This morning, Joe Williams, the executive director of the hedge-fund managers’ “education reform” front group (“Democrats for Education Reform”) published an opinion piece in the New York Daily News opposing Mayor Bill de Blasio’s plan to fund universal pre-kindergarten by taxing incomes over $500,000. As Mayor de Blasio has pointed out, the incremental tax to pay for U-PK would be the equivalent of a soy latte at Starbucks every day, about $1,000 a year for the city’s wealthiest residents. But the hedge fund managers say no. This may explain why the California Democratic party called out DFER last year and urged them to stop calling themselves “Democrats” when they are fronts for Republicans and corporate interests. Imagine someone who has a take home pay of half a million a year unwilling to pay another $1,000 to ensure that every child in the city has pre-kindergarten class. How embarrassing for DFER. Why not just call themselves Hedge Funders for Education Reform and drop the pretense. They are making war on the signature proposal of the city’s wildly popular new progressive mayor.
The Alliance for Quality Education, which advocates on behalf of the city’s children, fired off a press release:
“On Pre-K, Parents Blast Corporate Education Front-Groups for ‘Putting the Rich First’ Over Students
NY, NY— Following the Daily News op-ed by DFER’s Joe Williams, a national leader in the education corporate reform agenda, which revealed they are advocating against Mayor de Blasio’s tax plan to fund pre-K, Zakiyah Ansari, Advocacy Director for the Alliance for Quality Education, & Celia Green from New York Communities for Change released the following statement:
“Shame on the corporate front-groups for trying to get in the way of pre-K for New York City. They are simply ‘putting the rich first’ and shortchanging four year olds. The best plan would be to combine both the mayor’s and the governor’s plans—that would serve more kids in New York City and throughout the state. Mr. Williams is misrepresenting the facts when he says the Governor’s plan is more equitable; there is nothing equitable about leaving tens of thousands of four year olds out in the cold on pre-K. Every single child deserves to have access to high-quality pre-K, not just the rich who can afford to pay for it,” said Zakiyah Ansari, Advocacy Director for the Alliance for Quality Education.
“The corporate reform agenda was rejected in New York City, and now their front-group spokesman is cozying up to the Governor and millionaires. Opposing the Mayor’s plan because it will slightly raise taxes is out-of-touch with not only families across the city, but with the countless wealthy individuals in the city who support the Mayor’s plan. The bottom line is that I’m tired of protesting cuts to programs or living in fear as to whether they will still be there next year– that’s why we need a reliable funding stream through a small tax increase on the wealthy,” said Celia Green, parent leader with New York Communities for Change.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
First Amendment right to call yourselves anything you like no matter how deceitful, disingenuous, dishonest, prevaricating, lying…
“Why not just call themselves Hedge Funders for Education Reform and drop the pretense.”
Ha! Great point, and this could be said of many reform groups.
They could call themselves He(i)fer, except that’s insulting to cows.
That might confuse people with the Heifer
Fund, a wonderful charity.
What makes you think Joe Williams is not a Democrat? Only Republicans support school reform?
They could do that, and would be far more honest doing so, but then it would be harder to misdirect the public and electorate.
These people know that the overwhelming majority of Republicans will reflexively support the privatization and hostile takeover of the public schools; it’s the Democrats they’ve had to work on/work over.
But they seemingly needn’t worry: ever more Democrats are willing if not happy to whore themselves out for the so-called reformers.
YES!
So many of these depressing stories; it must have felt this way in occupied France. Anyone who thinks that there is, now, a significant difference between Dimocrats and Repugnicans simply isn’t paying attention.
Again, YES!
Please, if you have not read the William’s column, read it. No where in what Diane wrote is this fact: Joe Williams strongly supports funding a statewide pre-k program.
Here’s his first paragraph: “There’s agreement across the political spectrum that universal prekindergarten is a crucial ingredient in New York’s obligation to provide every child with the “sound, basic” education required in the state Constitution.”
He continues, “Gov. Cuomo’s plan to pay for it is the way to go.”
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/cuomo-blank-check-fund-pre-k-better-tax-rich-advocate-article-1.1700731#ixzz2uMZsOc5S
Williams describes various reasons why he thinks a plan to fund universal pre-k proposed by the Governor is a better approach that the Mayor’s.
I’m not prepared to say which plan is better. But I do think it would be appropriate to point out that Williams does support universal pre-k.
Diane didn’t say he doesn’t support universal pre-k. She specifically said he’s got his briefs in a bunch over De Blasio’s funding method, because God forbid rich people should pay a dime more when we can always steal funding from other sources. Why should rich people fund anything? Just take it from the poor.
Dienne, I read what Diane said.
Then why did you feel the need to make such a stink about something she didn’t even say?
You can debate which proposal is better for funding universal pre-k in NYC and/or in the state. But the comment above does not inform readers that this is a debate not about whether there should be universal pre-k, but a debate about how to fund it.
Surely people might be allowed to disagree on what is the best funding source for governments to use in funding a worthwhile policy. Personally I would prefer a carbon tax as a funding source to in erased income taxes, but in turn would prefer higher taxes on the relatively wealthy to higher taxes on the relatively poor.
Yes, it most certainly does so inform the reader. At least, those with reading comprehension skills.
Supporting it politically is not exactly the same animal as supporting it monetarily.
Tax the uber rich, in part, to pay for it, plain and simple . . . .
Are Democrats for Education Reform one of those terrible “special interest groups” I keep hearing about from ed reformers?
If so, they should be ignored, as per instructions, because they’re self-interested.
“Special interest groups” have no place in this debate. We only allow pure, unsullied lobbyists to clutter up the editorial pages 🙂
Yes, think Eli Broad.
And Bloomberg, and Soros, and….of course not in their league, but think Michelle Rhee who is only a paltry millionaire.
Writing buddies Riordan (R) and Broad (D), both billionaires, are welcome to compose op ed articles together on why they are wonderful philanthropists….and that distracts, or at least they and the LA Times thinks it does, from theri puppet Deasy’s many terrible decisions.
Those two are like doting parents who think their little monster is a genius.
“The bizarre obsession with using pre-K to stick it to wealthy taxpayers hasn’t proved to be a big vote-winner in Albany.”
Now there’s a statement that isn’t at all self-interested. Nope. Just pure reasoned discussion without hyperbole.
Does de Blasio really have a ‘bizarre obsession” with sticking it to the wealthy and is he simply using children to achieve that end?
Democrats for Education Reform are just asking! They genuinely want to know 🙂
A Quinnipiac survey taken in early February — before It’s a Beautiful Day Gate and Drive as I Say, Not as I Drive Gate — gave de Blasio a 51% approval rating in the five boroughs. I’m not sure that qualifies as “wildly popular.”
The same poll showed that NYC voters overall prefer the Cuomo plan for funding pre-K by 49-40. Registered Democrats do prefer the de Blasio plan, but only by a 49-39 margin.
What DFER is lobbying for appears to be in line with what average New Yorkers want, and what they want might not have anything to with ideology, but with simply clawing back some services in exchange for the staggering amount of state tax money that city residents–and not just the 1%–send to Albany every year.
Tim,
I would say that a 40-point edge over his opponent in the election is a mandate. Bloomberg never got that and he sent over $100 million on each election.
Debalsio received 750k votes, that is 16% of the total registered voter base of the city, roughly 4.6m voters. 16% is hardly a plurality of the electorate. I bet a recall effort could garner more than 750k signatures at this point. Deblasio is a disgrace to the city.
MS, I know you are upset with Mayor de Blasio because he is critical of charters, but face it: he won in a landslide. Not by 40 points, as I guessed, but by 49 points:
“Bill de Blasio, who transformed himself from a little-known occupant of an obscure office into the fiery voice of New York’s disillusionment with a new gilded age, was elected the city’s 109th mayor on Tuesday.
“His landslide victory, stretching from the working-class precincts of central Brooklyn to the suburban streets of southeast Queens, amounted to a forceful rejection of the hard-nosed, business-minded style of governance that reigned at City Hall for the past two decades and a sharp leftward turn for the nation’s largest metropolis.
“Mr. de Blasio, the city’s public advocate, defeated Joseph J. Lhota, a former chairman of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, by a margin of about 49 percentage points, with 99 percent of the vote counted.
“It was the most sweeping victory in a mayor’s race since 1985, when Edward I. Koch won by 68 points, and it gave Mr. de Blasio what he said was an unmistakable mandate to pursue his liberal agenda.”
Got that: “an unmistakable mandate to pursue his liberal agenda.”
That means he will pay more attention to the 94% of kids in public schools than to the 6% in charters.
Yes he did win a landslide. His focus quite rightly is on NYC. The Gov’s focus is on the state. I think there could be a thoughtful debate about the most effective way(s) to pave for universal pre-K not only in NYC but throughout the state.
I think de Blasio’s margin was actually closer to 50 points. I have no quibble with any winner’s mandate, whether the margin of victory is 99 or 0.9 points.
I’m simply pointing out that there are many run-of-the-mill, non 1%er New Yorkers, including a lot of Democrats, who share DFER’s position on this issue.
Diane likes to think that 70,000 public school children, almost all minority in 183 different schools do not exist. She keeps telling us to simply ignore the 6%, Sad reality of the anti choice movement. As for Deblasio he won a mandate from 20% of the voter base, not the city of New York. Unfortunately NYers do not vote. This guys approval ratings are now at 51% and its not even been 2 months. Keep going after charters like he is and he will face a serious recall threat.
Matthew, why do you not care about the other 94%? Don’t you think it is selfish to think only about the children in charters, who have privileges that kids in public schools don’t have? I care about all children, but I think it is revolting to pretend that the 6% are the only ones who matter.
that last post was me, for clarification…
It is sad to continuously see Diane refer to 70,000 public school children as invisible kids. To minimize that number she uses this 6% number thinking it sounds smaller. Well 70,000 amongs 183 schools are larger then most school districts around this country. But she and the Deblasio far left want to shut these schools down and force these 70k back into the failing zoned schools they fougth so hard to get out of. Imagine what that conversation will be like for our mayor, telling the kids who have been lucky enough to get accepted to a life changing charter this fall only to have it taken away because the mayor has some special interests to support.
As for his ‘mandate’, it doesnt exist, there is a reason why he is tanking in the polls, because NYers are waking up to the disaster they just voted into office. We will begin a recall effort in the next few days and I ask that each of you out there reading this anti choice blog joint the effot to right the ship and stop our great city from sinking under this humiliation of a mayor.
As in “DeSpeedio”, “speedgate”, etc. etc? Here’s a summary from a longer news story:
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/02/21/de-blasio-could-face-tough-questions-after-motorcade-caught-speeding-breaking-traffic-laws/
“As CBS 2 Political Reporter Marcia Kramer reported, just two days after he announced a massive plan to prevent traffic deaths slow drivers down, CBS 2 caught the mayor’s two-car caravan on Thursday blowing through two stop signs in Queens, changing lanes without signaling, blowing through stop signs, going 40 mph in 30 mph zone and then nearly 60 mph in a 45 mph zone.
“Mr. Mayor, why won’t you answer any more questions?,” Kramer said as the mayor left the room. “You say you’re transparent. Why won’t you ask any more questions?”
As de Blasio noted, police Commissioner Bill Bratton earlier Friday was out defending the mayor’s caravan. He said he was not “overly concerned” about the traffic violations that were caught on tape, and it is not the mayor’s job to tell police officers how to drive.
Speaking to reporters Friday after his weekly meeting with the mayor, Bratton defended the security detail, which is operated by NYPD detectives, saying the officers did “what they’re trained to do.”
He added that the video “did not raise significant concerns.”
But the number of violations all caught on camera by CBS 2 would have resulted in a suspended license, Kramer reported.”
No one should be confused here, the mayors plan is to ‘sock the upper middle class to pay for retroactive union teachers raises’ via taxes. If he cared about Pre-K he would be more than happy with the Governors proposal to pay whatever cost is neccessary. In reality the mayor knows he can not misappropriate the money to pay for his special interests payday, yet if it comes from city taxes, he can. This is why such an extremist mayor can not be given the checkbook to such a large amount of funding, he simply is not trustworthy.
Diane, the ‘other 94%’ get more funding than the 6% you wish to wipe off the face of the earth. Why are you making war on 77,000 children and their families in 183 schools? I am not calling for the extinction of zoned schools as you call for it for charters. You need to look inward and realize that you are turning kids against kids and parents against parents.
When the data actually shows that charters are any good at doing better than the public schools from which they pillage, we can talk about those 6% being deprived of a better education. The governor is pro-charter, and that is why DeBlasio doesn’t want the “free” money from him…because it will come with strings…$1200 more per family per year making over $500,000…$100 per month…a new pair of shoes? A night out? 20 cups of starbucks coffee? All so that impoverished children can get a good start on the rest of their life. What a huge sacrifice.
Leaving DFER aside, I would submit there are legitimate reasons to oppose De Blasio’s pre-K plan besides the belief that people who make more than $500,000 a year should never, ever pay one more cent in taxes.
I might be more inclined to support it if the Mayor gave me more details than the 10 pages of fluff he’s released so far, or if the plan wasn’t so rushed (remind me again why this HAS to happen immediately?), or if it didn’t involve handing over hundreds of millions of dollars to private “community groups,” or if it didn’t require NYC schools to give up 1,000 classrooms that could be used to try to lower class sizes in K-12.
Clarification, please? In our state, Arkansas, the cost of public education is borne by real estate property taxes (paid to the state, then redistributed on a cost-per-student basis), not income taxes. Are other states different in that respect? Is New York in particular different?
We also pay via property taxes, however the new mayor wishes to insert a ‘special tax’ on households making over 500k to pay for Pre-K. The state has already told us it cna afford it, so why does the mayor need the funds? Is it because he has some contract negotiations coming up with the very speical interest that got him elected?
Now, in Arkansas I am sure that 500k is a ton of money, but if you are a family of two working adults making 250k each with 2 kids living in Manhattan, its not that rich. Be very clear here, our mayor has not said on ‘individuals’ making over 500k, its going to target families, and the cost will be roughly $2,500 per household. Not a small sum.
“Now, in Arkansas I am sure that 500k is a ton of money”
Thanks for takin’ a (cheap) shot. Last time I looked $500k was a pretty impressive income just about anywhere. Anyhow, down here in the impoverished rural south, we have special elections to determine whether or not to impose a “millage” increase. I had supposed people in New York had the same possibility at their disposal.
The singular advantage of increasing property taxes (rather than income taxes) is that those who own more pay more, which should be a great relief to those couples attempting to make a mere half-million dollars a year support four human beings. That would be about $600 per person, per year, to provide universal pre-K. And THAT wouldn’t pay your phone bill.
Its not a cheap shot, it is the truth, nor should it offend you. Whats the average cost of a 2 bedroom 1750 sq foot condo in the most expensive area in Little Rock, or anywhere in Arkansas for that matter? In Manhattan it is over $1.5 million dollars. Everything is relative. 500k a year in Arkansas is huge money, in NYC if you are a working family of 2 (250k each) paying the mortgage on a 1.5mm tiny 2br and 35k per kid to get them into a private school because your local public school is a slum let alone 50k for your child care, I can assure you, an extra $2,500 annually is a large amount of money. Everything is relative!
Reblogged this on Crazy Normal – the Classroom Exposé and commented:
“Imagine someone who has a take home pay of half a million a year unwilling to pay another $1,000 to ensure that every child in the city has pre-kindergarten class.”
Parks, Schools and Bill de Blasio: Risking Mediocrity For Fairness
http://www.forbes.com/sites/howardhusock/2014/02/20/parks-schools-and-bill-deblasio-risking-mediocrity-for-fairness/
MS you and teachingeconomist, if you are in fact not the same person, should get together and relieve your self-loathing by starting a club to improve social skills so you don’t have to feel alienated from general humanity. If you had friends and people that loved you, you two would not need to cling to a suppressed adolescent libertarian ideology as a self-defense mechanism.
Please add to this twosome and additional name, Harlan, who makes a triad of bad taste.
Nano,
First let me thank you for using my posting name rather than the sexually demeaning nicknames you typically use for me (it is perhaps a mark of my naïveté that I did not understand Ann Ryand carpet sniffer as a sexual reference until you called me a Koch sucker). I hope this marks a turning point in our conversations.
Secondly I can assure you I am not MS. I believe MS lives in NYC and sends his or her children to a charter school. I live in what I believe New Yorkers call a “fly over” state and have sent all my children to traditional zoned public schools. (The last Ito to through is a junior in high school.)
Finally you are mistaken about my political position. I think and teach far too much about market failure to take a position that libertarians would recognize as a libertarian one. I would call myself more of a traditional liberal. In practical terms this has led me to vote democratic with a single exception of one race which pitted a pro choice republican against an anti abortion democrat. I voted republican in that case.
The group should engage in truth in advertising. They should call themselves Gangsters for Pilfering Taxpayer Money.
lol, says the one proposing an unneccessary tax hike to pay for teachers union backpay….
D’oh!!!
So says the clueless one who has no business coming over here.
We have received and appreciate your comments.
Please write again!
Despite our disagreements, I think everyone who posts here is passionately committed to helping more young people achieve their potential. So I thought some of you might be interested in 3 short videos we have just posted. They involve (district) alternative public school students who have taken dual (high school/college) credit courses. TC Columbia has done a lot of research showing how many young people, including those who have not necessarily done well in conventional schools, can benefit from such courses.
We agree.
Here’s a link to 3 recent interviews: 90 seconds to 2 minutes each:
http://centerforschoolchange.org/2014/02/alternative-school-students-speak-out-on-dual-credit/
Uh oh, here we go with the, “But we all want the same thing for the kids, so why don’t we sit down and communicate?”
That’s a very uplifting comment, Mr. Nathan, but it’s wrong; we don’t all want the same thing. Some on this site are passionate trolls and shills – wittingly or not – for ever more wealth and power accumulation by those who sign their checks.
I have no desire to sit down and “benefit” from people trying to destroy my livelihood and that of my colleagues, and who see children as “valuable assets” to be monetized.
Yes, I understand that your position, Michael. There are some who post here who may enjoy the interviews with these district school students…and may find them (and research I mentioned valuable in convincing others that students like these young people can benefit from the opportunity to earn college credit while in high school.