Graham Vyse, an editor at The New Republic, shows how Betsy DeVos has created a fissure within the Democratic party over school choice.
By her passionate advocacy for charters, vouchers, and every other alternative to public schools, she has put pro-school choice Democrats like Cory Booker into a bind. Booker has vociferously supported both charters and vouchers, yet as a Democrat with hopes for the future, felt compelled to vote against DeVos. It is somewhat amusing to watch him and others try to put distance between themselves and DeVos when she is carrying out the same ideas they have publicly espoused. Any Democrat who is aligned with DeVos on any part of her repugnant agenda should change parties.
“The ground definitely is more fertile,” said Preston Green, an education professor at the University of Connecticut. “I think President Trump’s support of choice does make it difficult. It might make people think twice about it, and especially DeVos’s selling of it…. You’re definitely starting to see a shift.” Meanwhile, the Trump administration’s education agenda and criticism from civil rights groups “might have made it easier for those who oppose charters to oppose them more vociferously.”
Brookings Institution fellow Jon Valant made a similar case in February, writing that “the Trump administration’s support of charters and choice may be distracting from—and contributing to—an emerging political threat to school choice programs, especially charter schools: renewed skepticism from Democrats.” In other words, with her extremist position on school choice, DeVos may be harming the very movement she helped build.
The recent report by the NAACP calling for regulation of charter schools is another straw in the wind, a very large straw, suggesting that the Democrats’ embrace of school choice is politically hazardous.
DeVos is a gift to those of us who have warned for years that privately managed charters is a decisive victory for privatization and a significant step away from democratically controlled public education.
The message of her tenure in office is that school choice is a radical rightwing strategy that defunds public schools.
She gives Democrats a new opportunity to separate themselves from the favorite cause of the Walton family, the Koch brothers, and the Republican party.
As the recent Democratic gubernatorial primary in Virginia showed, candidates who support public schools without qualification can energize their base of teachers and parents. Democrats who favor any form of privatization will be unable to call upon that base.
If Democrats hope to win back a significant share of House seats in the 2018 election, they must put support for public schools at the top of their agenda. That’s where the voters are.

Make sure you read the last paragraph in the New Republic article, the statement by Heilig. He’s for families having real choices.
LikeLike
I agree. If you believe in school choice you would fight for choices that are part of the system. If you believe in privatization you believe that some schools should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as they can convince some parents to send their kids.
LikeLike
Well said.
LikeLike
Hah! Almost a summary of what I wrote yesterday for Alternet:
http://www.alternet.org/education/better-deal-education
“With the Trump/DeVos agenda of budget cuts and school privatization deeply unpopular even among the president’s supporters, now is an ideal time for Democrats to speak up on behalf of public schools”
LikeLike
But will the DNC support public schools? I don’t “get” the DNC. They have forgotten their base and went to the “right.” That’s why we have that DUMP.
LikeLike
Are the Democrats listening?
LikeLike
People like Cory Booker and Andrew Cuomo would probably do very well if they ran as Republicans.
LikeLike
Yes, agree SomeDam poet.
LikeLike
I’ve made this argument before and I know it’s not exactly popular around here, but Trump and DeVos and the rest of the band are actually doing some good specifically because of how blatantly odious they are. No longer can people “innocently” pretend they don’t see what’s going on. The time for choosing sides is here. The Democrats can continue to be Republicans if they really want to, but the farce is being exposed. If they want to get elected – and if they really care about the threat Trump et al pose – they’re going to have to stop representing the billionaires and the corporations at the expense of the rest of us.
LikeLike
I should clarify, I don’t mean to imply that they are doing good intentionally, nor do I mean to imply that they are remotely decent people in spite of the inadvertent good they are doing. I’m just saying there’s something to be said for unmasking the evil that’s been there all along.
LikeLike
Unfortunately, apart from criticisms of DeVos (which take no courage at all) the Democrats appear to be simply rearranging the deck chairs for the final journey to the bottom of the sea.
The faux outrage is very stale after the umpteenth time.
LikeLike
Dienne,
The change in my part of the big city is incomplete, but palpable. Reforminess is no longer associated with the first black president. It’s Trump’s shtick now. Odious! Of course, it cannot be felt in the neoliberal press, but on the grassroots level, something is different.
LikeLike
Agree dienne77.
LikeLike
I absolutely agree with you, Dienne77, and I have been saying this to people in real life since DeVos was appointed. THANK YOU, Donald Trump, for making Betsy DeVos the new face of corporate education reform!
There is a REASON why Eli Broad protested her appointment, even though her policies are basically in line with his own. Unlike her, he is savvy enough to realize that he won’t get what he wants without a large measure of deception — and DeVos is not sharp enough to play the deception game, not anywhere near like Duncan was.
LikeLike
Interesting article in the new Scientific American – a metadata study of peer reviewed papers judging the effectiveness of vouchers in US education. The conclusion is that by just about any measure (they mostly rely on standardized math and reading tests) students using vouchers did less well.
LikeLike
You should send a copy of the study to the members of the House, Senate, White House and DeVos.
LikeLike
“Toxic Democrats” like hedge fund managers and most of Silicon Valley have been making life hard for teachers for a long time I don’t feel sorry for them if they have to explain their version of privatization. They have been attacking and undermining public schools for decades, and their methods have been reprehensible. They have been buying elected officials to do their dirty work. Trying to monetize public education is hardly a lofty goal, and the charter lobby has been acting like mobsters.
LikeLike
Yes, “Toxic Democrats” indeed. They attended private preppy schools.
LikeLike
Booker may as well be an old, white, republican. He is a shill for the republican party, sharing the same donors as Chris Christie – and we know how toxic Christie is, but he will find a soft landing when he is done ruining NJ and playing out his petty vindictiveness towards his opponents, parents, teachers, unions and public schools.
Booker is the “nose in the tent” because blacks historically vote democratic. Booker has been a disaster in every capacity for NJ. I’m happy to watch him squirm and try to reconcile being a wolf (republican) in sheep’s (democrat’s) clothing.
I’ve got a feeling it is just a matter of time before the Trump administration implodes by 1000 tweets. Literally, for pretty much everything Trump says, he does the opposite. He has filled the swamp with more vile creatures than anyone could have imagined. He insults the hands that feed him. He is the ultimate P.T. Barnam…he can’t even believe the stuff that he says/tweets. Countdown to implosion – and Betsy will go with him. Not sure the Pence would be better, but Trump is just a lunatic waiting for a straight jacket.
In the last few local elections, how in the world did Repubs win? Sanity must be restored.
LikeLike
NEW YORK MAGAZINE just put out a piece by Lisa Miller describing how Devos is sinking like a rock, and details how all this came about. According to numerous on-the-record and off-the-record sources, the Department of Ed. has been in a complete shambles since she took over.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/07/betsy-devos-secretary-of-education.html?utm_campaign=nym&utm_source=tw&utm_medium=s1
For example, there’s the story of how Charles Doolittle, a career official with the Department, recently quit. Doolittle describes the disillusioning experience of watching this Devos’ performance when confronted in a hearing by Congresswoman Katharine Clark. Devos’ responses so nauseated him that he immediately exited the Department.
(Doolittle was one of the few willing to speak on the record. Miller says that others echo Miller, but are afraid to speak out.)
Here’s that video of the the moment which Doolittle to leave:
Here’s “s description of Doolittle’s reaction to this:
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
NEW YORK MAGAZINE’s Lisa Miller:
“Charles Doolittle decided to quit while at work, watching DeVos on C-Span. She was defending her budget to a House subcommittee in May and was much better prepared than she had been in her confirmation five months before.
“But under fierce questioning from Representative Katherine Clark of Massachusetts, DeVos seemed to fold. Would the federal Department of Education protect a gay child who wanted to use a school voucher to attend a school with anti-gay admissions policies? DeVos stumbled. She started. Then stopped. Then started again.
“ ‘States and local communities are best equipped to make these decisions,’ she concluded.
(Doolittle reacted) “ ‘I didn’t think I would ever see a Cabinet member who couldn’t say for the cameras, ‘Oh, we would never discriminate against x, y, or z population,’ says Doolittle.
” ‘I sent an email to my supervisor saying, ‘We’ve got to talk. I’m out.’ ”
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Doolittle also describes his disgust with billionaire Devos costing the taxpayers millions for a security detail that Doolittle thinks in unnecessary, and that she could easily pay for out of her own pocket … especially since the cost meant over 100 Department employees lost their jobs.
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
“The following week, DeVos got a security detail of U.S. Marshals, the first Education secretary ever to have one: 22 guards, six on duty at a time, which will cost taxpayers at least $7.8 million this year. There was widespread outrage among the department’s rank and file, for Trump has made no secret of wanting to reduce the number of federal employees.
” “I mean, let’s say the average federal salary at ED is 80k,’ says Charles Doolittle, a career employee who quit the department in June. ‘That unnecessary security is 100 employees. They’re freezing hiring, even considering buyouts, and possibly layoffs? And if the security really is so terribly necessary, then why doesn’t the billionaire pay for it out of pocket?” ”
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
LikeLike
Jack,
No matter how low DeVos goes, Trump doesn’t care. She has an audience of one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ve been monitoring the reaction to Devos’ speech at ALEC last week — with the accompanying protests — and how the speech/protests were covered by the corporate reform propaganda orgs (that is the on-line orgs belonging to the faux-progressive wing of the corporate reform).
I then compared that to how the mainstream media covered it.
First of all, Devos’ speech at ALEC and protests were a major national story about education — covered by the NY Times, Time Magazine, the Washington Post, etc.
However, the faux-progressive wing of the corporate ed. reform world wouldn’t touch the story with a ten-foot pole.
I checked on the coverage … or rather NON-coverage of Devos’ speech from the various billionaire-funded (i.e. Eli Broad) corporate reform propaganda orgs:
Campbell Brown’s THE 74 … nada, notthing, zip, zero … like it never friggin’ happened.”
L.A. School Report … nada, notthing, zip, zero … like it never friggin’ happened.”
Peter Cunningham’s Education Post … nada, notthing, zip, zero … like it never friggin’ happened.”
Peter Cunningham’s personal Twitterl which usually and regularly includes comments on all things educational, in particular events or occurrences which have had much less of a national profile or impact than Devos’ speech …
… once again … nada, notthing, zip, zero … like it never friggin’ happened.”
The same goes for the twitter or Erika Sanzi, Shavar Jeffries, and countless others.
I would suspect there was some coordination on this also among all these folks, with the agreed upon plan to ignore the Devos’ speech and protests.
The faux-progressive wing of the corporate ed. reform movement apparently wants to have it both ways:
— to benefit from the support from ALEC and other assorted right-wing scum such as Trump and Devos .
… yet …
— distance themselves from those folk at the same time.
These faux-progressive corporate reformers need to maintain the phony illusion that corporate ed. reform is not an enterprise being executed by the extreme right wing — and that they’re joined at the hip to that right-wing scum — therefore they must pretend Devos’ speech never happened and her/their fealty to ALEC and extreme right-wing forces is non-existent.
For example, take a look at EDUCATION POST, founded and edited by Peter Cunningham:
Devos, according to the mainstream media, is the face of the School Choice, but instead of covering Devos’ ass-kiss-athon of ALEC, Peter — on or about the same day as the speech — instead publishes articles criticizing Devos on safe progressive-friendly issues, and implicitly distancing EDUCATION POST and the faux-progressive corporate reformers from ALEC, Secretary Devos, Trump and the rest of the extreme right-wing backers of charters and vouchers.
Here are these two recent EDUCATION POST articles referencing Devos— again, posted during the days before, during & after her ALEC Speech — ones that take safe stances in tune with progressives and progressive readers:
1) one critical of Devos’ Civil Rights stance on campus sexual assault;
http://educationpost.org/dear-betsy-you-need-to-get-serious-about-addressing-sexual-assault/
AND
2) another from a student attacking Devos’ Civil Rights stance:
http://educationpost.org/without-the-office-of-civil-rights-my-high-school-would-have-continued-to-discriminate-against-students-like-me/
You see. These are are safe “progressive” issues about which the faux-progressives, in their various propaganda orgs. can write articles dealing with Devos
This way the faux-progressive corporate reformers can then claim:
“Don’t you get it? We corporate ed reformers are true progressives who oppose Devos, Trump, ALEC, and extreme right-wingers etc. just as much as anyone does…
BUT ON THE OTHER HAND …
“We don’t want to report on Devos’ ALEC speech, as that would turn a spotlight on the extreme-right-wing scum who are backing both her and charters/vouchers/”School Choice” in general, and how, in fact, we faix-progressives are working hand-in-hand with that right-wing scum to push the same agenda.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
One more thing to underscore the points made in the above post:
Last week, Peter Cunningham wrote a piece that was in both THE 74 and his site, EDUCATION POST attacking what Randi Weingarten said in a speech …
… only he NEVER MENTIONS the context of Weingarten’s speech … neglecting to point out that her speech was in response to … Secretary Devos’ speech at ALEC … lest he violate the coordinated faux-progressive party line to treat Devos’ ALEC SPEECH like it never friggin’ happened.
One ludicrous claim from Cunningham in this piece: teachers unions are to blame for the low numbers of African-American teachers in U.S. classrooms.
Huh? Talk about “alternative facts.”
https://www.the74million.org/article/cunningham-on-school-segregation-teacher-union-president-randi-weingarten-is-projecting
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
PETER CUNNINGHAM:
“Nationally, the student body is over 50 percent people of color, but the teaching profession is just 17 percent people of color. Only about two teachers in 100 are Black males.”
“The roots of this institutional racism in the teaching field go back to the 1950s, when the Supreme Court ruled segregation illegal. Tens of thousands of Black teachers working in all-Black schools could not find work in integrated schools.
“Teachers unions have done little to address this issue.”
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
NEA represents close to 3/4 of a million African-American teachers
in their ranks. But for NEA’s existence and its pushing for their on-going employment, most of them would likely never have been hired in the first place, or perhaps not have been retained after being hired.
I wouldn’t call that “very little.”
Indeed, NEA was initially formed from the merger of the national union that represents African-American teachers and another group of white teachers.
However, when it comes to the corporate ed. reform’s record at maintaining and defending the existence of African-American teachers in U.S. schools, I have just two words for Mr. Cunningham:
“New Orleans”
Peter and his allies have celebrated the firing of 7,000 teachers in The Big Easy — and still do. The overwhelming majority of those teachers were both African-American teachers and life-time citizens of the New Orleans community, the loss of which basically decimated the African American middle class in New Orleans, and has done so most likely permanently.
However, Peter’s former boss Arne Duncan celebrated the “New Orleans” miracle, saying that Hurricane Katrina was ‘the best thing to ever happen to New Orleans. (i.e. its schools).”
Again, that includes the firing of 7,000 African-American teachers who lived in New Orleans, who were replaced by overwhelmingly white Teach for America Corps Members who came from outside New Orleans. The overwhelming majority of those TFA’s teacher put in their minimum requirement of two years, then skipped town for other more lucrative non-teaching careers in other cities — only to be replaced by more TFA’s who do the same … Rinse and Repeat.
Once again, exactly WHO is responsible for the low numbers of Black teachers in UI.S. schools?
LikeLike
Peter Cunningham can kiss my butt.
LikeLike
EXPOSING the long-standing and carefully ignored DFER duplicity: “The faux-progressive wing of the corporate ed. reform movement apparently wants to have it both ways: to benefit from the support from ALEC and other assorted right-wing scum such as Trump and Devos [and] yet…distance themselves from those folk at the same time.” We are seeing much of this in our district where leaders have assertively sold old to test-score-reform/charters and who now pretend outrage at the DeVos educational agenda.
LikeLike
My favorite sentence from the post revised a bit:
Any Democrat who was aligned with DeVos before or after she became the #FakeU.S.SecretaryofEducation on any part of her repugnant agenda should change parties or resign and leave politics. They might also consider giving up their citizenship and moving to Russia.
LikeLike
“Furious teachers at a recently shuttered Detroit charter school were notified Wednesday that they won’t be paid thousands of dollars they earned during the last school year.
Teachers at the Michigan Technical Academy had contracts that required the school to pay them through the summer for work they did during the school year. But the school’s management company, Matchbook Learning, alerted teachers in an email Wednesday that the money would instead go to pay off the school’s debts.”
The best part? The authorizer told the teachers to contact the wage and hours division at the Michigan labor dept.
I thought the authorizer was the regulator? If they can’t regulate the schools who can?
http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/detroit/2017/07/26/detroit-charter-school-teachers-get-tough-news-their-school-was-in-debt-so-they-wont-get-paid/
LikeLike
My favorite part of that story is the final line of the email which the charter operators sent to teachers.
Keep in mind that this is an email telling the teachers that the charter operators are screwing them out of two months of pay because the operators used it to pay off debts rather than pay those teachers, and sorry, but there’s nothing that those teachers can do about it.
The closing of the email reads:
“We wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors.”
I kid you NOT. That’s what they wrote.
It’s here:
http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/detroit/2017/07/26/detroit-charter-school-teachers-get-tough-news-their-school-was-in-debt-so-they-wont-get-paid/
LikeLike
” alerted teachers in an email Wednesday that the money would instead go to pay off the school’s debts“.
So fulfilling teacher contracts was not a debt? Maybe they should have said “the money would go instead to pay off those school debtors with enough clout to collect to collect on their debts in court should the charter renege.”
LikeLike
From the New Republic article:
“The irony, Heilig told me, is that no one is against the basic principle of “school choice”—that parents should have options. “The debate is whether schools that are private schools or privately managed like charter schools should have the power in the conversations about whether students can enroll and whether students can stay,” he said. “We want to make sure that parents and families can do the choosing and the public interest is protected.”
It’s interesting that the NAACP has asked for a moratorium on charters until there is transparency and and accountability and the charter folks are so terrified that they prefer to claim that the NAACP would sell out their own kids for a teacher union donation rather than accept any accountability or transparency.
The “choice” movement has completely lost their way. They have one goal — more charters — and accountability and transparency will prove that their results are tainted so they fight it with ever single fiber of their being — even if it means they attack the NAACP as selling out their own children for the teachers union. Better to attack critics than to clean house when cleaning house is the LAST thing the billionaires who underwrite the movement want.
LikeLike
The Democrats have a lot to learn. The game they’ve been playing as GOP Lite is old, dating back to Bill Clinton in the early nineties, and the party needs to deal with the fact that many in their base are onto them now.
Genuine Progressives know very well that when the Democrats support a neoliberal economic agenda which promotes free markets, and act as if competition and marketing are the answers to virtually all economic problems, they are allowing profits to take priority over people and they are squandering their ability (and their responsibility) to act as the counter weight to capitalism gone wild.
We know from history, yesterday and today, that greedy billionaires and multi-millionaires are insatiable, ethically challenged and self-serving, not self-correcting, so they are very much in need of regulatory oversight, but right wingers (in both parties) aim to deregulate instead.
It’s largely the Democratic base who are impacted most by capitalism gone wild, including the inequitable distribution of wealth and over representation of the super-rich in government. And when the Democratic base feels that the wealthy have more influence than the dwindling middle class and working poor, they feel discounted and a lot become apathetic, so if they aren’t inclined to revolt, many will just stay home instead of voting for the lesser evil –and Republicans will win by default…
LikeLike
Yes, it’s why it is a crying shame that when some Democrats had a chance to vote for two progressive candidates running on one of the most progressive platforms in decades, they got trumped. Believing the Russian propaganda designed to make them give up on democracy instead of understanding that there is no perfection.
Obama was terrible on some issues but he did some good things and yet so many people could have made the same point that he should have lost and let McCain Palin win to tear down the system because he wasn’t good enough on health care reform. Would that have been better if Obama had lost? To make a point that the Dems were too corrupt?
Was Obama just the “lesser evil” who was much more evil than Hillary Clinton? Or were the ugly naysayers happy to tear down the woman candidate giving Obama a pass because they were willing to look at the whole instead of focusing on the part?
We know from history that greedy billionaires pay for propaganda and foolish voters fall for it as they did in this election. Including many Democrats because they delight in hearing people say that because Bernie and Liz Warren aren’t perfect they won’t vote anymore. And when that happens — as it will because both those candidates are exactly like Hillary with flaws and warts and imperfections that will be magnified because the right loves watching Dems eat their own — it will be playing right into the Koch Brothers’ hands.
Was Obama the lesser evil? Or do you just reserve that nasty phrase for far more progressive Democrats like Hillary Clinton?
LikeLike
I associate Hillary with Bill, his right of center New Democrats, and her history of sitting on the Walmart board and not fighting for unions. I voted for Obama in 2008 but was very disappointed by his education policies and voted 3rd party in 2012. In 2016, I strongly backed Bernie, but when he was no longer a choice, I voted for Hillary, because I wasn’t willing to take the chance of handing the presidency and supreme court over to an idiot like Trump.
Virtually any mainstream Democrat is the lesser evil compared to GOP candidates, since there are so few GOP moderates now and so many Tea Partiers. I think we definitely need more people like Sanders and Warren –and I know they are not perfect, but in my book, they are a great start toward making the Democratic party more Progressive and less corporate-owned.
LikeLike
There is a disproportionally large number of millionaires in Congress. Not surprising, given the costs of a political campaign. One topic, that has wide support from both conservatives and liberals, is public financing of campaigns. If Congress were to enact public financing, that would end the influence of the big-money contributors, and result in a more diverse Congress, including more representation by women, minorities, and non-millionaires.
Fat chance.
LikeLike
Public financing of campaigns has wide support from conservatives?
Say what?? If only that were true.
LikeLike
There is more support for publicly-financed campaigns, than most people realize. And I mean from all parts of the political spectrum, including many conservatives.
LikeLike
Publicly financed campaigns would be the law already if it were not for the Golden Rule — he who has he gold, makes the rules.
LikeLike
Too bad those conservatives keep voting for politicians who oppose it.
LikeLike
Diane,
I would respectfully offer this:
DeVos is not at all influential or responsible for making education reform “toxic to Democrats”. You misundersatnd her and the Democrats.
The Democrats have willingly toxified themselves by jumping on the education reform bandwagon and becoming complicit, corrupt, lazy, fearful, and opportunistic. Let’s put the blame where it really belongs. Just because a drug dealer offers you great opioids doesn’t mean that you should buy them and consume them.
If the GOP are a bunch of drug dealers, then Democrats are a bunch of willing addicts, save for a few.
Both parties rot from the head. Shame on both of them, and may new parties emerge for a new America in the coming years.
LikeLike
Could you please stop with comments like “Democrats are a bunch of willing addicts, save for a few”.
In fact, the reason we are in this mess is the certainty that “both parties rot from the head”.
We recently had a very pro-reform Democrat who turned out to be far more conservative than any Democrat who had ever run before or since. Joe Biden had to bring Obama to gay marriage as he had absolutely no interest in getting there.
There are plenty of Democrats that aren’t “willing addicts” but because they are tarred by this ridiculous attack, we are run by right wing Republicans. It’s a crying shame.
We will never know, but it is just as likely as not that if Clinton and Kaine — Kaine who was NOT a “willing addict” and Clinton who was the ONLY Democrat who pointed out that charter schools pushed out the cheapest kids — we would not have had Obama II. We would have begun moving toward a new consensus. And if the “Third Party” Bernie had won, we’d have more of the same “hands off I’ll just hire some reformers like the guy I so actively campaigned for last month who is REALLY in the pocket of reformers.”
It is comments like this that brought us an America that is rotting from the head. People so checked out that they can’t distinguish friends from enemies and just want to destroy it all and to heck with all the people who suffer. Lots of revolutionaries playing right into the Koch Brothers’ hands.
LikeLike
The original post is very true, and the sad fact is that much of its truth boils down to the fact that house apes tend to hoot and jabber in unison with other house apes who happen to be waving the same flag that they are. There is really little in the way of though or rational discourse beyond this.
Arne Duncan was allowed to wreak the havoc he did in large part because of the mentality “Democrats GOOD!!! Republicans BAA-AAD! Democrats GOOD!!! Republicans BAA-AAD!!!”
The fact that many democrats now feel moved to oppose policies pushed by Republicans when they supported those same policies when they were pushed by Democrats is just a sad commentary on humanity. I’m sorry, I’m being generous — house apes.
Rampant stupidity can make one think that maybe the people smirking and profiting off of rampant stupidity are actually in the right. What else are you going to do?
LikeLike
There are now many calls for the resignation of Randi Weingarten. see this article:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/449881/randi-weingarten-american-federation-teachers-segregation-school-choice-response?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202017-07-27&utm_term=NR5PM%20Actives
LikeLike
Charles, I promise you that Randi will not resign. She is elected by her members not by Rightwingers at the National Review
LikeLike
I can’t imagine her resigning,either. I am just saddened to see opponents of school choice/vouchers bringing racism and segregationists into the discussion. Even liberals in Lyndon Johnson’s Office of Economic Opportunity saw vouchers as a way to help black children to escape segregated schools.
One method, which school choice proponents use to convince legislators to enact school choice, is to point up the benefits to children of color. The tactic works.
LikeLike
Charles,
No one in LBJ’s administration supported school vouchers. LBJ went to Southwest State Teachers College in Texas. He briefly taught. He went to public schools. He NEVER supported diverting public money to religious schools.
LikeLike
Read the article. There were some staffers in the Office for Economic Opportunity, who viewed school choice/vouchers, as a way to assist lower income families and children of color, as a way to escape failing segregated schools. This is a fact.
LikeLike
Charles,
The LBJ administration never supported school vouchers.
LikeLike
National Review (NR) is an American semi-monthly Conservative magazine focusing on news and commentary pieces on political, social, and cultural affairs. The magazine was founded by the author William F. Buckley Jr. in 1955.[3] It is currently edited by Rich Lowry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Review
Suggestion: if the media source is conservative and far to the right, doubt whatever that source alleges about anyone from the left, and fact check, and fact check, and fact check, and fact check, and fact check, and fact check — but not from another conservative media source.
LikeLike