Peter Greene has a genius for taking complicated ideas and boiling them down to their essence in language that everyone can understand. This post is a classic example of that genius. Others have written entire books trying to explain what he says concisely here.
In the recent writings about school choice, pro and con, Peter Greene was especially affronted by a statement from Kevin Chavous, who works for Betsy DeVos’s American Federation for Children. He said: It is school choice–directly empowering parents to choose the best educational environment for their child–that is the most democratic of ideas.
Nope. Nope nope nopity nope. There are arguments to be made for parent choice, but “it’s the essence of democracy” is not one of them.
Democracy, even the sort-of-democracy practiced by the USA, is not about saying, “I want to make this personal choice, and I want everyone else to pay for it.”
Democracy is not saying you want a six-lane highway to run back the lane where only your house sits, so you get the rest of the taxpayers in your state to pay for it.
Democracy is not saying that since I want to have a police force that patrols my own house 24/7, I should have that police coverage and all local taxpayers should foot the bill.
Democracy is not “My fellow taxpayers have to pay for whatever I decide on my own that I want.”
He adds:
Choice fans often like to talk about the money following the child because “that money doesn’t belong to the school system.” And they have a point– it is not the school’s money. It is also not the family’s money. It is the taxpayers’ money, and the taxpayers have given it to support a system that will educate all students in the community through an institution managed by elected representatives of those taxpayers (when was the last time you saw a school board requirement that only parents can be elected).
And so, my fellow Americans, democracy consists of the consent of the governed, not the requirement to pay for whatever each person wants:
The “most democratic of ideas” is not that each individual gets to live in the Land of Do As You Please at public expense. Vouchers may be many things, but they are not remotely democratic.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Giving he Medal of Freedom award to Bill and Melinda Gates mocked democracy and it made the award meaningless.
NPE’s honor roll provides a barometer for the nation’s strength over oligarchy.
LikeLike
People should be wary of what “choice” supporters are promising, because it’s a fairy tale.
If we go to “backpack vouchers”, which is clearly where ed reform is headed, there will be downside.
They have absolutely no idea what the downside will be, and worse than that, they refuse to admit there COULD be a downside. Be wary of people like that.
This rainbows and sunshine world where everyone gets exactly what they want and no one has to compromise and there is no risk is just baloney.
You will not get public schools back if you lose them. You will get tweaks to privatization as parts of it fail and the downside consequences they’re currently pretending don’t exist become apparent but you will not get public schools back. This is a permanent, irrevocable, dramatic change in the whole concept of public schools and they’re just rolling the dice. No EARTHLY idea of the ripple effects or impact on students in public schools.
LikeLike
The reason ed reformers are so willing to gamble with public schools is they do not value public schools.
No one treats something they value so recklessly. That just doesn’t happen. They had to come into this with the idea that there is NO value- ZERO- in existing public schools or they could not justify the cavalier approach to this national experiment.
LikeLike
And that’s exactly the reason they don’t try to “reform” the police/firemen’s unions. They want the teacher’s unions gone….but when your house is being robbed or on fire, you want (value) those unionized people there ASAP. Children don’t matter except to their parents, so therefore teachers don’t matter either. Needs/value based for the rich only.
LikeLike
In Ohio, Kasich’s attack against unions included police and firemen. It was speculated that Kasich was concerned about charges of sex discrimination if the male-dominated public service jobs weren’t included in his law.
A fireman protesting in front of the Statehouse, held a sign, “If you have a fire, call the Koch’s”
LikeLike
Compulsory school attendance is not democracy, which is consent of the governed.
LikeLike
Mary Foley You say: “Compulsory school attendance is not democracy, which is consent of the governed.”
You are missing the distinction between children and adults. Adults who understand democracy know that children need to receive an education based in democracy in order to keep it for themselves when they grow up, and to pass it on to others after them. At that point, it’s an issue of history.
Hence: compulsory education for children. Apparently, too many who went through the system in our culture got many things, but didn’t get THAT memo.
LikeLike
Mary Foley Adults in a democracy also need to understand what it’s like to live in an other-than-democratic political culture. Have a look at what happens to journalists in Russia–but that’s just a tiny bit of the difference.
Without that knowledge, however, we tend to forget the import of the political ground we, here in the USA, presently walk on–at least for awhile yet.
LikeLike
When DeVos went to Van Wert Ohio she told those people they could have a menu of schools to choose from and they would also retain everything they value about their existing public schools.
They were skeptical because it’s nonsense. She has no clue what they will be left with when she’s thru conducting her revolution. Normal people, unlike billionaires, are risk averse. They’re risk averse for a very good reason. If they gamble and lose they’re screwed. Ed reformers are NOT risk averse because they do not value schools like the schools in Van Wert so to them there’s no risk. They don’t know why anyone else values them either. That’s why we get the smears about “flat earthers”. DeVos literally does not know why anyone would value a public school. Her assumption is they’re stupid.
LikeLike
Vouchers (Education Stamps) are simply a device for imposing market dynamics on a public institution where market dynamics do not belong, They do nothing to address equal rights to a quality education for all. In a market system it is the commercial marketers of “products” who choose what to put on the “shelves”. The consumer gets second choice from what it most profits the profiteers to make available. If anyone is dumb enough to believe that such a system guarantees equal protection under the law they need only look around at other market systems — that is, if they have eyes to see.
I’m only surprised the education capitalists haven’t started sloganeering the Education Safety Net yet …
LikeLike
I suppose vouchers might have helped my dyslexic son who could not function in the local Public school go to Gow (a school for dyslexic boys) or even a nontraditional hands on private school that didn’t require a Regents diploma, but instead he dropped out and got his GED.
There might be instances such as this where it would be appropriate, but the majority of cases are just wants and not needs.
And how do we differentiate between the two?
LikeLike
Most public schools are not equipped to handle the special needs and requirements of children on the opposite end of the spectrum. Parents of gifted/talented children, could be given assistance in locating the proper educational environment, and resources, outside the publicly-operated school system, through the use of vouchers or ESA’s.
LikeLike
Charles, no more than 5 comments a day. That’s one.
LikeLike
Diane Also, democracy won’t last unless children are schooled in an environment that fosters their embrace of it. Children aren’t born able to live in a democracy, or under the principles of freedom and responsibility, they have to be educated into it, which means to educate to what is best in all of us. It’s a constant transfer of authority from outer guidance and even pressure (aka good teaching and leadership) to inner guidance of a well developed self. Without that transfer, democracy dies of its’ own accord.
The thread running through Greene’s post is “I get what I want regardless, and everyone else pays for it.” (Notice the issue is payment–it’s a dialogue soaked with capitalism and devoid of other goods). That’s what happens when someone is not educated to live in a democracy, or to be free and to take up the responsibility of their own living, in community with others. Or to even understand for themselves the significance of their writ-large political environment and to be self-motivated to act in terms of it .
Greene also subtly points to what has gone missing for many in their education over the last several decades–that so many of us can be so selfish, shallow, and so-saturated–in the way a child can be selfish and think only of themselves. In all of the above, I am talking about the threads running through the long-term curriculum.
The whole idea of “choice” and “freedom,” manipulated today by the right, are meant to appeal to that selfishness, that absence of a truly democratic education in a good number of the polity, in a cultural environment where people have felt neglected and shut-out–by the very people (and the moneyed “class”) who sought to reduce that education in the first place (to box-checking) and that now wants to destroy democratic education (and democracy) by claiming they are the only one’s offering it.
LikeLike
I want everyone to know that my Representative Pete Visclosky is fantastic. I just received this email from him and am posting it in its full form. It is refreshing to realize that not all brains in our government are dead. Pete is a Democrat !!
………………
Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to President Trump’s budget cuts to public education in Fiscal Year (FY) 2018. I appreciate hearing from you.
I agree with you. That is why I am a member of the House Public Education Caucus. This caucus was established to advocate for public schools and their students, and to oppose any efforts to reduce critical public school funding. I believe these efforts would be detrimental to our public school system and the 50.4 million students these schools serve, including the over one million students attending public schools in Indiana.
Specific to your concerns, in his FY 2018 budget request, President Trump has requested
$59 billion for the Department of Education. This is a decrease of $9.2 billion below the FY 2017 funding level. This budget proposal also would increase spending on state vouchers and charter schools by $1.4 billion above the FY 2017 funding level. Although the President has submitted his budget to Congress, the final funding level for the Department of Education and its programs will not be set until Congress approves the FY 2018 Appropriations Act for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, and the President signs it into law. Therefore, making an accurate prediction of the final funding level for public education, state vouchers, and charter schools would be impossible at this time.
Regrettably, I find the President’s budget request for FY 2018 to be disappointing. It is unbecoming of a great nation. It utterly fails to properly invest in the future of our country, whether that is in our physical infrastructure or in our human capital. It is also disingenuous because it is based on extreme economic assumptions that fundamentally differ from the norm of standard economic forecasts. It also fails in the core functions of government to protect the health and safety of its people and provide relief for those who, through no fault of their own, experience serious difficulty in their lives.
Governments should protect society’s most vulnerable citizens and invest in basic services, such as education, health care, and economic and transportation infrastructure to create job opportunities for its citizens. As a member of the House Appropriations Committee, I am keenly aware of the importance of making these smart investments in our communities and in in our citizens and the profound economic impact these investments can have.
Looking forward, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees are set to consider
the twelve appropriations measures to fund the federal government for FY 2018 and will take into consideration the President’s budget request. Therefore, I would encourage you to remain engaged with my office and other relevant elected officials. You can receive regular updates on my actions in Congress and as a member of the House Appropriations Committee at visclosky.house.gov, on Facebook at facebook.com/repvisclosky, or on Twitter at @RepVisclosky. You can also contact my office at 219-795-1844.
Thank you again for contacting me. Be assured that I will continue to monitor all measures that would affect public school funding with your views in mind. Do not hesitate to let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Peter J. Visclosky
Member of Congress
LikeLike
Opps. Forgot to mention. Visclosky represents NW Indiana.
LikeLike
Here is an article from the “Washington Post” on the Democratic Education Caucus. It lists the names of its members. These are the people that want to hear from us. Perhaps NPE could reach out to them as well since we know a lot of members of congress are ill informed about the issues. They should receive the publications from NPE. These are also the people that could nix Booker’s bid for the nomination in 2020 and save Diane’s TV from her shoes. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/public-education-caucus_us_5875183ee4b099cdb0ffb0c2
LikeLike
Of all the schemes, vouchers make the least amount of sense because the results are dismal. It causes serous harm to public schools. The money often goes to people that already pay for private school. With vouchers they get to diminish the education of those that attend public schools while they use public funds to supplement private school tuition. They are taking from the working class and poor and giving money to upper middle class or wealthy. It’s a reverse “Robin Hood.” Poor people that get vouchers do not get enough money to attend an excellent school. They can attend a school with questionable academics, and they would have been better off in the public schools.
The same misinformation is true for vouchers masquerading as “scholarships.” It is a tax avoidance strategy for the wealthy. What nobody mentions is that the lost revenue will have to be supplemented by increasing taxes on the middle and working class, or else services will be cut. In either case, the poor and working class carry the burden for the rich.
LikeLike
Yep, yep, yepity yep. Peter Greene has the gift.
I notice that this morning’s Politico has a link to the Network for Public Education’s statement about charter schools…along with a typical rejoinder from the charter industry claiming that charter school are public schools.
LikeLike
There is nothing democratic about school choice, but there IS something Democratic about it, which makes all the difference.
LikeLike
That something is charters, of course.
LikeLike
“It all depends on the meaning of choice”
“Voucher’s crap
But charter’s cool” —
Democrat
For choice of school
LikeLike
“I never had privatization relations with that woman — Ms. DeVos”
LikeLike
Who needs to have it explained more clearly? Vouchers are not even remotely democratic. “Nope. Nope nope nopity nope.”
LikeLike
Good grief! Charters and vouchers segragate, siphon $$$$$ from our public schools, which have been under attack since Reagan. And our public schools still good a great job of educating our young. The narrative is that of the BILLIONAIRES like Gates who is just insuring his income flow.
Our job is to figure out HOW TO HELP OUR YOUNG BECOME CONSCIOUS and charters and vouchers do NOT do this, and neither does standards and testing. Are people DAFT? Maybe they are drinking water from Flint, Michigan.
LikeLike