I think we are beginning to understand the real purpose of Corporate Reform. The 1% and their minions repeat ad nauseum that school choice will fix all education problems, lift the poor out of poverty, and no new taxes are needed. Indeed, they have pushed for tax cuts and cheered on deep cuts to public education. We are watching a generation of defunding public schools, refusing to invest in teachers’ salaries, and a massive transfer of resources from the public sector to private institutions.
Jeff Bryant explains it here.
“Recent news stories about wealthy folks giving multi-million donations to education efforts have drawn both praise and criticism, but two new reports by public education advocacy groups this week are particularly revealing about the real impact rich people have on schools and how they’ve chosen to leverage their money to influence the system.
‘The Education Debt’
“The first report, “Confronting the Education Debt” from the Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools examines the nation’s “education debt” – the historic funding shortfall for school systems that educate black and brown children. The authors find that through a combination of multiple factors – including funding rollbacks, tax cuts, and diversions of public money to private entities – the schools educating the nation’s poorest children have been shorted billions in funding.
“One funding source alone, the federal dollars owed to states for educating low-income children and children with disabilities, shorted schools $580 billion, between 2005 and 2017, in what the government is lawfully required to fund schools through the provisions of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
“The impact of not fully funding Title I is startling, the report contends, calculating that at full funding, the nation’s highest-poverty schools could provide health and mental health services for every student including dental and vision services, and these schools would have the money to hire a full-time nurse, a full-time librarian, and either an additional full-time counselor or a full-time teaching assistant for every classroom.
“State and local governments contribute to underfunding too by keeping in place tax systems that chronically short schools, particularly those that educate low-income students, mostly of color. Two school districts in Illinois are highlighted – one where 80 percent of students are low-income and gets about $7,808 per pupil in total expenditures, while another, where 3 percent of students are low-income, spends $26,074 per student…
“In the meantime, while the nation’s education debt expands, the accumulated wealth of the richest Americans continues to grow. During that time period the federal government was shorting schools billions, the personal net worth of the nation’s 400 wealthiest individuals grew by $1.57 trillion, the report notes.
“There is a direct correlation between dwindling resources for public schools and the ongoing political proclivity for transferring public dollars to the nation’s wealthiest individuals and corporations,” the report declares. “The rich are getting richer. Our schools are broke on purpose.”
This is the context for Bryant’s discussion of the NPE Action Report, “Hijacked by Billionaires.” The 1% buy control of state and local races so they can advance their tax-cutting, budget-cutting ideas and promote school choice.
“What motivates these wealthy people from exerting their will in the electoral process varies. They are bipartisan politically. Some are directly connected to the charter school industry. Others have expressed disdain for democratically controlled schools and argue, instead, for school governance to transfer to unelected boards. Some are motivated by their hatred of teachers’ unions. While others believe strongly that public education needs to be opened up to market competition from charters.
“But what billionaire donors all have in common, the report authors write, is their devotion to blaming schools and educators for problems posed by educating low-income children. Instead of using their political donations to advocate for more direct aid to schools serving low-income kids, wealthy donors “distract us from policy changes that would really help children,” the report argues, “such as increasing the equity and adequacy of school funding, reducing class sizes, providing medical care and nutrition for students, and other specific efforts to meet the needs of children and families.”
Their one unifying idea is lower taxes.
His third example is a new book about how predatory elites subvert democracy.
“Rich people are playing a double game,” writes Anand Giridharadas in his new book ‘Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World.’ “On one hand, there’s no question they’re giving away more money than has ever been given away in history … But I also argue that we have one of the more predatory elites in history, despite that philanthropy.”

Diane:
You write: “I think we are beginning to understand the real purpose of Corporate Reform.”
You are way too nice here. We have known for a very long time what the real purpose of Corporate has been and continues to be. The task is not gathering knowledge, but organizing political power to stop the oligarchs.
LikeLike
Thanks Diane!
LikeLike
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
LikeLike
The lawmaker piece is the piece I don’t get. They can’t be this clueless can they?
Facebook funding “blended learning” in schools is like Con Agra funding school lunch initiatives. It’s the same thing.
I saw a photo of a public school in Chicago who accepted a “donation” from Google. The kids were sitting on large blocks with the Google brand on them.
This isn’t at all subtle. I mean, if these companies and individuals are going to run US public education policy let’s at least admit that and stop insulting the public by pretending it’s charity. They bought it. This is a transaction. Our lawmakers happily and eagerly handed it over to them for pennies on the dollar.
I once saw an eighth grade test that was offered in West Virginia public schools decades ago. The test was written by coal companies, who had so much political clout at that time they ran “public” schools. It’s the same thing, but with better branding and marketing.
LikeLike
Giving away our money
They give away billions
And billions more
The billionaires zillions
Flow out the door
But really the money
Is actually ours
It’s repackaged honey
From our honey jars 🍯
LikeLike
“Predatory elite” is my new favorite term. Sadly, our democratic public schools are their prey. They have the money and power to make the government work for them while slamming the door on the common good and equity.
Title 1 has been a great boon to poor students when districts use the funds to support its poorest most vulnerable students. Before the great recession, as an ESL teacher, Title 1 partly paid for my salary and teaching materials. Some other districts were not as generous with their Title 1 money, even before 2008. Today under the influence of billionaires and libertarians both states and federal governments seems to believe that poor students can get along with less. This is a perversion of the original intent of Title 1. Even with a court order directing him to pay more to urban school districts in New York, Cuomo chooses to ignore the court order without consequence.
Once again I congratulate NPE and their researchers for a job well done on their thorough sleuthing and assembling all the data in their case studies. The report is a remarkable document.
LikeLike
It’s Predatory Giving.
LikeLike
It’s the dollar at end of the fishing line
LikeLike
Find the Pea
The game is find the pea
And pea ain’t even there
The billionaire, you see
Has hid it in his hair
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Crazy Normal – the Classroom Exposé and commented:
The United States has one of the more predatory elites, the Wealthiest Americans, in history, despite that philanthropy. Compared to vampires, this 0.1-percent predatory elite is even more bloodthirsty and greedy.
LikeLike
Scariest but truest line exposing the entire decade and a half of unending testing invasions inside our city’s schools where low-income students make up the larger population: “…what billionaire donors all have in common, the report authors write, is their devotion to blaming schools and educators for problems posed by educating low-income children.”
LikeLike
Of course, the reason they do that is because it would cost so much more to fund schools adequately and deal with root causes like poverty. So by blaming the schools and tossing them a bone every once in a while, they can wash their hands of the whole thing.
The billionaires like Gates don’t want to pay even the taxes that they owe.
In fact, for years, Bill Gates company Microsoft was holding $100 billion in offshore accounts to avoid paying income tax on the money at the standard 35% corporate rate.
Micosoft only agreed to pay the tax when Trump lowered the rate to just 15% and even then, Microsoft really had no choice because they would have been forced to pay the 15% whether they repatriated the money or not.
Apples CEO Steve Crook … I mean Cook did the same thing with the 200+ billion Apple was holding in offshore accounts
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oops, Tim Cook
When it comes to Apple, i get my crooks confused
LikeLiked by 1 person
🙂
LikeLike
Q The billionaires like Gates don’t want to pay even the taxes that they owe. END Q
Where did you come up with this fantasy? Some (not all) billionaires give more money away, than they pay in taxes. Already, the top 1% of earners in the USA, pay 39% of all federal taxes.
This shows me, that the wealthy are paying a lot of taxes. How happy they are, when they write the check to the IRS, is a matter of debate.
Do you have any evidence, that Mr. Gates (or any other person) is deliberately attempting to evade their tax liability? If you do, then you should report this to the appropriate law enforcement authority.
LikeLike
Bill Gates lives in a state with no corporate tax and no income tax.
LikeLike
Corporate welfare at the expense of the larger public and common good is designed to favor deregulation and profit taking. That is obvious. It is the doctrine of Milton Friedman and his “free market” fans.
For the doctrine to work you must lower the expectations of the many, and also see to it that the national debt prevents investments for the common good.
The call is for SACRIFICE and with all out efforts to lower expectations of people–the masses. They must be taught NOT to expect__
affordable and safe housing,
a living wage;
dependable access to affordable healthcare;
clear air and water;
well maintained and up-to-date transportation;
a safe food supply;
humane working conditions;
a financial and social service net for people in need; regulated systems of banking;
an uncorrupted legal and voting system;
academic and press freedom;
a judicial system that is fair;
public education from well-prepared teachers who are fairly compensated; affordable and life-long education;
a systematic plan and habits of thought/action to save the planet and endangered species.
Lower expectations. Normalize sacrifice by the many for the benefit of the few and by any means possible. Then open the markets for “social impact” investing schemes. Make a profit and appear to be doing good (while doing well). Keeping the illusion of doing “good works” is a huge part of the advertising package that sustains corporate welfare. You create a huge social welfare gap (wage gap, education gap) and they make money by cherry picking short term high publicity “gap-closing” projects.
Add your own list of “sacrifices” that most people are being asked to make for the sake of corporate welfare. What sacrifices are you making to support the tax breaks given to the people who do not need them. What “entitlements” are taken for granted by the corporate class and especially he mega-billionaires whom you are helping to subsidize by your sacrifices and carefull cultivated diminished expectations for the good life.
LikeLike
Lots of the privatization schemes require regular people to pay more for a worse service. It is a myth that privatization always saves money. Their corporate structure keeps all the money at the top of the pyramid while they workers are paid less and get down graded benefits.
LikeLike
There are public subsidies and other costs that are hidden in many cases that make private solutions seem cheaper than the public/government solution.
A good example is the big banks. On the surface, it make look more efficient to let private companies run the big banks than to have them run bybthe government as national banks.
But as we saw after the 2008 financial meltdown, there are literally trillions of dollars in hidden costs to the public associated with this setup. If those were included — along with the built in costs of future bailouts (which is virtually assured), the private big banks would cone out costing far more than a nationalized version.
Another good example is the nuclear power industry. On paper, nuclear power plants (particularly old ones) look like a cheap way to produce power. But, as with the banks, there are a lot of hidden costs (billions of dollars in government subsidies and loans and assurance that the government will pay for a major accident as well as the cost of long term waste containment/disposal.)
If one figures all the latter things in, as well as the cost to replace aging plants (capital cost is the majority of the cost), nuclear can no longer even compete.
The whole private is necessarily cheaper/more efficient claim is bogus. It might be true in some cases, but as a general statement, it is false.
LikeLike
Don’t know much about banking but sounds right.
Your nuclear power analysis is correct for US & not just for factors you mentioned, but all relating to privatization. Tho our nukes were built when utilities were much more heavily regulated, that’s still a far cry from a govt planned/ owned/ operated program – in a democracy subject to will of people – like France’s. Their 45-yr record has been excellent for safety as well as low cost (they have often exported power w/n EU). Also benefited from a concerted effort to standardize design/ manufacture to a degree not seen elsewhere.
France’s nuclear power industry has already begun to contract, & will eventually produce perhaps 1/2 their power [down from 75-85%]. But I see that as a consequence of pioneering an experiment. Their plants were all built w/n a short span, & are all ‘old’ at the same time, so they have little choice but to supplement w/other types of power as they gradually shut down & sparingly replace. But others can learn from their 45-yr success, stagger the build-up, plan for gradual replacements/ tech updates.
LikeLike
“Add your own list of “sacrifices” that most people are being asked to make for the sake of corporate welfare.”
Thanx for the invitation to vent, Laura. For me the sacrifice – & it’s a biggie – is my sons’ financial security. They are artsies as I was, & have crossed the t’s & dotted the i’s as I did [good grades, BA’s, worked long hard hrs/ yrs in their fields as well as other fields to supplement income]. But there the similarity ends.
It has always been hard to make a living as a musician, but it used to be that one could teach & gig, & eke out a modest living if sharing costs w/someone of equally modest income. But the depression of teaching income has made that close to impossible. Once, Eng MA’s who didn’t want to teach found work in publishing houses. But publishing has contracted due to automation and Reagan-era tax laws that put paid to inventory-acctg favorable to book publishing. And there were once jobs available for artists/ art history BA’s in museums & arts foundations. But those are public goods which have suffered from fed budget-slashing [also since Reagan days].
In my young adulthood 40 yrs ago, if you gave up on trying to make a living as a musician/ artist etc, there were many corporate entry-level jobs w/career paths available that you could get w/a BA & a strong work history [often, as in publishing & advertising, the artsy BA was a plus!]. Today’s seekers of corporate entry-level jobs will find they need warehouse-forklift skills.
The saddest thing for me is to see my sons’ cynicism/ acceptance of this new norm. One still lives w/us in late 20’s despite having 27 piano students & a side gig producing friends’ recordings. The other (nearly 30) is struggling thro transition from a decade of live-mike recording/ supplemental audio-production toward school-of-rock/audio studio work [opportunities growing but competition fierce] — & recently found he could make more $ in a day delivering for DoorDash app than he’d ever made previously.
They’re both on ACA & thank god for that. But I don’t know if either of them gets this ‘new norm’ is thanks to our society’s division into 1-10%’r’s & their minimal-public-goods-accessible peons.
LikeLike
Title 1 was supposed to level the playing field somewhat. I work in a public school in the Bronx. Although my school has a high rate of student poverty, we are not eligible for Title 1. Most of our neighboring schools do get Title 1 funding. From what I see, much of this extra money doesn’t get to the students. Much of it goes to outside vendors and accountability schemes: SmartBoards, iPads, “Coaches”. My school sometimes gets 2 year old technology hand-me-downs from a neighboring Title 1 school since we can’t afford the latest shiny object. Like everything else, Title 1 money has been taken over by the profiteers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Any idea why yr school despite hi rate of student poverty is not eligible for Title I?
Just wondering if govt has been cutting Title I funds/ raising the bar, or perhaps due to some other bureaucratic manipulation…
LikeLike
And who benefits from the sale of these electronic devises? The billionaires who own the companies!
What a scam!!!
LikeLike
Yuh. I think this whole thread (& other recent posts) have a bottom line. It’s about $tax money collected from stupid-cow working/ middle classes — who are already shouldering the lion’s share of the natl debt & what’s left of US public goods — paying into richie-Rich schemes to make profits off the stupid cows [while increasing the natl debt].
Why do they do it?? I think it’s cuz they stupidly believe richie-Rich’s sales pitch that his ‘free’ ‘philanthropic’ donations will decrease regular guy’s tax-load while providing them w/services those taxes they’re not paying would have garnered. [I.e., they believe in a free lunch.] Regular guy’s local tax load is actually decreased – but richie-Rich is collecting elsewhere – from state &/ or fed funds, over a period of years. Meanwhile regular guy’s public goods [quality of public ed, etc] are declining & his fed/ state taxes are inching up, but by the time he notices, he blames it [courtesy richie-Rich’s political spin] on ‘big govt.’
LikeLike
This is news???
How long has this been going on? A LONG time.
LikeLike