit our senators, governors, and congressional representatives and let them know that we parents, taxpayers, citizens MUST be listened to and our voices must no longer be ignored in this debate.
That’s a long term project but one that we must start TODAY. I recommend personal visits to your two US Senators, congressional representatives, and governor’s office. Also visit any state or local officeholders responsible for education. They’ll listen if there are enough of us visiting on a regular basis.
The squeaky wheel gets the grease. It always has. Let’s start “squeaking”. Relentlessly, at every level of government dealing with education.
The hedge fund managers and the other privatizers have tons of money, but we have far more PEOPLE. And we have another secret weapon they don’t have: The Truth. And preaching it all day begins to have an effect.
We have to let grassroots allies in other states know about this as well. There are also real concrete reasons for this; more and more federal legislation that is pro-privatization is coming up before the US Congress, as the Privatizers try to impose federal sanctions and controls that they can’t get passed on the state or local level.
So, right now our voice, against so-called “education reform” is not being heard. Is it any wonder why almost no nationally prominent politician is in our corner? They haven’t heard our message yet. And we’re the only ones who can deliver it.
Diane’s personal visit to Elizabeth Warren was a good start. But there’s no reason she has to be on her own. We can all visit our political leaders—with Diane’s book in hand—and let them know that there is another narrative to be heard.
We’re the ones we’ve been waiting for. Let’s do it.
Puget Sound Parent,
You make powerful, critical, indispensable, and brilliant points.
Diane should make your post an article.
Thank you tons for your effective critical thinking . . . . .
Thanks, Robert. I appreciate your kind and supportive words.
Now, let’s all get started! There’s a lot of work ahead of us, and my post above only scratches the surface.
Newspaper editorial boards, school PTAs and PTOs, visits to parochial and private schools—who often get decimated when charters move in to the neighborhood, AND intelligent, qualified outreach to certain conservative groups, who because of their opposition to Common Core are good prospects for starting a Left-Right Coalition against many related things. (A lot of right-wing groups are now growing skeptical about ALL of it, seeing the vital connection between Common Core, Constant Testing, Vouchers, and they share the same antipathy for Wall Street.
We all have to do what we can. And little by little, we’ll tear down that wall.
LOVE your words! Yes!
“Can you think of one single senator or governor or house member who is clearly against charter schools, vouchers, and the corporate takeover of our schools?”
Yes, just one: WI Congressman Mark Pocan, who is a progressive and on the House Education & Workforce Committee. When he was a WI state legislator, he joined ALEC in order to expose it, and he described their plans to promote vouchers and privatize public education:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/07/1071984/-WI-Rep-Mark-Pocan-Rips-Into-ALEC-on-Assembly-Floor-re-Special-Needs-Vouchers
As it was so aptly stated in a post long ago, we have been politically orphaned in the battle to preserve public education. There is not one union leader or prominent politician that speaks out against privatization or corporate reform (CCSS).
Not yet. You’re correct. But there are on the state level. And one of them will move up soon enough. And THEY make noise too, and THEY might be in an even better position to influence the US senator or governor or cabinet member.
The union leadership has been largely co-opted. (Although the locals and some rank and file members are still fighting back hard.)
The ONLY ones politicians are afraid of are voters, taxpayers and parents. And they’re more easily influenced than you might think.
If we’re still “orphans” than it’s time to go and get some political figure to “adopt” us. If we make it “The Newest Cool Thing To Do”, they’ll rapidly follow.
New York was attesting ground for CCSS. It has failed miserably. The parental outrage that followed is the tip of the iceberg for what will follow. Its a huge, growing, and untapped market for any national leader. Time will tell.
I think they are pro-reform because the reformers contribute to their campaign and perhaps the people who tend to vote are pro-charter. I know that is the case in my town.
So far the only pol I heard who has publically supported Public Ed is Nan Rich of Florida who is having a hard time trying to fight the large bankroll of the pretend Democrat Charlie Crist who will probably beat her in the gubernatorial primary election. He has refused to debate her since he is ahead in the polls.
I am so weary of politicians and while I really like Warren’s economic policies, I would like to hear her make a strong speech in defense of public ed. In this country it seems power and money influence elections, and people follow along blindly. So while this is good news, we have seen Democrats turn on a dime. I also see Hillary as a Neoliberal, and for this reason want to either be an Independent or Green party voter.
Elizabeth Warren, like all national politicians, live in very insulated circles surrounded by yes men. They really are clueless regarding the plight of every day people. In the case of education, some lobbyist plants the typical talking points in her head, they sound reasonable on face value. College and career readiness – Greta! Global competiveness – Of course, who could be against that. Higher order, critical thinking skills – A no brainer, no? And on and on and on. So in the course of Liz Warren’s hectic schedule, with little time of introspection, these talking points are imprinted on her brain. Viva Citizens United!
And that’s the problem. Education deform has been put into a neat package. Common Core is the savior which will make all our lives better. It sound sooooo good. I want some of that.
You have to live it to realize the danger it holds.
As we have said over and over – They’ve all drunk the Kool Ade and become addicted to the taste.
It’s time to get them back to a healthier diet – let’s start drinking plain water again.
I will. Get an answer from Elizabeth Warren. It won’t be immediate, but it will happen. I just heard from a friend who saw her in Cambridge recently that she ran into Warren in a restaurant. Warren said she just finished reading “Reign of Error.” I will find out her views on vouchers now.
awesome. a little bit of hope
Tell her to not only read and sign the STOP COMMON CORE TESTING petition, but way more importantly have her read the impassioned pleas and angry comments written by parents from all across the country. And they are the tip of the iceberg. The vast majority of signers and commenters are from New York. Why? Because its the only state that is two years ahead of the PARCC and SBAC rollout planned for 2015. She certainly could use this issue to separate her from the rest of the field.
In 4 days, 3,312 letters/emails have been sent to Washington DC by outraged parents and educators from all across the country. Read their comments and add your own feelings and experiences.
STOP COMMON CORE TESTING.
http://www.petition2congress.com/15080/stop-common-core-testing
A few questions for those who live in the “real world”, for the ones who are “practical.”
Having heard this jive for 30 years I’m wondering., “Where are the results?”
How come conditions have deteriorated across the board, in every sector, with absolute consistency through Democrat and Republican administrations with your “real world” approach? Seems then in your “real world” you are resigned to continuing deterioration.
How is it that your “practical” approach to politics has nothing to show in return?
Is it really then so practical to do the same thing over and over and expect different results? My understanding is that this is not practicality it is something else.
And for those who are looking for a candidate who will eliminate CCSS.RTTT, etc what if that candidate is also in full support of the MIC and aggressive foreign policy? What if that same candidate is also going to continue with Wall St. ove the people policies? What if….
Is that single issue on education enough for you to support a candidate who is going to continue with drone assassinations?
Michael,
Have you bought a cabin in the woods and begun stockpiling guns, ammunition, water, canned goods, and other supplies?
Just wondering!
I see you point, Ellen, But Michael’s concern about violations of our civil liberties under the guise of controlling terrorism is a very valid point he raises . . . .
We do not belong any more as the world’s peacemaker or police, with all our hyper expensive naval bases and price gouging military policies.
I am sick of my federal taxes going to pay for, in part, war, and I am sick to death of Obama’s war on the average citizen when it comes to their privacy and civil liberties.
He is gross . . . . .
Ellen,
Are you trying to avoid the truth? Are you going to support one of the big business parties?
Are you going to support another pro-war candidate in 2016?
Just wondering!
Oh and are you going to answer any of the questions or attempt to respond with a smidge of intelligence?
Just wondering!
Michael,
I’ve never claimed to be as brilliant as you or many of the others. I try my best to keep up. I’ve read your posts and agree with some of what you say, but sometimes your conclusions are over the top. I need to live in this world. I only have a smidgeon of control. I’m retired, do volunteer and community service, help take care of my mom, my grand kids, and my children, attend church to pray for us all, and then struggle along as best I can.
If I take everything you say to heart, I’d be hiding under my bed. Thus my comment about the cabin in the woods.
Michael, why not make your points without the vitriol?
I have learned there are more allies available to all of us then we may think . . . .
How about a candidate who will continue with drone assassinations and will also continue with CCSS? Chortle, chortle.
OR maybe they don’t. I can see Ted Cruz or Rand Paul doing away with both, but do you think Jeb Bush would, or Hillary Billary? Do I see you as ever supporting Ted Cruz or Rand Paul? Not in a gazillion light years. Somebody ought to ask them. At least they won’t give a weasel answer like Hillary will. We know where Jeb stands (or squats. He must need an extra wide toilet seat.)
Elizabeth Warren advocates restoring Glass Steagall, as I do, but does she have a chance of getting it through the current big bank loving congress?
Of course, Cherokee Warren might be lying to Diane. After all she WAS a Harvard professor.
Why do you put down Warren with your native American reference when she advocates restoring and strengthening Glass Steagall?
Certainly, she has NO chance of getting through Congress if she sits back and does nothing . . . . .
Be polite, Harlan, and please don’t get ahead of yourself. Did not mother ever remind you of that?
Actually, to be complete in my thinking, your comment was a put down to Warren and to native Americans . . . .
Sometimes my jokes don’t make it. But you are right about the politeness. I shouldn’t imitate liberals. I should show them that I am better than they are by returning politeness to their scurrilous character assassinations.
I admire Elizabeth Warren. I think she has the potential to be a great legislator. She’s right on the main point, for sure. I hope she doesn’t ruin her credibility by ancillary liberal follies.
Aligning oneself with “Chief Spreading Bull”, as Elizabeth Warren is known in MA, could be a dangerous thing for one’s credibility.
Ms. Warren has no political point of view other than the one that will earn her the most fame and $$. She stands for nothing except herself and frankly, if Harvard accepted her perhaps we should take a fresh look at Harvard.
As for myself, if I don’t have the time to fully vet a candidate I will always choose the one that has the least ties to Harvard. They are quite proud of their “first woman of color” to Harvard Law School though!
Press down on the screen were you want the photo to go until you get a long black segmented bar. At the far right end, there will be an “Add Photo” segment. Hold that and you will be taken to your Camera Roll. Then just select the photo, and voila, inserted.
What are you talking about here?
Diane’s difficulty including a photo from her iPad. I’m assuming that the photo was taken on the iPad.
Oh . . . .
I’m confused. What did E. Warren say “without reservation” was “untrue”….that she supports vouchers, or that she supports “efforts to dismantle our nation’s precious democratic institution whose doors are open to all”.
It wasn’t clear from this post what you are claiming she denied: her previous stance on vouchers, or some kind of hyperbolic straw-man.
David R., sorry if you did not understand my post. I spent time with Elizabeth Warren in her DC office and asked her directly about her view of vouchers. She said unequivocally that she does not support vouchers. Apparently the quote from her book appeared ten years ago. I don’t believe the same things I believed ten years ago. Maybe she doesn’t either.
As a huge Elizabeth Warren fan, I may be reading this through rose-colored glasses, but my understanding is that she supports universal vouchers to attend any PUBLIC school — a qualitative difference from supporting vouchers for private schools.
In her 2012 article on Warren written before the MA election, Carrie Lucas writes: ” Yet in her 2003 book, The Two Income Trap, Warren and co-author Amelia Warren Tyagi cite the traditional public schools system, in which children are assigned to a school based on their residence, as a key source of economic pressure for families with children. Warren and Tyagi call for system-wide reforms to break the link between where a child lives and where they go to school, and specifically make the case for a fully-funded voucher program that would enable children to attend any public school.”
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2012/01/26/elizabeth-warrens-quiet-support-for-public-school-vouchers
I taught in a California school district and parents were given a date window to apply to attend another school in the district but that was also conditional on seats being available at that other school. If a parent wanted their child to attend the other high school that was located in a middle class community instead of the poverty riddled, gang infested barrio that surrounded the high school where I taught, if there was no room, they would be denied.
There’s always a catch, even to the best of plans.