Archives for the month of: September, 2017
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Good News! Pennsylvania Supreme Court Gives OK to Trial about School Funding!

By dianeravitch
September 28, 2017 //
8

Pennsylvania has one of the worst, most inequitable school funding arrangements in the nation. The legislature has fiddled and done nothing, allowing wide disparities to remain.

But today the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in favor of permitting a trial on funding inequities. This is a big win for districts who are desperately underfunded.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Thursday opened the door to a lawsuit by the William Penn School District and others asking courts to remedy wide funding disparities among school districts, breaking with decades of precedent dismissing such challenges.

Courts “must take great care in wading deeply into questions of social and economic policy, which we long have recognized as fitting poorly with the judiciary’s institutional competencies,” Justice David Wecht wrote in the majority opinion.

But “it is fair neither to the people of the Commonwealth nor to the General Assembly itself to expect that body to police its own fulfillment of its constitutional mandate.”

The court’s opinion — joined by four justices and accompanied by two dissenting opinions — does not resolve the William Penn lawsuit.

But it enables a trial court to hear arguments in the case, which contends that Pennsylvania’s school-funding system violates the state constitution’s guarantee of a “thorough and efficient system” of education, and its equal-protection provision. Commonwealth Court had dismissed the suit, which lawyers for the plaintiffs said Thursday they would now seek to expedite.

Pennsylvania’s school-funding system has long been a subject of complaint, with some of the widest spending gaps in the country between low- and high-poverty districts and heavy reliance on property taxes to fund schools.

In the William Penn School District — which has some of the highest tax rates in the state, but spends less per pupil than nearby Lower Merion — “we are moving ahead,” a jubilant Jane Harbert, superintendent of the district, said Thursday. “I have to tell you, it just bring tears to my eyes that we’re allowed to go further with this. We’re fighting a battle not just for William Penn but for the whole state of Pennsylvania.”

The first person she called with the news, Harbert said, was former superintendent Joseph Bruni, who spearheaded the suit. In an interview, he said he had waited a long time for this.

Categories Education Reform, Equity, Funding, Pennsylvania

How to Protect Your Child’s Privacy! Join the Parent Coalition for Student Privacy Webinar on Tuesday!

By dianeravitch
September 28, 2017 //
1

A letter from Leonie Haimson, leader of Student Privacy Matters and Class Size Matters (I am a board member).

Dear folks:

This Tuesday October 3 at 8 PM EST, Class Size Matters is co- sponsoring a free webinar with the Parent Coalition and NYS Allies for Public Education on what practical steps parents can take to safeguard their children’s data from breach or abuse.

Our webinar will cover the following topics:

1. How to opt out of directory information sharing — and why;
2. What common practices in schools violate student privacy & federal law;
3. Practical tips for protecting your child’s privacy;
4. Questions to ask your teacher or principal about apps and other technology used in the classroom.

Registration is required so please sign up today!

According to federal law, at the beginning of each year, school districts are supposed to inform parents of their children’s privacy rights under the federal law called FERPA, including their right to opt out at the beginning of the year from allowing the district to disclose their child’s directory information, including name, address and other details, with various organizations or vendors that do NOT provide services to schools.

Yet in NYC and in many other districts, we have discovered that that parents have not been informed of these rights. To make things worse, NYC DOE voluntarily shares the directory information of students with charter schools for recruiting and marketing purposes.

If you are concerned about this issue, and/or have other concerns and questions about how best to safeguard your child’s privacy, please join our webinar. Whether or not you can attend, you should also check out our Parent Toolkit with more information about this issue and much more. More on the directory information issue, including a sample opt out form as a pdf or in word that you can fill out and submit to your school is here.

Hope you can join us on Tuesday and thanks!
Leonie
Leonie Haimson
Executive Director
Class Size Matters
124 Waverly Pl.
New York, NY 10011
212-529-3539

Make a tax-deductible contribution to Class Size Matters now!

Categories Data and Data Mining, Privacy and Privacy Rights

High School in Louisiana Threatens to Sanction Athletes Who “Take a Knee”

By dianeravitch
September 28, 2017 //
6

A tweet by Shaun King, a columnist for The Intercept includes a letter by a high school principal in Louisiana threatening athletes with sanctions if they do not stand during the National Anthem.

Members of the NFL have said that the “#TakeAKnee” campaign is a protest against racism and police brutality.

Based on the action of one player (Colin Kaepernick) who is presently unemployed, Trump decided to turn the issue into a culture war in which he is the defender of the Flag and Patriotism. This is red meat for his base. If you #TakeAKnee” or if you disagree with Trump, you are against the Flag, the National Anthem, and Patriotism.

The good news is that NFL teams are standing together (that is, kneeling together) in unity against racism and police brutality; even their owners and managers are joining their protests. These are strong men. They are not easily cowed, especially not by a bully who escaped military service because he had sore feet.

At least seventy percent of players in the NFL are African American. The team must be a team, working together in unity, or it is not a team.

If the owners fired the players who “took a knee,” they would have to fire the entire team, the managers, and themselves.

Trump is very pleased with himself. He thinks he has gotten hold of a terrific issue, one that pits him against unpatriotic people of color. It distracts attention from the investigations of him and his family and allows him to pontificate on the greatness of the flag and the anthem. He thinks it is a winner for him.

But here is the dilemma: His base loves professional sports. There is no evidence that they will stop attending NFL games or watching them on TV.

Like most of what Trump does, he is not serious. He will drop this issue when he has gotten maximum PR value from it and he will find another one to divide people and turn them against their neighbors.

Categories Fake News

Jan Resseger: Will the Ohio Legislature Have the Courage to Reign in Politically Powerful ECOT?

By dianeravitch
September 28, 2017 //
2

Jan Resseger writes here about the fate of legislation that would establish accountability for the Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow (ECOT), which is the worst performing school in the state and is owned by one of the biggest donors to Republican politicians.

ECOT has a bad habit of claiming tuition for students who are theoretically enrolled but never turn on their computer. There apparently are thousands of phantom students. The state has attempted to claw back millions of dollars from ECOT but ECOT has fought them in court.

Can William Lager, owner of ECOT, ever be held accountable for his collection of hundreds of millions of dollars from Ohio taxpayers? It will be settled in court. Unfortunately, Lager has contributed to the campaigns of several judges on Ohio’s Supreme Court.

The law needs fixing, to protect students and taxpayers:

Ohio State Senator Joe Schiavoni ought to be a hero to public school teachers and parents—and to citizens who support responsible stewardship of tax dollars. Except that thanks to the power of the Republican leadership in the Ohio legislature, few people are really aware of Schiavoni’s heroic effort to put a stop to Bill Lager’s massive scam—the Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow.

Schiavoni is a Democrat and his bill to regulate online charter schools has been pushed aside for over a year now. As Schiavoni explained in testimony last February, “Senate Bill 39 is the updated version of Senate Bill 298 from the last General Assembly.” In March of 2016, Schiavoni first introduced a version of this bill—designed to reign in Bill Lager’s giant scam. ECOT was (and still is) charging the state, which pays charter schools on a per pupil basis, for students who have enrolled at ECOT but are not regularly logging onto their computers to participate in the educational program.

Here is how Schiavoni described the bill (then Senate Bill 298) at that time: “We need to make sure that online schools are accurately reporting attendance and not collecting tax dollars for students who never log in to take classes. Online schools must be held accountable for lax attendance policies. Without strong oversight, these schools could be collecting millions of dollars while failing to educate Ohio’s school children.” Schiavoni’s bill required e-schools to keep accurate records of the number of hours student spend doing coursework. It required online schools to notify the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) if a student failed to log-in for ten consecutive days. It required that a qualified teacher check in with each student once a month to monitor active participation. In the last legislative session, the bill was never fully debated and never brought to the Senate floor for a vote.

Schiavoni re-introduced the bill in February, and this afternoon at 3:15, Peggy Lehner, the chair of the Senate Education Committee, is finally holding a hearing on Schiavoni’s bill. When he testified in February about the bill he was introducing, Schiavoni explained why it is needed: “Other than the requirement that e-schools provide no less than 920 hours per year of learning opportunities, there are no specific statewide standards related to the number of hours per day or week that e-school students must be engaged in learning. In an environment where a teacher is not physically able to see students in a classroom, this lack of accountability is very concerning.”

Schiavoni believes Senate Bill 39 will address the outrageous problems at Ohio’s on-line charter schools: “Senate Bill 39 requires each e-school to keep an accurate record of how long each individual student is actively participating in learning in every 24-hour period. This information must be reported to ODE on a monthly basis, and ODE would be required to make this report available on their website. Senate Bill 39 would also require a teacher who is licensed by the Ohio Department of Education to certify the accuracy of student participation logs… on a monthly basis.”

Categories For-Profit, Fraud, Ohio, Virtual Charter Schools

Mayor of Allentown Helps Real Estate Developer Make Huge Profit by Converting Empty Building to Charter School

By dianeravitch
September 28, 2017 //
7

The mayor of Allentown, Pennsylvania, Ed Pawlowski, helped out a generous campaign contributor named Ramzi Haddad.

Haddad had purchased an industrial building that was vacant. He wanted to convert it to a charter school.

He asked the mayor to expedite zoning hearings. The mayor did. The mayor got a campaign contribution.

Haddad gave $15,000 to Pawlowski over the course of three years, according to campaign finance records. The indictment against Pawlowski alleges that Haddad also caused several associates, two of whom were identified in court documents only by initials, to give an additional $25,000 to the mayor.

After Pawlowski expedited the zoning hearing, emails show, Haddad asked for three other favors to get the proposed Executive Education Academy Charter School off the ground. Haddad asked Pawlowski for a letter of support to the Zoning Hearing Board for his proposed tenant, an appearance by a city employee at the zoning meeting and to hurry up the city permitting process for the school. Emails show Pawlowski complied with at least two of those requests.

At the meeting, Haddad secured the variance needed to move a charter school to the industrial property, giving him the go-ahead to rent most of the Union Boulevard building to the charter school.

In August, an investment group led by Haddad netted a handsome payout after selling the property to a foundation formed by the Executive Education Academy Charter for $32.5 million, according to bond documents. Haddad and his business partner bought the land for $850,000, property records show.

None of this was criminal, it seems.

Pawlowski’s efforts to help Haddad with the building were not part of a 54-count criminal indictment filed in federal court against the mayor in July, nor a guilty plea entered by Haddad in 2015. The interactions were the first of many between Haddad and the mayor detailed in the city emails that show an established relationship between the pair.

It was just part of the ordinary pay-to-play that we have come to expect in politics.

As for the property, think of it: Haddad and his partner paid $850,000 and sold it for $32.5 million.

The question is, why did he give so little to the mayor? Why did the mayor sell out the public trust for only a few bucks when the developer was getting ready to pocket millions?

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, For-Profit, Privatization

Harvard Program on Choice: Protest Expected, Funders Hide Their Names

By dianeravitch
September 28, 2017 //
56

Betsy DeVos is the keynote speaker today at a conference on “The Future of School Choice,” sponsored by Paul Petersen’s Program on Education Policy and Governance at the Kennedy School at Harvard.

Might as well be called “The Glorious and Lucrative Future of School Choice” because there are no critics invited, no supporters of the public schools attended by 85-90% of American students. She will be surrounded by adoring fans, which may help her forget that she is the most unpopular member of the Trump cabinet.

DeVos will be introduced by the dean of the Kennedy School, who is not at all embarrassed to host a conference utterly lacking in balance or fairness. Apparently, he is hoping the students ask questions, since the panelists won’t.

Curiously, the names of the funders–which originally included the foundations of Charles Koch and Bill Gates–have been scrubbed from the program. The only named sponsor is EdChoice.

Click to access future-of-school-choice-agenda.pdf

Hundreds of protestors are anticipated.

https://m.facebook.com/events/131082490873746/

DeVos has devoted her life’s work to privatization of education. Her own state of Michigan has been her plaything, since she has funded so many politicians. Thanks to her intervention, education in Michigan is a hot political mess, and the state’s standing on NAEP has fallen substantially.

She owes her home state an apology.

Categories Betsy DeVos, Billionaires, Charter Schools, Education Reform, Privatization, School Choice, Vouchers

Steve Lopez of LA Times: No, Ref Rodriguez Did Not Make a “Rookie Mistake”

By dianeravitch
September 28, 2017 //
9

A few days ago, Peter Cunningham of Education Post (and former communications director for Arne Duncan and reliable critic of public schools and unions) wrote an article defending Ref Rodriguez, the then-president of the Los Angeles Unified School District Board, who has been indicted on multiple counts for money laundering and campaign finance fraud. Cunningham said that Ref was being treated harshly because of his prominence and that he had simply made “a rookie mistake.”

Steve Lopez, a regular columnist for the Los Angeles Times, refutes Cunningham’s claims in this article.

He also answers a question that bothered me about Ref’s indictment. Why is it illegal to give money to your own campaign? As Lopez explains it, it is not illegal to give money to your own campaign, but it is illegal to pretend that you received that money from other people and then repay them for pretending to give you money.

Lopez writes:

The chief of a nonprofit that advocates for charter schools — which Rodriguez has championed — argued in a Times op-ed that the charges against Rodriguez are overblown and he should stay on the board.

“If the allegations are true, Rodriguez clearly made a rookie mistake,” said the op-ed, which called Rodriguez a humble, sincere and polite political novice who should pay fines if he broke the law but not lose his job.

A rookie mistake? Here’s my take:

If you field a double off the wall in the right field corner, wildly fling the ball over the head of the cutoff man and give up an extra base, that’s a rookie mistake.

If you pull someone over on your first night as a cop, forget to put your patrol car in park and then watch it roll over your foot as you’re writing a ticket, that’s a rookie mistake.

Rodriguez is charged with taking $26,000 of his own money and redistributing it through an intermediary to 25 people, mostly friends and relatives — who donated $24,250 to his 2015 campaign for school board.

What’s that smell like to you?

A rookie mistake, or a premeditated strategy to work around campaign law?

The L.A. district attorney’s office, which has filed 25 misdemeanor charges along with the three felonies, seems to think Rodriguez pulled off a money-laundering scheme.

And here’s the most interesting thing about the case:

If Rodriguez had donated the $26,000 to himself, that would have been legal because there’s no limit on how much you can dump into your own campaign.

So this leaves the jaded among us to wonder if Rodriguez —who has admitted to nothing, and whose lawyer did not return my call — wanted it to appear as if he had support from ordinary people, rather than just the charter-advocating high-rollers who bankrolled his campaign.

If so, here are some pointers for future reference:

Tip 1: If you want to make it look as if you’re a strong enough candidate to attract donations from working people, try to find more working stiffs who aren’t relatives or employees at the charter school organization you founded.

Tip 2. Janitors and tutors do not typically donate between $775 and $1,100 to school board candidates, and when they do, it raises suspicion.

Tip 3. Never, ever, drag your own mother into a harebrained, bone-head scheme, even if your name is Soprano. There is no way to reverse that kind of bad karma.

As prosecutors lay it out, Rodriguez cashed out a business investment and wrote the $26,000 check to a female cousin, who has also been criminally charged. The cousin — an administrator at the charter school Rodriguez started — is suspected of depositing the money into a bank account under the names of Rodriguez’s parents. Prosecutors say Rodriguez’s mother then signed 16 checks for friends and family members who were listed as donors to her son’s campaign.

I know, innocent until proven guilty. But this sounds like one hell of a rookie “mistake.” And if you’re someone who frets about awkward conversation at family gatherings during the holidays, just thank the holy gobbler you’re not spending Thanksgiving with the Rodriguez clan this year.

This was a fairly sophisticated strategy on Ref’s part, and he faces a criminal indictment.

He stepped aside as board president, but did not leave the board. So many millions were spent to get him elected, and he does not want to disappoint his backers, who funded one of the dirtiest campaigns ever seen in Los Angeles (his ads mocked his highly qualified opponent, Bennett Kayser, for his age and disability). He wanted to make sure the pro-charter majority maintained its control. He knew for two years that he was under criminal investigation, but kept this to himself.

Now, investigators and journalists will look closer at Ref’s finances. Where did the $26,000 come from? It is not only “the union” that wants to know. It is anyone who cares about ethics in government.

Stepping aside and keeping his seat is wrong. He should resign from his position from the board at once.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corruption, Ethics, Los Angeles

Andrea Gabor: The Dark Money That Underwrote the Charter Campaign in Massachusetts

By dianeravitch
September 28, 2017 //
13

Andrea Gabor writes here about the dark money campaign to persuade voters in Massachusetts to lift the cap on charter schools last November. The dark money came pouring in, but suffered a crushing defeat when voters weighed in. Andrea worked closely with Peggy Wiesenberg, a Massachusetts attorney and parent of three public-school graduates. Peggy wrote to tell me that KIPP is planning to open two new charters in Lynn, Massachusetts, despite the fact that the people of Lynn don’t want more charter schools. Governor Baker, a Republican, has added two new charter supporters to the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education; one is a board member of KIPP, the other is a Harvard scholar funded by the Walton Family Foundation:

KIPP plans to expand in Massachusetts by adding two schools in Lynn per a pending request to increase enrollment by 1,014 seats (up from 1,586 in Lynn). The Mass. Board of Elementary and Secondary Education will take up that request in Feb 2018.
See”Charter Amendment Requests Pending BESE Action (Grades, or Maximum Enrollment, or Change to Charter Region)” http://www.doe.mass.edu/news/news.aspx?id=24563

One of the two new BESE members appointed by Gov Baker is on the Board of Trustees of KIPP MA; the other Martin West whose scholarly work has been funded by the Walton Family Foundation.

But, back to the new post by Andrea Gabor:

The New York-based Families for Excellent Schools added about a third of the $45 million spent to push charter schools. Pro-public education advocates spent nearly $16 million.

“Voters defeated Question 2 by a stunning 62-to-38 margin–an endorsement of Massachusetts public schools, which are rated number one in the nation. But not for lack of efforts by organizations like FESA, which allowed a slew of wealthy contributors to hide their identities and their sizeable contributions in support of the referendum. In some cases individuals contributed twice: Once through a ballot committee that was required, by law, to publish names of contributors, and a second substantially greater contribution, in some cases millions more, via FESA.

“At the top of the list of FESA’s secret donors were public officials in the Massachusetts government. Governor Charlie Baker was a leading proponent of Question 2 and backed efforts to impose charter schools in towns, like Brockton, where there was widespread local opposition.

“Normally, nonprofits organized under IRS Code 501(3), such as Families for Excellent Schools (FES), don’t have to reveal the names of donors so long as they are not engaging in political activity. And ordinarily, their affiliated social-welfare nonprofits, organized under IRS Code 501(c)(4), such as FESA, can have some political involvement in electoral politics and keep donors secret, so long as this is not their primary activity. However, if the organization is a vehicle for receiving contributions for a ballot campaign, then the voting public is entitled to know the names of each contributor and the amount donated before the election.”

FES was fined more than $400,000, the largest fine ever imposed by the state for a campaign finance violation.

Here are some of the big donors:

“The campaign-finance disposition agreement has revealed other backers of Question 2 who used FESA contributions to hide the full value of their donations in support of the charter-school referendum including:

“Paul Sagan, Chair of the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, who contributed $496,000 on August 4 and 5 in addition to his previously disclosed contribution of $100,000 on August 10, 2016.

“Seth Klarman, Investment Manager of the Baupost Group LLC, contributed $3 million within six months of the election in addition to his previously disclosed contribution of $40,000 in September 2015.

“Jonathan Jacobson, Managing Director Highfields Capital Management LP, contributed $2 million in August and October. That’s in addition to the previously disclosed contribution of $40,000 in September 2015 by his wife Joanna, Managing Partner of Strategic Grant Partners, another dark money vehicle, according to Professor Maurice Cunningham of UMass Boston…

“Josh Bekenstein, a Bain Capital investor, and his wife Anita, a private philanthropist, each contributed $750,000 in August and $500,000 on October 2016 for a combined total of $1.5 million, in addition to Josh’s previously disclosed contribution of $40,000 in September 2015.

“Chuck L. Longfield, Founder of Target Analytics and Chief Scientist at Blackbaud, funneled $650,000 to FESA under the name “Chuck Longfield,” in addition to a previously disclosed contribution of $100,000 under the name “Charles Longfield” on August 2016 and $1,000 in November 2015. [The OCPF filings have a discrepancy in the house number associated with Longfield’s contributions—in all likelihood a typographical error.] Longfield went on WBUR radio on October 31, 2016 to explain why he gave $100,000 in support of raising the cap on charter schools, never mentioning the exponentially larger contribution that he made through FESA to lift the cap.

“Martin Mannion, Managing Director of Summit Partners, contributed $100,000 to FESA between August and October 2016 in addition to a disclosed campaign contribution of $30,000 in October 2016.

“Alice Walton contributed $750,000 to FESA on November 2016 in addition to her previously disclosed contribution of $710,000 to Yes On 2, another campaign committee, in July.

“The Boston Globe reports that in addition to paying the fine, and revealing its donors, the group also “agreed with the IRS to dissolve itself, and Families for Excellent Schools, its umbrella group, agreed not to fund-raise or engage in any election-related activity in Massachusetts for four years.”

Gabor says that New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman may look into the “Families for Excellent Schools,” a political group of millionaires and billionaires with no purpose other than to destroy and privatize public schools.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Dark Money, Massachusetts

FAIRTEST: The SAT Scores are a Hoax

By dianeravitch
September 28, 2017 //
28

FairTest has been fighting the misuse of standardized testing since 1973. This is the statement it released about the SAT scores that were just released. It is all about the Benjamins (test fees), not the kids:

FairTest Reaction to Class of 2017 SAT Results

2017 SAT SCORES “CAN’T BE COMPARED TO PREVIOUS RESULTS” BECAUSE

“REDESIGNED” EXAM IS “MARKETING PLOY DESIGNED TO SELL MORE TESTS”;

LAUNCH FAILS TO SLOW SURGE OF SCHOOLS BECOMING TEST-OPTIONAL;

980+ COLLEGES, UNIVERSITIES NOW DO NOT REQUIRE SAT OR ACT SCORES

The College Board, the SAT’s sponsor, warns that scores released this week “can’t be compared to previous results.” That is because the revised exam is “a marketing ploy designed to sell more tests, not a better tool for tracking college readiness,” according to Bob Schaeffer, Public Education Director of the National Center for Fair & Open Testing (FairTest).

“The College Board is a test-selling company,” Schaeffer explained. “Based on its public tax returns, the Board takes in more than $900 million each year. It holds assets topping one billion dollars. The firm’s president receives nearly $900,000 in annual compensation.”

“The SAT redesign aimed to reposition the Board’s flagging, flagship product,” Schaeffer continued. “It hoped to stave off further growth of the rival ACT, which has become the nation’s most popular college entrance exam. Most importantly, it tried to stem the rapidly growing movement toward test-optional admissions policies.”

Schaeffer concluded, “Since plans for the revised test were announced, more than 100 colleges and universities dropped SAT and ACT requirements. That’s a pace of one every two weeks. Schools increasingly recognize they do not need the SAT – old or new – to make high quality admissions decisions.”

More than 980 accredited, bachelor-degree institutions now will evaluate all or many applicants without regard to test scores. The list of test-optional schools includes almost 300 ranked in the top tiers of their categories by U.S. News & World Report.

Here is a list of test-optional institutions.

Comprehensive free directory of 980+ test-optional and test-flexible colleges and universities: http://fairtest.org/university/optional

List of 290+ schools that de-emphasize ACT/SAT scores ranked in U.S News’ top tiers

Click to access Optional-Schools-in-U.S.News-Top-Tiers.pdf

Chronology of higher education institutions dropping admissions testing requirements

http://www.fairtest.org/sites/default/files/Optional-Growth-Chronology.pdf

Categories Education Industry, Testing

A Message to Trump: HELP THE PEOPLE OF PUERTO RICO!

By dianeravitch
September 27, 2017 //
82

Trump held a press conference yesterday to boast about how effective he has been in aiding the people of Puerto Rico, who are American citizens.

The news coverage of Puerto Rico tells a different story.

Large parts of the island are without power. Some parts of the island will be without electricity for months. People need the basic necessities of life. No doubt Trump thinks this is “fake news” and that he is the best president ever, ever, ever, and he deserves our thanks.

Churches, synagogues, and mosques will be collecting supplies for the people of Puerto Rico this weekend. But that will not be enough. It won’t turn the power back on.

Why doesn’t Trump send in the Army Corps of Engineers to restore power throughout the island?

Why doesn’t he send tankers and ships loaded with food and water, with diapers and cleaning supplies, with medical supplies?

Why doesn’t he stop bragging and take action to save lives?

People will die because of his inaction and indifference.

Is he indifferent because Puerto Ricans speak Spanish?

Puerto Ricans are Americans. They deserve the aid and support of the federal government to pull through this emergency.

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post wrote an article probing Trump’s indifference to Puerto Rico and comparing it to his response to the hurricane damage in Texas and Florida:

Milbank wrote:

Suppose that the entire San Diego metropolitan area had lost electrical power, and it wouldn’t be restored for months.

Or, suppose that most of the ports, roads and cellular towers in the Seattle metropolitan area had been destroyed, and a major dam had failed.

Or, that most of the homes in the Twin Cities area of Minnesota were either damaged or destroyed in one day.

Or, that the combined populations of New Hampshire, Maine and Vermont had seen much of their forests and agricultural land wiped out.

Or, that the residents of Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming — combined — had lost access to food and clean water, leaving them vulnerable to cholera. And imagine that overflowing hospitals, without power, had no capacity to deal with an outbreak.

Now, imagine that in response to any of these scenarios, the president of the United States variously ignored the plight of the affected Americans (in all of the above cases about 3.4 million people, give or take), blamed them for their own troubles and provided inadequate help. This is precisely what is happening right now to the 3.4 million U.S. citizens of Puerto Rico, an island territory more populous than about 20 states. Hurricane Maria essentially wiped out these Americans’ ports, roads, electricity, communications, water supply and crops and many homes. Yet, a week after the storm, the response from the American mainland has been paltry.

There is no rush, as there was after Hurricane Harvey hit Texas, to approve the emergency funds that Puerto Rico will surely need. There has been no massive movement of military personnel and equipment to Puerto Rico: no aircraft carrier (one was sent to the Florida Keys in response to Hurricane Irma), no hospital ship (finally on Tuesday afternoon the Navy said it was sending one). The Post’s Joel Achenbach, Dan Lamothe and Alex Horton called the three Navy amphibious ships dispatched to Puerto Rico “a modest fleet given the scale of the crisis.”

President Trump, so visible when Harvey and Irma hit, all but ignored the devastation that Maria brought to Puerto Rico, devoting more attention to respect for the flag at NFL games. When he did turn his focus to Puerto Rico on Monday, it was to say that the island “was already suffering from broken infrastructure & massive debt” and that its “old electrical grid, which was in terrible shape, was devastated. Much of the Island was destroyed, with billions of dollars . . . owed to Wall Street and the banks which, sadly, must be dealt with.”

Two Trump Cabinet members, Energy Secretary Rick Perry (who traveled with Trump to Texas and Florida after hurricanes there) and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, made a joint public appearance Monday but didn’t even mention Puerto Rico. And the Trump administration said it would not assist Puerto Rico by waiving the Jones Act, which restricts the use of foreign cargo ships, after waiving the act in response to Harvey and Irma.

Why didn’t Trump care?

Categories Education Reform
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »