Betty Rosa, chancellor of the New York Board of Regents, describes a recent trip to Puerto Rico with her colleagues. When she got to the airport, she realized she had left her driver’s license behind. Would she miss the flight? What to do? For a moment in time, she felt like an undocumented person.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
There is an 1982 Supreme Court case of Plyler v Doe which affirmed the right of undocumented children to attend public schools. Local school district are not supposed to function as INS. Parents still must show proof of district residency, but they are not required to show proof of legal resident status. There have been some school districts that have chosen to ignore this ruling. I have had students from other districts that were denied admission to the local school so the parents moved. Once Trump and his merry band of right wingers get to work, they may change the law. Plus, there will be two more conservatives on the Supreme Court, and we know how that will go.
LikeLike
Diane: this just up on my “The New Yorker” online magazine:
DAILY COMMENT
BETSY DEVOS AND THE PLAN TO BREAK PUBLIC SCHOOLS
By Rebecca Mead December 14, 2016
(Quoted from article, then link for the full text:)
Among the points that can be made in favor of Betsy DeVos, Donald Trump’s billionaire nominee for the position of Secretary of Education, are the following: She has no known ties to President Vladimir Putin, unlike Trump’s nominee to head the State Department, Rex Tillerson, who was decorated with Russia’s Order of Friendship medal a few years ago. She hasn’t demonstrated any outward propensity for propagating dark, radical-right-leaning conspiracy theories, unlike Michael T. Flynn, Trump’s designated national-security adviser. She has not actively called for the dismantling of the department she is slated to head, as have Rick Perry, Trump’s nominee for Energy Secretary, and Scott Pruitt, the nominee to head the Environmental Protection Agency.
That the absence of such characteristics should bear noting only underlines the dystopian scope of Trump’s quest to complete his cabinet of cronies. On the other hand, DeVos has never taught in a public school, nor administered one, nor sent her children to one. She is a graduate of Holland Christian High School, a private school in her home town of Holland, Michigan, which characterizes its mission thus: “to equip minds and nurture hearts to transform the world for Jesus Christ.”
How might DeVos seek to transform the educational landscape of the United States in her position at the head of a department that has a role in overseeing the schooling of more than fifty million American children? As it happens, she does have a long track record in the field. Since the early nineteen-nineties, she and her husband, Dick DeVos, have been very active in supporting the charter-school movement. They worked to pass Michigan’s first charter-school bill, in 1993, which opened the door in their state for public money to be funnelled to quasi-independent educational institutions, sometimes targeted toward specific demographic groups, which operate outside of the strictures that govern more traditional public schools. (Dick DeVos, a keen pilot, founded one of his own: the West Michigan Aviation Academy, located at Gerald Ford International Airport, which serves an overwhelmingly white, overwhelmingly male population of students.)
As a board member of Children First America and the American Education Reform Council, and later as the chair of the American Federation for Children, DeVos lobbied for school-choice voucher programs and tax-credit initiatives, intended to widen the range of institutions—including private and religious—that could receive funding that might otherwise go to both charter and traditional public schools. In a 2013 interview with Philanthropy Magazine, DeVos expressed her ultimate goals in education reform, which she said she saw encompassing not just charter schools and voucher programs but also homeschooling and virtual education: “That all parents, regardless of their zip code, have had the opportunity to choose the best educational setting for their children. And that all students have had the best opportunity to fulfill their God-given potential.”
One can fully credit DeVos’s commitment to her cause—one might even term it her crusade—while also seeking to evaluate its effectiveness. How have such DeVos-sponsored initiatives played out thus far in her home state? Earlier this year, the Detroit Free Press published the results of a yearlong investigation into the state’s two-decade-long charter-school initiative—one of the least regulated in the country. Almost two-thirds of the state’s charter schools are run by for-profit management companies, which are not required to make the financial disclosures that would be expected of not-for-profit or public entities. This lack of transparency has not translated into stellar academic results: . . .
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/betsy-devos-and-the-plan-to-break-public-schools?mbid=nl_TNY%20Template%20-%20With%20Photo%20(119)&CNDID=30445349&spMailingID=10060582&spUserID=MTMzMTgzMTAzMzI5S0&spJobID=1061378301&spReportId=MTA2MTM3ODMwMQS2
LikeLike
It seems that DeVos can implement something original and exciting for white students, but she can ignore a multitude of problems when black and brown children are in her sights. The problem is more than half of the students in public schools live in poverty including many black and brown students and those that do not speak English well. She has fought every accountability measure. She would like taxpayers to write her a check and get out of her way. Clearly, she knows best. Consider what she did to not for Detroit.
LikeLike
Accountability is their Achilles heal. It’s where their hubris, arrogance, and self-serving ideology live. It’s what will expose all that and more. Watch for them to try to fake it in some way.
LikeLike
Thanks for the link!
LikeLike
If you are TRULY interested in kids and their future lay your hands on this weeks issue – Dec. 19 – 26- of “The Nation”
and read Bill McKibben’s article.
Your own kids as well as the kids we teach in schools.
LikeLike
Off topic- Why does Trump have to divest of his business interests? Oligarchs, like Bill Gates, keep their business interests. Microsoft has a deal with Pearson to create products for Common Core. And, Bill is an investor in Bridge International Academies, the largest seller of, for profit, schools-in-a-box. Gates works to corporatize and privatize schools, in lock step with the Aspen institute and governmental depts. of ed. Presidents, governors, and oligarchs, a distinction without a difference? We know from Princeton Prof. Gilens’ research that only the most connected 10%, influence political decisions.
LikeLike
I assume this isn’t a serious question. Are you suggesting that the presidency is already so corrupted by financial interests that it doesn’t matter whether Trump divests himself of his businesses?
LikeLike
It’s not???
LikeLike
Adding- the law that prohibits voters from being paid for their votes should be struck down? Corporations make money in D.C.’s political circles, why shouldn’t they have a cost of doing business, beyond lobbyists and political party (conjoined parties) payoffs? The deck is stacked against the 99%, shouldn’t there be, something similar to a 15% tip, from the colonialists to American voters?
LikeLike
What reduction in donations, do you foresee for the Clinton Foundation, given November’s vote? Clinton speaking fees?
LikeLike
I don’t understand the question, and I don’t see how it responds to my question.
LikeLike
Comments at this blog, do not follow legal evidentiary rules. If Clinton fundraising drops off substantially, after they lose power and cannot exert political influence, would the average Joe reasonably speculate
something about the nature of politics that recognizably does not reach the bar of legal culpability?
LikeLike
I’m not asking for compliance with the rules of evidence. I’m just hoping for a straightforward response to what I think was a straightforward question. Instead you’re responding in riddles with rhetorical questions. And so here we are.
LikeLike
Flerp: I wish I’d said that.
LikeLike
There is ample reason to understand that the American political process is tainted by the influence of money. Otherwise, it would not be on the radar of those concerned about Trump’s conflicts of interest. Influence peddling firms would not be well-funded in state capitols. And, K Street would be, merely an address like any other. Lawsuits against mayors, state and national Senators, governors, state and national House representatives, and local officials have been won, showing that the potential for crime exists. Americans can wait until crimes are committed and bring charges. Or, they can attempt to prevent them. If prevention is impossible, because a legal framework to prosecute is untenable, e.g. oligarch influence on government policy in governmental departments and agencies, then, it weakens the argument for “conflicts of interest” against politicians.
Insider trading laws have been criticized for similar reasons. It would be interesting to hear the perspective of Chris Christie and Trump’s son-in-law on the fairness of Wall street prosecutions. Perhaps they could draft the conflict of interest law that would prevent both politicians and oligarchs from allowing money to affect decisions.
Adding, in some nations, lobbyists are prohibited.
LikeLike
What I was interested in is whether you think the presidency is so corrupted by the influence of money that it does not matter whether or not Trump divests himself of his businesses. That seemed to be the implication of your first comment, in which you asked why Trump should have to divest himself of his businesses. It wasn’t clear to me whether you were being serious. Actually, it still isn’t clear to me.
LikeLike
The U.S. is an oligarchy. Whether any of us should be “serious” about Trump’s potential conflicts of interest, may be equivalent to the diligent arrangement of deck chairs on the Titanic. That was my reasoning in posing it as a question.
As the humorist quipped, “Your right to know, supersedes my right to exist”?
LikeLike
It “may be” equivalent? You do like to hedge. But I’ll take that as a confirmation that you don’t think it matters whether Trump divests himself of his businesses. I “may disagree,” by which I mean that I disagree.
LikeLike
Gov. Grifty’s wife was convicted but, not him?
Show me the law that will prevent or lead to meaningful punishment for conflicts of interest by oligarchs and politicians and, I’ll have a firm opinion. Apparently, even obvious crimes like admitted bribery result in fines for business but no consequences for individuals. I shouldn’t dismiss the fines so readily. They are a cost of doing business for corporations, who aren’t paying taxes, so there’s that.
LikeLike
I think you do have a firm opinion, but you’re not comfortable articulating it with firm language. Sometimes saying exactly what you mean is the most difficult thing.
LikeLike
Thanks
Sent from my iPad
>
LikeLike
Betty,
NY State is very fortunate to have you. A friend of mine who is an NBCT said that you are a breath of very fresh healthy air compared to Merril Tisch.
Thank you for your advocacy.
LikeLike
One thing kind of funny — sadly, darkly funny — is that the country is getting a dose of what many schools experience when an inexperienced dingbat is put in charge, which has been happening outrageously often, because mainly youngish, inexperienced dingbats believe in the deforms.
LikeLike
Have we been overcome by an epidemic of ADD? What do most of theses comments have to do with the subject of this posting–that is, Chancellor Rosa’s experience and her concern about the status of undocumented individuals. The tendency of readers to go off on tangential spins leaves my limited linear thought process in a state of huh???
LikeLike
Off topic, but not really, as it addresses the enormous elephant in the corridor outside the Oval Office.
Don’t understand people who say at this point, well, let’s give home a chance, even though — blah, blah, blah. Well, since becoming PEOTUS, he has shown no transformation whatsoever. He picks awful people, Tweets awful things and is his usual stupidly uncompromisingly obscene self. What are people saying? Give total insanity a chance? Let a maniac run things and maybe that’ll be good? We should give crazy a try? . . . Just baseless optimism for optimism’s sake? Denial? Magical thinking? Avoidance 101?
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-12-15/long-shot-bid-to-block-trump-arrives-at-electoral-college-monday
LikeLike
Give him a chance, not home a chance
LikeLike
Sorry, Fred.
LikeLike
No. Not at all Akademos. Thank you for putting this discussion back on track. Chancellor Rosa’s message and perspective in the Age of Trump are what need to be addressed.
I also think we should refer to him as President-Reject Trump (48.2% for Clinton vs 46.1% Trump and 5.7% Others).
LikeLike
Fred, another way to put it is that 54% of voters did not want Trump.
LikeLike
Yes, Diane. 54% against Trump is clearly a sharper way to show the extent of his flawed victory. At least W, the last president we rejected to office, came closer. Only 52% of the voters spurned him.
LikeLike
And yet this fool keeps boasting of his historic victory. He thinks he won in a landslide.
LikeLike
“Give him a chance” is one of those bits of blather that people say because it sounds vaguely fair-minded and principled. It’s like “you must respect the office.” Unless you’re plotting a coup or planning to get drunk and take your pants off in the White House (disrespectful!), it’s pretty meaningless advice.
LikeLike
I respect the office but not the man who will assume it in a month. He is an illegitimate president. He was elected by the tag team of Assange and Putin. #notmyPOTUS
LikeLike
Trump’s feud with the press. May as well create a department and run only a national press, a national chain of state-run supply stores, state-owned factories for manufacturing all domestic products, age limits, no offspring and locked cells for all people who are not high govt officials, and so on.
What a dumb chapter in US History.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/15/settling-scores-trump-team-resumes-battle-with-press-hints-at-wh-briefing-changes.amp.html?client=safari
LikeLike
Actually, my comments belong here:
Two posts down.
LikeLike
agreed
LikeLike