In 2018, California will elect a new governor to replace Jerry Brown. Brown has been an ally to the charter industry, which has been allowed to proliferate with minimal accountability. This great blue state has put the future of public education at risk. Major funders—California’s Silicon Valley billionaires and of course Eli Broad—are all in for charters and privatization. Netflix founder Reed Hastings gives millions to the California Charter Schools Association, and he has asserted that elected school boards should be replaced by thousands of autonomous charter schools. Absent supervision and accountability, corruption is predictable.
Tom Ultican, who left Silicon Valley to become a high school teacher of physics and math, writes here about the governors’ race.
The candidate with the most money is Gavin Newsom, the former mayor of San Francisco. He has received campaign contributions from Silicon Valley, like Trump friend Peter Thiel. Strangely, he received the endorsement of the California Teachers Association, although Newsom publicly said that he was neither anti-teacher nor pro-teacher. His money comes from charter supporters, but Newsom will have the troops supplied by CTA.
CTA has to d3cide whether it will have a seat at the table or will be on the menu. The Vergara case demonstrated how eager the tech entrepreneurs are to destroy unions and teachers’ rights.
Tom Ultican explains why he, as an educator, will support State Treasurer John Chiang.
Chiang has collected the second largest pot of funding, Not from Silicon Valley billionaires, but from mostly Chinese-Americans.
Ultican writes:
“Because of the relentless attacks on public schools and educators, candidate views on education are key. Many self-styled “progressive democrats,” have adopted education positions attacking teachers’ unions and promoting privatization (Rahm Emanuel, Corey Booker, Antonio Villaraigosa). Some position statements promulgated by Chiang’s campaign:
In 1988, California voters approved Proposition 98, which requires a minimum percentage of the state budget to be spent on K-12 education. Unfortunately, while Proposition 98 was meant to create a constitutional “floor” for education spending, it has turned into a political ceiling. As a result, California is grossly under-invested in public education.”
“We also must protect the collective bargaining rights of our educators, classified employees, professors, early childhood educators and child care providers. It is critically important that the people who interact with our students and children every day have a seat at the table and a voice on the job to advocate for the best conditions possible for our children to learn.”
“We must also increase both the quantity and quality of California’s early childhood education programs and assure free access for all working families.
“We also know that small class sizes are the key to improving student learning. We need to expand the Class Size Reduction program so our students have every opportunity to learn.”
“Cities and states across the nation are jumping on board and are finding innovative solutions to provide two free years of community college. California needs to find a way to get to that place, where we make community college free while ensuring students are on the right path through participation and graduation.”
“To reclaim the promise of quality education, we must ensure that children and their families have access to wraparound services to meet their social, emotional and health needs.”
Read about the candidates. If you vote in California, be informed.
Governor Brown has been the greatest disappointment. I agree: Chiang for governor.
There is no question that John Chiang is the most qualified gubernatorial candidate to advance our goals for rebuilding California’s intentionally drained public school system. In his current office as state treasurer, he has a documented track record of holding charter schools accountable to the public when they take money from the hard working taxpayers of our state. He pushed hard for legislation to require charters to adhere to simple public meetings and public records laws. When Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed it, he implemented regulations for the charters that sought bond funding through his office. He is a dedicated, authentic public servant in a field of front runners so slick, they’re likely to trip each other. As a public school parent leader who seeks partnership with our teachers unions, I find CTA’s endorsement of charter-backed Newsom deeply disappointing.
I’m going with Delaine Eastin, former State Superintendent of Public Schools. Her vision has been consistent in support of public schools going back decades.
“Cities and states across the nation are jumping on board and are finding innovative solutions to provide two free years of community college. California needs to find a way to get to that place, where we make community college free while ensuring students are on the right path through participation and graduation.”
I feel like Woody Allen waking up in sleeper . Was not the entire University of California free till the 1980s
I seem to recall that higher education used to be free in California
Would a Californian jump in with facts?
Wikipedia article on California Master Plan for Higher Education indicates that higher education was free at one point.
Karen Wolfe
As I understood it as well.
So yes the anti tax fever of prop 13 set it back . In NYC the free CUNY system destroyed by the City Financial crises after over a hundred years. A crisis brought on by the burning boroughs not the operating budget . As City became the landlord of last resort for a massive amount of run down burnt out housing.
But you have not seen anything yet . This tax package will gut everything Public.
Yes, in CA all state higher institutions of education were free to CA residents.
https://thebaffler.com/salvos/academe-on-the-auction-block-johnson
“In 1967, after he’d been elected governor in a state whose flagship university had become a hotbed of student protest, Ronald Reagan wondered aloud why the taxpayers of California should spend their hard-earned money to “subsidize intellectual curiosity.” At the time, state universities in California charged no tuition to in-state residents. He promptly pushed for billing students and cutting state funding, inaugurating a trend. The state used to fund 32 percent of the budget of the University of California. By 2000 it funded 24 percent, and today it funds about 10 percent. Other state governments have followed suit. In 1980, when Reagan was elected president, states contributed 54 percent of total higher education spending. By 2014, they invested only 37 percent. According to the Center for Investigative Reporting, the shortfall in public spending in the interim was at least $500 billion. Matters are even worse post–Great Recession: since the 2008 meltdown, the average state is spending 18 percent less per student. In 2012, money from student tuition exceeded money from state appropriations for the first time in the postwar era.”
Would like to know if CTA is following the money to have weight with whom they see as winning.
My understanding is that the UC college system was free until Gov. Ronald Reagan proposed not only a charge for tuition, but also a cut in the state’s contribution toward UC’s budget. This opened the floodgates to regular increases in tuition and decreases in the state’s portion of UC’s budget from the 1960s to now. Those early years coincided with anti-tax sentiment, and a ballot measure passed that capped property tax, Prop 13, which has pretty much put public education on life support.
Sorry but the UC system was not “free until Reagan.”
I paid only $45 a semester in the dark ages of the 1950s to attend UCLA. But there was a fee.
Now it is close to $13K a year for Californians and far more for out of state and foreign students who make up about 40% of the student body, and who are mainly Asian/Chinese/Japanese…that is some scary inflation. Around $23K for them…so the system has rejected too many locals in order to collect the greater fees…a crummy decision which loyal taxpayers and local alums really resent.
The Cal State system, which turns out most of our elementary school teachers, was and is far less expensive, but it too always had a minimal fee. About $5 – 6 K now.
The Community College system was indeed free about 30 years ago, but no longer. It is still however the best investment in higher ed. Many students transfer to our 4 year colleges thereafter their bargain fees at our excellent 2 year city college system…rated best in the nation. They take everyone…about $1600 a year. Academics and Voc Ed are very good.
And of course, UCLA and UC Berkeley are the two top tier public universities in the nation. Requires an A+ average.
Yeah…I am bragging. Happy holidays.
BTW…in support of tutican’s choice, as I have written here for some months, Chiang is an educated and honest pol whom I met in about 2003 when he first ran for office. His refined demeanor and quiet grasp of facts, belied his boyish looks. He has proven himself to be excellent in each office he has won, and would make a far better Governor than the flashy, scandal ridden, front runners. Eli Broad has always been adulterer and charter pimp, Villaraigosa’s, puppet master.
As a a California parent, and as a supporter of our teachers, and a citizen of Oakland, I cannot wrap my head around why the CTA would attach themselves to the skirts of Newsome? Eastin, has declared herself to want a moratorium on charters, while Newsome enjoys the money rolling in from the likes of CCSA, Walton, Gates, and Broad…Seriously CA?? What are you confused about???