Archives for the month of: October, 2017

Once in a while, an elected official stands up and speaks truth to power.

Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona did that today when he announced he would not run again.

Please read his remarks.

If you want the Cliff Notes version, it is here.

It was a powerful speech, which accurately captured the damage that Trump has done to our politics, our alliances, our policies, the very tone of government.

Trump, through his surrogate Steve Bannon, has declared war on the Republican Party. Bannon, using the funding of the arch-reactiomary Mercer Family, is purging the party of moderates. Who will be next? As Flake said, we must not normalize Trump’s coarseness, vindictiveness, and incoherence.

Here is Senator Flake’s speech:

______
JEFF FLAKE, Senator from Arizona: At a moment when it seems that our democracy is more defined by our discord and our dysfunction than by our own values and principles, let me begin by noting the somewhat obvious point that these offices that we hold are not ours indefinitely. We are not here simply to mark time. Sustained incumbency is certainly not the point of seeking office and there are times when we must risk our careers in favor of our principles. Now is such a time.

It must also be said that I rise today with no small measure of regret. Regret because of the state of our disunion. Regret because of the disrepair and destructiveness of our politics. Regret because of the indecency of our discourse. Regret because of the coarseness of our leadership.

Regret for the compromise of our moral authority, and by our, I mean all of our complicity in this alarming and dangerous state of affairs. It is time for our complicity and our accommodation of the unacceptable to end. In this century, a new phrase has entered the language to describe the accommodation of a new and undesirable order, that phrase being the new normal.

But we must never adjust to the present coarseness of our national dialogue with the tone set up at the top. We must never regard as normal the regular and casual undermining of our democratic norms and ideals. We must never meekly accept the daily sundering of our country. The personal attacks, the threats against principles, freedoms and institution, the flagrant disregard for truth and decency.

The reckless provocations, most often for the pettiest and most personal reasons, reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with the fortunes of the people that we have been elected to serve. None of these appalling features of our current politics should ever be regarded as normal. We must never allow ourselves to lapse into thinking that that is just the way things are now.

If we simply become inured to this condition, thinking that it is just politics as usual, then heaven help us. Without fear of the consequences and without consideration of the rules of what is politically safe or palatable, we must stop pretending that the degradation of our politics and the conduct of some in our executive branch are normal. They are not normal. Reckless, outrageous and undignified behavior has become excused and countenanced as telling it like it is when it is actually just reckless, outrageous and undignified.

And when such behavior emanates from the top of our government, it is something else. It is dangerous to a democracy. Such behavior does not project strength because our strength comes from our values. It instead projects a corruption of the spirit and weakness. It is often said that children are watching. Well, they are. And what are we going to do about that? When the next generation asks us, ‘Why didn’t you do something? Why didn’t you speak up?’ What are we going to say?

Mr. President, I rise today to say: enough. We must dedicate ourselves to making sure that the anomalous never becomes the normal. With respect and humility, I must say that we have fooled ourselves for long enough that a pivot to governing is right around the corner, a return to civility and stability right behind it.

We know better than that. By now, we all know better than that. Here today I stand to say that we would be better served — we would better serve the country — by better fulfilling our obligations under the Constitution by adhering to our Article 1 — “old normal,” Mr. Madison’s doctrine of separation of powers. This genius innovation which affirms Madison’s status as a true visionary — and for which Madison argued in Federalist 51 — held that the equal branches of our government would balance and counteract with each other, if necessary.

“Ambition counteracts ambition,” he wrote. But what happens if ambition fails to counteract ambition? What happens if stability fails to assert itself in the face of chaos and instability? If decency fails to call out indecency? Were the shoe on the other foot, we Republicans — would we Republicans meekly accept such behavior on display from dominant Democrats?

Of course, we wouldn’t, and we would be wrong if we did. When we remain silent and fail to act, when we know that silence and inaction is the wrong thing to do because of political considerations, because we might make enemies, because we might alienate the base, because we might provoke a primary challenge, because ad infinitum, ad nauseam, when we succumb to those considerations in spite of what should be greater considerations and imperatives in defense of our institutions and our liberty, we dishonor our principles and forsake our obligations. Those things are far more important than politics.

Now, I’m aware that more politically savvy people than I will caution against such talk. I’m aware that there’s a segment of my party that believes that anything short of complete and unquestioning loyalty to a president who belongs to my party is unacceptable and suspect. If I have been critical, it is not because I relish criticizing the behavior of the president of the United States.

If I have been critical, it is because I believe it is my obligation to do so. And as a matter and duty of conscience, the notion that one should stay silent — and as the norms and values that keep America strong are undermined and as the alliances and agreements that ensure the stability of the entire world are routinely threatened by the level of thought that goes into 140 characters — the notion that we should say or do nothing in the face of such mercurial behavior is ahistoric and, I believe, profoundly misguided.

A president, a Republican president named Roosevelt, had this to say about the president and a citizen’s relationship to the office: “The president is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able and disinterested service to the nation as a whole.”

He continued: “Therefore, it is absolutely necessary that there should be — that there should be a full liberty to tell the truth about his acts and this means that it is exactly as necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile.” President Roosevelt continued, “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president or that we are to stand by a president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Acting on conscience and principle in a manner — is the manner — in which we express our moral selves and as such, loyalty to conscience and principle should supersede loyalty to any man or party. We can all be forgiven for failing in that measure from time to time. I certainly put myself at the top of the list of those who fall short in this regard. I am holier than none.

But too often we rush to salvage principle — not to salvage principle, but to forgive and excuse our failures so that we might accommodate them and go right on failing until the accommodation itself becomes our principle. In that way and over time, we can justify almost any behavior and sacrifice any principle. I am afraid that this is where we now find ourselves.

When a leader correctly identifies real hurt and insecurity in our country, and instead of addressing it, goes to look for someone to blame, there is perhaps nothing more devastating to a pluralistic society. Leadership knows that most often a good place to start in assigning blame is to look somewhat closer to home. Leadership knows where the buck stops.

Humility helps, character counts. Leadership does not knowingly encourage or feed ugly or debased appetites in us. Leadership lives by the American creed, “E pluribus unum.” From many one. American leadership looks to the world and just as Lincoln did, sees the family of man. Humanity is not a zero sum game. When we have been at our most prosperous, we have been at our most principled, and when we do well, the rest of the world does well.

These articles of civic faith have been critical to the American identity for as long as we have been alive. They are our birthright and our obligation. We must guard them jealously and pass them on for as long as the calendar has days. To betray them or to be unserious in their defense is a betrayal of the fundamental obligations of American leadership and to behave as if they don’t matter is simply not who we are.

Now the efficacy of American leadership around the globe has come into question. When the United States emerged from World War II, we contributed about half of the world’s economic activity. It would have been easy to secure our dominance keeping those countries who had been defeated or greatly weakened during the war in their place. We didn’t do that. It would have been easy to focus inward.

We resisted those impulses. Instead, we financed reconstruction of shattered countries and created international organizations and institutions that have helped provide security and foster prosperity around the world for more than 70 years.

Now it seems that we, the architects of this visionary rules-based world order that has brought so much freedom and prosperity, are the ones most eager to abandon it. The implications of this abandonment are profound and the beneficiaries of this rather radical departure in the American approach to the world are the ideological enemies of our values. Despotism loves a vacuum and our allies are now looking elsewhere for leadership. Why are they doing this? None of this is normal.

And what do we, as United States senators, have to say about it? The principles that underlie our politics, the values of our founding, are too vital to our identity and to our survival to allow them to be compromised by the requirements of politics because politics can make us silent when we should speak and silence can equal complicity. I have children and grandchildren to answer to.

And so, Mr. President, I will not be complicit or silent. I’ve decided that I would be better able to represent the people of Arizona and to better serve my country and my conscience by freeing myself of the political consideration that consumed far too much bandwidth and would cause me to compromise far too many principles.

To that end, I’m announcing today that my service in the Senate will conclude at the end of my term in early January 2019. It is clear at this moment that a traditional conservative, who believes in limited government and free markets, who is devoted to free trade, who is pro-immigration, has a narrower and narrower path to nomination in the Republican Party, the party that has so long defined itself by its belief in those things.

It is also clear to me for the moment that we have given in or given up on the core principles in favor of a more viscerally satisfying anger and resentment. To be clear, the anger and resentment that the people feel at the royal mess that we’ve created are justified. But anger and resentment are not a governing philosophy.

There is an undeniable potency to a populist appeal by mischaracterizing or misunderstanding our problems and giving in to the impulse to scapegoat and belittle — the impulse to scapegoat and belittle threatens to turn us into a fearful, backward-looking people. In the case of the Republican Party, those things also threaten to turn us into a fearful, backward-looking minority party.

We were not made great as a country by indulging in or even exalting our worst impulses, turning against ourselves, glorifying in the things that divide us, and calling fake things true and true things fake. And we did not become the beacon of freedom in the darkest corners of the world by flouting our institutions and failing to understand just how hard-won and vulnerable they are.

This spell will eventually break. That is my belief. We will return to ourselves once more, and I say the sooner the better. Because we have a healthy government, we must also have healthy and functioning parties. We must respect each other again in an atmosphere of shared facts and shared values, comity and good faith. We must argue our positions fervently and never be afraid to compromise. We must assume the best of our fellow man, and always look for the good.
Until that day comes, we must be unafraid to stand up and speak out as if our country depends on it, because it does. I plan to spend the remaining 14 months of my Senate term doing just that.

Mr. President, the graveyard is full of indispensable men and women. None of us here is indispensable nor were even the great figures of history who toiled at these very desks, in this very chamber, to shape the country that we have inherited. What is indispensable are the values that they consecrated in Philadelphia and in this place, values which have endured and will endure for so long as men and women wish to remain free.

What is indispensable is what we do here in defense of those values. A political career does not mean much if we are complicit in undermining these values. I thank my colleagues for indulging me here today.

I will close by borrowing the words of President Lincoln, who knew more about healthy enmity and preserving our founding values than any other American who has ever lived. His words from his first inaugural were a prayer in his time and are now no less in ours.

“We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break the bonds of our affection. The mystic chords of memory will swell when again touched, as surely as they will be, by the better angels of our nature.”

Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

A large group of parents wrote a letter of complaint to Eva Moskowitz about the harsh discipline at their Success Academy school in her new space, which appears to attract a white, middle-class enrollment. They objected to the no-excuses code, which they say broke their children’s spirit.

Here is the parents’ letter.

https://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/2017/10/hudson-yards-success-charter-parents-to.html

A group of parents at Eva Moskowitz’s New $68 Million flagship Success Academy don’t like the boot camp discipline and heavy homework nightly.

“Moskowitz’s heavily hyped Success Academy Hudson Yards Middle School, which so far enrolls about 200 kids in grades five and six, is meant to be a model for her to share her education gospel with schools from around the world through a new Education Institute that was launched at the school in June.

“But already Moskowitz has encountered some difficulties.

“An anonymous group of parents at the school has sent scathing letters to Moskowitz and Hudson Yards Principal Malik Russell that decry what they call draconian disciplinary tactics.

“The parents charge Russell gives detention for minor infractions such as failing to clasp their hands, failing to make eye contact and inadvertently breaking wind in class.

“It’s like a military-style boot camp,” said one of the parents, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation.

“The kids have two hours of homework a night,” the parent added. “They don’t have time for playdates, they have no time for a life.”

As Trump would say, “they knew what they signed up for.” Draconian discipline.

As Betsy DeVos would say, “Get out and make another choice.”

A Cub Scout was thrown out of his pack after he asked a state legislator why she supported gun legislation that allowed a wife-beater to own a gun. The brave little boy then asked why owning a gun was a right but having health coverage was a privilege.

Shame on his pack leader!

Exercising free speech is a right too!

No wonder membership in the Boy Scouts is declining and they opened membership to girls. Let’s hope they are as outspoken as Ames Mayfield.

The New York Times reports:

“When a group of Cub Scouts met with a Colorado state senator this month, they asked her about some of the most controversial topics in the nation: gun control, the environment, race and the proposed border wall between the United States and Mexico.

“But questions from one Cub Scout, Ames Mayfield, 11, got him kicked out of his den in Broomfield, Colo., according to his mother, Lori Mayfield. At the meeting on Oct. 9, for which the scouts were told to prepare questions for State Senator Vicki Marble, Ms. Mayfield recorded her son asking the senator why she would not support “common-sense gun laws.”

“I was shocked that you co-sponsored a bill to allow domestic violence offenders to continue to own a gun,” Ames said in a question that took more than two minutes. He continued, “Why on earth would you want somebody who beats their wife to have access to a gun?”

“The event took place not long after the Las Vegas shooting. As part of her answer, Ms. Marble, a Republican from Fort Collins, defended her position on gun ownership, saying that shootings in Las Vegas and Aurora, Colo., happened in so-called gun-free zones, and that “the more guns a society has, the less crime or murders are committed.”

“On Oct. 14, five days after the event with Ms. Marble, Ms. Mayfield was asked to meet the leader of the Cub Scout pack who oversees a number of dens in Broomfield, including the one Ames belonged to.

“Ms. Mayfield and the pack leader, whom she did not identify, sat down at a Chipotle restaurant that afternoon. “He let me know in so many words that the den leader was upset about the topic of gun control,” Ms. Mayfield said in an interview on Saturday. “It was too politically charged.”

“He communicated that my son was no longer welcome back to the den,” she said.

“Ms. Mayfield said the den leader’s response might have been fueled by her decision to post the videos of the senator’s interaction with the scouts online, where they were picked up by the local news media.

“She also said she was told the den leader had been upset by other references in Ames’s long question, such as pointing out that the senator was a Republican and that gun ownership was considered a right while health care was seen as a privilege.”

Ames has a bright future ahead of him.

Anthony Cody writes here about the political power of teachers and how it should be used.

Cody reports on a discussion between Barbara Madeloni of the Massachusetts Teachers Association and Eric Heins of the California Teachers Association at the Network for Public Education Conference last week in Oakland.

Barbara Madeloni believes in the importance of building a movement. It was that movement, working closely with parents that defeated a referendum to expand charter schools in the state last fall.

In California, the powerful California Teachers Association just gave its endorsement for governor to Gavin Newsom, even though he refused to take a position as between the charter lobby and public schools and couldn’t say whether he was for or against teachers.

This is what Newsom said some weeks earlier, in a public appearance:

“I’m not interested in the stale and raging debate about which side, which camp you’re on – are you with the charter people, are you anti-charter, are you with the teachers, are you anti-teacher. I’ve been hearing that damn debate for ten damn years. With all due respect, I got four kids. I have an eight year old, second grade. I have a five, three and a one year old. I’m not gonna wait around until they’ve all graduated to resolve whether Eli Broad was right or whether or not the CTA was wrong. I’m not interested in that debate. I’m interested in shaping a different conversation around a 21st century education system that brings people together, that could shape public opinion, not just here in the state, but could shape an agenda more broadly across the country, particularly in a time of Betsy DeVos and Donald Trump. We need that kind of leadership.”

With views like these, will Newsom remember that he was endorsed by the CTA? Will he care? Is he unsure whether he is for or against teachers? How can anyone who cares about education be against teachers? How can they be bored and indifferent to galloping privatization? It is views like these that laid the groundwork for Betsy DeVos.

This post is a real tour de force. That means that Mercedes Schneider has managed to say something truly original, which I hope you will read in full.

Betsy DeVos is constantly saying how much she wants the best for every child, how urgent it is to let parents have charter schools, voucher schools, for-profit schools, cybercharters, almost anything but public schools. Despite her protestations, she is contemptuous of public schools and has spent many millions through her American Federation for Children to advance privatization.

So zmercedes uses her post to tell you what Betsy would say if she spoke her mind, without covering up any of her thoughts.

She begins like this.

“First of all, I’d like to thank all of you for coming because I appreciate yet another opportunity to campaign in a manner that ultimately promotes my favorite minority, the one to which I belong: America’s elite among elite, those possessing the top .1% in American net worth.

“One way to understand my elitist motivations is to study the history and positions of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Of course, I would have preferred that ALEC be kept from public awareness, which it was for almost four decades. However, the unfortunate truth is that those without the interests of corporate America in mind destroyed that beautiful ALEC secrecy in 2012.

“The ALEC end game is to supplant federal control over states with corporate control. We prefer to promote this idea as federalism, or state control. The reality is states are ripe for control, and that control might as well come from moneyed interests– the .1%– rather than the federal government.

“The beauty in promoting “state control” is that those outside of the top .1% (or, let’s be generous, outside of the top 1%) hear the term “state control” and equate it with “local control.” Though I occasionally mention local control, I do not ultimately advocate for local control. You will not hear me give a speech in which I advocate replacing state control with local control. Local control is too close to you people, and, as such, corporate interests become more difficult to serve because it is the state legislators (and therefore, statehouses) that ALEC corporations control, not usually the local politicians.

“Besides, we lose the ability to hide our ALEC intentions behind federal scapegoating if we do not center our pseudo-local arguments on state control, and the best way to fool the public is to divert attention from the corporate control we desire by actively campaigning for federal control over states as the ultimate problem.”

Keep reading.

Meet the real Betsy.

Unvarnished.

Scientists from the Environmental Protection Agency were scheduled to speak at a conference about the condition and future of Narragansett Bay in Rhode Island.

At the last minute, the agency told them they were not allowed to speak, presumably because the conference and their testimony involved climate change.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/10/23/let-us-do-our-job-anger-erupts-over-epas-muzzling-of-scientists/

EPA administrator believes there is no such thing as climate change. Apparently there is also no such thing as science. “Science” is what he and industry lobbyists say it is.

EPA should be called the Environmental (Non)Protection Administration so long as Pruitt and his ilk are in charge.

The American Federation of Teachers is joining with other concerned citizens to bring water to the people of Puerto Rico, a vital mission that seems to have been forgotten by the Trump administration.

Randi Weingarten sent out the following information:

“Responding to the water crisis unfolding in Puerto Rico, AFT, Operation Blessing, AFSCME, and the Hispanic Foundation launched Operation Agua today to crowdsource contributions and provide a reliable source of safe drinking water to families across Puerto Rico.

“More than a month after Hurricane Maria devastated the island, most Puerto Ricans still have no reliable source of safe drinking water. When I was in Puerto Rico last week, I saw with my own eyes children collecting water in streams that were likely severely contaminated. We know people are collecting water from runoff or even drinking from toxic Superfund sites. And even the water coming out of the tap is unsafe because there is no electricity to run treatment facilities. The federal government has failed the people of Puerto Rico and we need to continue to fight to get the federal response this disaster requires. But we must also continue to do what we can to care for Puerto Rico children and families. Our campaign isn’t a substitute for federal action but a necessary intervention to get as much clean water as quickly as we can to people.

“Operation Agua’s initial goal is to purchase and distribute 100,000 individual water filtration systems for households and classrooms and 50 large capacity clean water devices to a network of non-profit organizations, union offices , schools and other community based groups to provide stable and reliable sources of safe water.

“A single $30 contribution provides an in-home purifier that requires no electricity and filters and provides more than 10 gallons of safe water per day to a family. $5,000 delivers a disinfectant generator that can disinfect 150,000 gallons per day—enough safe water for hundreds of people.

“Here’s more information about Operation Agua and how organizations and individuals cane become sponsors.

Recently I have been tweeting The Onion, not posting it, even when I thought it was funny.

But this post is so real, so not-funny, and so representative of what is happening that I wanted to share it with you.

It is about Trump’s insistence on intruding into our lives every day, dominating our thoughts with concern about what crazy thing he will do next, what crackpot nonsense he will tweet, which institution he will destroy next, which person he will insult today. It is exhausting and fascinating, like watching a violent car crash and wondering if you too will crash into the wreckage.

It begins like this:

“Good morning, everyone! What a week we’ve got coming up. A tremendous week. The fall season is here, we’re working on huge tax cuts, and there’s a lot of optimism having to do with business in our economy. Also, we’re ending Obamacare. And I’m going to get the wall. But beyond all that, what I’m looking forward to the most is another seven days of infecting every little aspect of your daily lives.

“Oh, you thought you might be able to block me out for even a moment? Good luck with that one. There will be no rest from having to think about me, or my administration, or the latest controversy I’ve thrown myself into. I am inescapable. My name, my face, my voice, my words, and those of my legions of surrogates—no matter how much you try to go about your normal life, I will find a way force myself in. MAGA!

“I will poison every second of quiet reflection that you previously enjoyed.

“I’m like a disease without a cure. There’s not a single thing I haven’t contaminated. News, entertainment, medicine, sports; if there’s a part of culture I haven’t ruined for you yet, just wait. This could be the week. I’ll either claw my way into your waking consciousness or just linger in the back of your mind, ready to pop out at any moment and remind you that I’m the president of the United States and will be for at least the next three years. You know that sickening feeling in the pit of your stomach—the one that’s been there since last November? Well, it’s not going away this week, I’ll tell you that.

“I will poison every second of quiet reflection that you previously enjoyed. No more sitting calmly with a coffee on a park bench. No more carefree drives with the windows down and the radio up. No more tranquil moments reveling in the splendor of a sunset. Just me festering in your brain, befouling all you hold dear.

“The mind is funny like that sometimes. The second you’ve freed yourself from the burden of having to ponder my ironclad stranglehold on absolutely every facet of American life, there I’ll be again, ready to resume the endless cycle of fear, regret, anger, and shame. Go ahead, try and tune me out right now.

“Donald Trump. Donald Trump. Donald Trump.”

Read the rest.

The Washington Post reports that his daily attacks on the free press are undermining public confidence in the media.

“THE BIG IDEA: Donald Trump celebrated Sunday that his campaign to delegitimize the free press is working.

“The president touted a Politico-Morning Consult poll published last week that found 46 percent of registered voters believe major news organizations fabricate stories about him. Just 37 percent of Americans think the mainstream media does not invent stories, while the rest are undecided. More than 3 in 4 Republicans believe reporters make up stories about Trump.

“It is finally sinking through,” the president tweeted.

“The first rule of propaganda is that if you repeat something enough times people will start to believe it, no matter how false. Trump uses the bully pulpit of the presidency to dismiss any journalism he doesn’t like as “fake news.” This daily drumbeat has clearly taken a toll on the Fourth Estate.”

The first rule of a would-be dictator is to destroy confidence in the free press.

Trump swore on the Bible at his inauguration to uphold the Constitution. That includes the First Amendment. His daily attacks on freedom of the press, which he called “the Enemy of the People,” violates the oath he took. The term “Ennemy of the People” was borrowed from Josef Stalin.

He also daily violates the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution by accepting payments from foreign governments in Trump properties and brands around the world and refusing to divest his business interests.

Two grounds for impeachment even without the Russia investigation.

The Network for Public Education just held its fourth annual conference in Oakland, California, on October 14-15.

It was a fabulous conference, with great speakers, roundtables, panels, and camaraderie.

I opened the conference on October 14. I introduced our wonderful board and staff (we have 1.5 staff members and hundreds of amazing volunteers).

I described what we are for and what we oppose.

If you agree with us, please join, donate whatever you can, and help us continue our grassroots efforts to strengthen and support public education.

In the days ahead, I will post all the keynote addresses. They were fantastic.

If you knew how inspiring these two days were, you will want to join us next year. I can’t give the location yet, but we will meet in the Midwest.