Archives for the month of: August, 2018

There are very few unionized workers in Missouri, but nonetheless voters rejected a law passed by the Legislature to cripple labor unions. The legislature passed the law in 2017, the labor movement gathered enough signatures to force a referendum, which was decided yesterday. The vote was overwhelming, 63% opposing the law. In politics, 63% is a landslide.

Robert Kuttner of The American Prospect explains what happened:

Kuttner on TAP

Labor’s Astonishing Missouri Win—and the Opening It Portends. Ohio’s razor-thin vote for an open House seat got most of the headlines, but the bigger story was the defeat of a right-to-work ballot proposition in supposedly right-wing Missouri.

The bill to make Missouri America’s 28th state with a “right to work” law was passed by the legislature in 2017 and signed by then–Republican Governor Eric Greitens. But the labor movement qualified a ballot initiative overturning the measure, and it passed by a margin of 2 to 1, including in very conservative parts of a state carried overwhelmingly by Trump.

The “right to work” option was added to labor law by the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act. Passed by the Republican 80th Congress over President Truman’s veto (he denounced it as a “slave labor act”), Taft-Hartley allows states to pass laws permitting workers to opt out of paying union dues even when a majority of workers sign union cards.

The name “right to work” was always a fraud. Even in states without such laws, anybody can take a job at a unionized facility. Workers merely have to join, or if they don’t want to join, to pay dues after they are hired.

“Right to work” makes it much harder to organize in such states. Until the last few decades, these measures were largely confined to the anti-union South and Mountain West. Lately, they have been enacted in Michigan, Indiana, and Wisconsin. In the past decade, they’ve been beaten with ballot initiatives in California and Ohio.

The Missouri vote not only extends and intensifies that success in a supposedly far more conservative state. It shows the latent appeal of pocketbook issues and trade unionism even in Trump country. It shows that the labor movement may be down, but it is far from out.

In Missouri, just 8.7 percent of workers are members of unions. But most working families know someone with a union job and they know the difference a union can make.

The right to have a union signals concern for the forgotten working class. By trying to crush labor, Missouri Republicans signaled not individual rights—the usual pitch for the misnamed “right to work” law—but their contempt for working people, who got the message.

The Missouri outcome also bodes well for the re-election of Senator Claire McCaskill, one of the supposedly endangered Democrats up this fall. More importantly, it signals the resurgence of the labor movement—and reminds Democrats that progressive economics are the indispensable ingredient for success on the beaten-down American heartland. ~ ROBERT KUTTNER

I have no link, but if you want to get the email blasts from The American Prospect, sign up here.

Politico reports that Arne Duncan stubbornly clings to his belief that teacher quality can be measured by test scores and lashes out at those who disagrees. This despite the fact that several states have dropped it, several courts have suspended or ended it, and it worked Nowhere. Of course, his boook went to print before the release of the RAND-AIR study of the total failure of the Gates $575 Million program to use Arne’s VAM approach. But, the study is out, and you would think he might backtrack. But no.

Also, before the recent finding that the effect of the LA publication of teacher ratings meant that the richest families scooped up the teachers with the highest scores and the poorest kids got those with the lowest scores. And Arne forgot, but we won’t, Roberto Riguelas, the LA teacher who committed suicide after his rating was published. The LA ratings, by the way, we’re made up at the request of the LA Times and had many flaws.

Duncan accuses Lamar Alexander of “lying” or wanting to cover up poor teacher performance, but Alexander was right. The feds have zero authority to foist half-baked—and in this case, harmful and expensive—ideas on the states.

“HOW ARNE DUNCAN SEES ‘LIES’ IN EDUCATION: Arne Duncan, one of the most outspoken Education secretaries to hold the job, is out with an incendiary new book about the “lies” he says the public is fed about education and student potential.

— Duncan’s 200-plus-page read, “How Schools Work,” published Tuesday, tells how the former secretary attempted to dispel these “lies” and sell education reform while at the helm of both the Chicago Public Schools and the Education Department. The book is peppered with anecdotes spanning decades, some of them very critical of other education players. A few of the highlights are below; more from your host here.

— ‘Bare-knuckle politicking’: That’s how the Chicago native describes multiple interactions with elected officials and his attempts to “insulate” his education reform work from “political attack” and “stay above the political fray.”

— Senate HELP Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) figures in one anecdote. Duncan says that he was left “stunned” when Alexander refused to back the administration’s pursuit of policies that tied teacher evaluations to student test scores and higher standards. “This was the Tea Party talking, pure and simple. It was as if he’d been captured,” he writes of Alexander, also a former Education secretary, and governor of Tennessee. “Senator Alexander’s stance was one of the least principled things I’d ever heard from a politician, and it showed zero political courage.”

— Alexander said in a statement to POLITICO that Duncan came to Washington to “create a national school board” and that he came to reverse that trend. “Arne and I have a difference of principle, not politics. I believe that teacher evaluation is the holy grail of education and, as governor, helped Tennessee become the first state to pay teachers more for teaching well. As U.S. Education Secretary, I challenged every state to create voluntary national education standards and accountability systems. But I told Arne on the first day he walked into my office that Washington, D.C., has no business telling states how to evaluate teachers and what education standards to set,” Alexander said.

— ‘Teacher accountability was the third rail’: That’s how Duncan described the controversy he faced around the issue, not just from Alexander, but also from teachers unions and Democrats. He writes he was “shocked” that, when conceiving the Race to the Top grant program, he found states like California and Wisconsin banned school districts from using student test scores to measure teacher effectiveness.

— “What was the lie at the center of these laws?” Duncan writes. “Was it that good teaching was immeasurable? Or was it that some teachers … preferred to claim that they couldn’t help the kids who most desperately needed their help?”

— The idea that teacher quality is the most important variable remains up for debate — a recent report on a Gates Foundation initiative that attempted to prove as much claimed its effort was largely unsuccessful. But in his book, Duncan remains committed to the idea. “The simple fact is that quality teaching matters more than anything,” he writes.”

In the education world, we have become accustomed to the intrusion of billionaires into local and state school board races, bundling money for candidates committed to privatizing—not helping—our public schools. The most prominent such group calls itself Democrats for Education Reform, but we have no way of knowing whether its contributors are Republicans or Democrats. Some of its most prominent members are billionaires who donate to both parties, depending on which candidate is likeliest to protect charter schools and low taxes.

This post in the Blog “Crooks & Liars” notes a broader phenomenon of Republican billionaires inserting their money into Democratic primaries to choose rightwing candidates.

I noted on Twitter and on this blog that Politico’s Morning Education recently published a lengthy interview with DFER spokesmen about where they plan to target their millions, which school board elections they plan to invade, without noting that DFER represents Wall Street and contains not a single educator in its midst. Politico didn’t bother to question why hedge fund managers in New York and Connecticut are swaying elections in Colorado and California. Nor did they point out that DFER was censured by the Democratic parties in both states, which said they stop calling themselves Democrats because they represent corporate interests. I don’t know nor does Politico whether DFER is actually a Republican front group with one or two show Democrats.

Politico Morning Education has NEVER interviewed a critic of Corporate Reform, has NEVER discussed the distorting effect of outside money bundled by hedge funders on state and local school board elections. Why do the Waltons—a fiercely anti-union, anti-public school family of billionaires—invest in school board elections across the nation? Why is this story NEVER reported by Politico? Why do they keep hands off the billionaires intent on privatizing public schools?

Conversely, why has Politico never seen fit to interview public school supporters other than National Union leaders? Why have they never interviewed Carol Burris or Anthony Cody or Julian Vasquez Heilig or Jesse Hagopian or the BATS?

When the Network for Public Education released a carefully researched 50-State report ranking states on their support for public schools, Politico did not consider it worthy of even a mention, let alone a paragraph with a link to the report.

What gives at Politico Morning Education?

Harold Meyerson, editor of The American Prospect, sent out this commentary on New York’s gubernatorial race. Control of New York’s State Senate hangs in the balance in this election, as well as several seats in Congress. By putting his name on the Independence Party line. Cuomo aids former members of the so-called IDC (the independent Democratic Conference), legislators who were elected as Democrats but caucus with and vote with the Republicans. The members of the IDC collect huge donations from hedge fund managers and charter school advocates, including Daniel Loeb, who until recently was chair of the board of Eva’s Success Academy.

Campaign cash is rolling in for the turncoat Democrats, who vote with the Republicans and support charters. Look at this eye-popping graph. The average contribution to former IDC members was $1,093. The average contribution to their challenger was $80.


Meyerson on TAP

Andrew’s Ego, Amok Again. In recent weeks, the three published polls of New York voters have shown that Governor Andrew Cuomo leads his primary challenger, Cynthia Nixon, by at least 30 percentage points, and his may-as-well-be-nameless Republican opponent in the November runoff, once he dispatches Nixon, by a similar margin. In other words, Cuomo doesn’t need to boost his totals by a few thousand votes more through a maneuver that might just cost the Democrats one or more of the state’s closely fought U.S. House or state Senate seats. Why would he do something as cynical as that?

Because he’s Andrew Cuomo, that’s why.

Yesterday, The New York Times reported that Cuomo has agreed to appear not just on the Democrats’ ballot line in November (assuming he beats Nixon in the party’s September primary), but also on the ballot line of something called the Independence Party. New York, you may recall, allows for fusion voting, in which a candidate can appear on the November ballot as the nominee of more than one party, provided, of course, that the party and the candidate agree to that. The candidate’s final vote total tallies his or her votes on every party line where his or her name appears.

Since the American Labor Party first began co-endorsing the Democrats it liked in the mid-1930s, New York’s many and varied third (and fourth) parties have each had a distinct ideology. In the past couple decades, the state has seen the social democratic Working Families Party run lefties on its line, most of whom are also Democratic nominees, while the Conservative Party has done the same with right-wingers, most of whom are also Republican nominees.

What the Independence Party is independent of, by contrast, is a coherent ideology. Its candidates in past elections have included conservative Republicans and such certain-to-win-anyway Democrats as the state’s U.S. senators, Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand. At least some of the party’s finances have been known to come from politicians who’ve mysteriously ended up as the party’s designated candidates.

Whatever the motivations of Democrats who’ve also been on the Independence line in elections past, November’s upcoming election is unlike any other New York election in recent decades. Half a dozen U.S. House seats and a like number of state Senate seats are up for grabs, which is to say that Democrats’ prospects for taking the House and winning New York’s Senate (where Republicans have clung to a very narrow majority, thanks to gerrymandering and assorted other mischief, for many years) very much depend on the outcome of a number of closely fought New York races. And though the Independence Party has placed Cuomo atop its slate, it has also decided to endorse the Republicans in almost every one of those House and state Senate contests.

In the opinion of New York electionologists, the fact that Cuomo will head the Independence ticket will likely mean that the party’s down-ticket nominees will win anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand votes more than they otherwise would. In most years, this wouldn’t make that much difference. This year, with so much at stake, it could make a world of difference—most importantly, on the question of whether the Democrats will capture the House and at last be able to thwart some of the policies, impulses, and outright crimes (if crimes they be) of President Trump.

And yet, in full knowledge of that possibility, and for no apparent reason save the demands of his vote-getting ego, Cuomo has consented to head the Independence ticket. If Republicans still control the Congress next January, and still are in position to doom progressive initiatives in Albany through their control of the Senate, Cuomo will have some ‘splainin to do. Indeed, he has some ‘splainin to do right now. ~ HAROLD MEYERSON

Copyright (C) 2018 The American Prospect All rights reserved.
American Prospect
1225 Eye Street, NW
Suite 600
Washington DC 20005 United States
If you believe you received this message in error or wish to no longer receive email from us, please unsubscribe.

I salute LeBron James for investing his funding in a public school, not a charter school.

Mr. James understands that the overwhelming preponderance of children in this country attend public schools, and we have a responsibility to make them work for all children. Charter schools and vouchers are an escape from the central problem, not an answer. He is way smarter than Donald Trump or Betsy DeVos or John Kasich or Jeb Bush or Rick Snyder or Rick Scott or Donald Trump or Reed Hastings or Eli Broad or any of the other billionaire builders of escape hatches that lead nowhere.

He is investing in wraparound services, as public schools do when they have the resources.

What he is demonstrating is that every public school can be its best when it has the resources to do what kids need.

We don’t need to hand public schools, their building and their public funding over to private entrepreneurs to prove what we know: Good schools are costly when kids are poor. They need smaller classes and additional resources.

This article in The Nation says exactly what I believe: “LeBron’s Education Promise Needs to Become This Country’s Promise.”

Every child should have the wraparound services, the small classes, the job training for parents, the caring environment of a family, that LeBron James’ school will offer its students.

LeBron James’s promise to the students in his school should be the promise that America makes to all its children.

I laughed when I read that Donald Trump slammed LeBron James and called him “stupid.” Trump doesn’t have the brains, the heart, or the accomplishments of LeBron James.

And I laughed again when Melania sent out a tweet congratulating LeBron after her husband mocked him. I hope she visits his PUBLIC school.

Look at what happened in Shelby County (Memphis), Tennessee, last week.

https://crooksandliars.com/2018/08/weekends-shelby-county-tn-elections-were

“Tennessee is a pretty red state, with over 60% of the votes in the 2016 presidential election going for Donald Trump. The State Senate is comprised of 15 Republicans and 1 Democrat and the State House is split 74 Republicans to 25 Democrats.

“SO — imagine the surprise this weekend in Shelby County when Democrats won 21 out of the 26 seats up for grabs! Commercial Appeal reports that of the top 10 seats in the county, including mayor and sheriff, the Democrats managed to clinch EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.

“Prior to the election, Republicans held 9 of those seats. So not only did Democrats hold onto their one, but they flipped the other 9! Blue wave? Nah – that is a blue tsunami.

“Devastating is the only way to describe the loss. A wake up call. A bullhorn.

“The newly elected Mayor, Democrat Lee Harris, won by over 10 points. In Tennessee.

“So what does this tell us as we go look forward to the midterms in less than 100 days?”

Read it and find out.

The Republican base loves Trump but the base is shrinking. There are not that many racists and haters left.

An interesting article in today’s Washington Post. I have noticed that some leftists still think that Mother Russia is run by socialists. No, it is a fascist authoritarian country run by billionaire oligarchs. Putin is probably the richest man in the world.

Now Russia has become the ideal nation to alt-right conservatives, who see it as a paradise of White, Christian power. Strange, isn’t it? Where is Joe McCarthy buried? There must be a lot of turning going on in his grave.

Christian Caryl, an opinion writer for the WaPo, wrote:

In the 1920s, ’30s and ’40s, many American leftists — including quite a few members of the Democratic Party — regarded the Soviet Union through a pink-tinted filter of earnestly held ideals. The U.S.S.R. was a “socialist paradise,” a place run by gruff but honest workers who were doing away with the economic and political injustices that plagued the United States.

The appeal of this vision was so powerful that many who clung to it had trouble confronting the brutal realities of the Soviet system. True believers dismissed the reports of famines, purges and concentration camps as capitalist propaganda, and scorned those who did the reporting as “Whites” or “reactionaries” or even “fascists” — in outright denial that many who first began to speak out about their experiences of Stalinism were ex-communists or socialists themselves.

I was reminded of those reality-averse leftists this weekend, when I saw a photo that was making the rounds on the Internet. The photo showed two older American men wearing identical T-shirts with the slogan “I’d rather be a Russian than Democrat.” Both were clearly pleased with themselves — they were clearly enjoying the feeling of trolling their presumed liberal opponents.

Yet, their prank still tells you a lot. It’s a reflection of the extent to which the Republican Party has now swung behind President Trump’s extraordinary Russophilia.

The trend isn’t new, of course. For years we’ve seen American conservatives cultivating ties with Russian counterparts who seem to embody all the cool things they can’t get at home: contempt for “political correctness,” the unapologetic defense of “Christian values” and rule by a macho strongman who sneers at journalists, gays and liberal snowflakes of all varieties.

The American right is mistaken, however, when it idealizes Putin as a defender of “conservative values.” Whatever values Putin has are entirely situational — he’ll do whatever it takes to boost Russia’s power and his own (because the two are intertwined). And clueless Republicans have given him a wonderful opening to exploit.

Take the case of Maria Butina, the alleged Russian agent who cultivated contacts with the National Rifle Association as a supposed “gun rights activist” from Siberia. Had anyone at the NRA troubled to ask, that person could have easily learned that her country has strict gun-control policies. Kremlin officials would never tolerate a genuine grass-roots challenge to that principle. But they do know what Republicans want to hear.

American evangelicals who come to Russia seeking allies in the fight against unbelief have proven equally gullible. Their official interlocutor, the Russian Orthodox Church, had a long history of collaboration with the Soviet regime, one that extends into the present. The church is less a religious community than an arm of the state, which repays that loyalty by making life hard for potential rivals. Putin would never allow evangelical Protestants or Catholics to compete in a free marketplace of religious ideas. The fact that Russian authorities have explicitly banned Jehovah’s Witnesses effectively puts the lie to any claims that Russia cares about “Christian values.” (And don’t look now — but Secretary of State Mike Pompeo seems to agree.)

Russian religious leaders love telling their American counterparts — such as star Trump supporter Franklin Graham — how much they hate the idolatry and decadence of the modern age. Yet, the stirring sermons never seem to have much of an effect on Russia’s sky-high levels of corruption, the ubiquity of drugs and prostitution (allegedly ably abetted by the police, who run lucrative protection rackets), or the prevalence of abortion, which remains the Kremlin’s favored method of birth control. That’s a view shared by Putin, by the way — though I doubt that many Republicans are aware. At 480 abortions per 1,000 live births, Russia’s rate is more than twice as high as that of the godless United States.

I’ve even heard some especially ill-informed conservatives try to argue that Russia is a paragon of the free market — even though anyone who knows about the country’s economy can tell you that its leading business tycoons enjoy their positions at the mercy of Putin. Those who tout Russia’s low income-tax rates should keep in mind that the tax service is one of the Kremlin’s most effective tools for keeping its political rivals in line.

And what about those white nationalists such as Richard Spencer, who like to praise Russia for its alleged success at remaining the “sole white power in the world”? Actually, a visit to just about any provincial town would show idiots like him a far more complicated reality, shaped by large-scale immigration from the majority-Muslim republics of the former Soviet Union. In that respect, indeed, even authoritarian Russia is wrestling with exactly the same globalizing forces that confront western Europe or the United States.

In short, the modern-day Republican romance with Russia has little to do with reality and everything to do self-delusion — making them oddly similar to those 20th-century leftists who succumbed to the fairy tales of Stalinism. You would think that Trump and his supporters would at least have the advantage of being able to learn from history. No such luck, apparently.

YouTube, Facebook, and Apple have agreed to remove the pernicious, fake content produced by Alex Jones of Infowars.

This is good news. Jones has created a brand based on lies, hoaxes, and fear-mongering. His most disgusting conspiracy theory was his claim that the Sandy Hook massacre was fake, a stage production with child actors, stage managed by the Obama administration to advance the war against guns. Jones is being sued for defamation by parents who lost children at the Sandy Hook massacre. Some have been pursued by stalkers and received death threats.

In its daily news brief, CNN summarized the story:

“Some of the web’s top gatekeepers have unleashed a serious crackdown on content from Infowars and its founder, Alex Jones. Infowars is the site (and Jones the man) that pushes baseless conspiracy theories that often create real-life damage (like the Sandy Hook hoax over which several more families this week sued Jones for defamation). YouTube, Facebook and Apple yesterday removed content from Infowars, claiming it violates their policies, such as YouTube’s barring “hate speech and harassment.” YouTube’s actions probably most damage the brand, which had multiple channels with millions of subscribers and more than a billion views.”

To learn more about Alex Jones, watch John Oliver.

Send an e-mail today.

It is wrong for the New York Board of Regents and the State Education Department to Punish kids for opting out!

Children are not the property of the state. When the state abuses them by demanding that they sit for hour after hour of standardized testing, this is child abuse.

Parents have the right to say no.

Write today. Open the link to see a sample letter and addresses.

Is the air coming out of the charter school bubble?

Are parents tired of seeing their children attend faux schools in shopping malls or schools that open and close like day lilies?

California has been the Golden State for charter schools until now, but the fever is subsiding.

Maybe it was the impact of the scandals, the waste, fraud and abuse.

After a quarter century of steady expansion, the rate of growth for charter schools in California has slowed to a crawl over the past five years.

During the just completed school year, the number of charter schools grew by a mere 1.6 percent — from 1,254 schools in 2016-17 to 1,275 in 2017-18. That was even lower than last year’s 1.9 percent growth, which set a record for the lowest rate of growth in at least two decades.

These sluggish rates of growth, mirrored by similar slowdowns nationally, present a sharp contrast to the double-digit rates of expansion of charter schools for most years since California approved its charter law in 1992.

Far outpacing every other state, California charter schools now enroll over 630,000 students, or 1 in 10 of the state’s public school students. The slowdown in their growth could increase competition among parents and students to get into the most sought-after charter schools and in general limit the choices that they have beyond traditional public schools. It is also stirring concerns among charter school advocates that the slowdown may represent a permanent feature of the California education landscape, not just a temporary pause.

The slowdown is accelerating at precisely the time President Donald Trump and his Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos are trying to expand education options for parents and children, which includes more charter schools, as well as tax-payer subsidies for private school tuition.

What is happening in California is being watched closely by national charter school advocates. “California is a place where you see charter schools in a wide variety of urban communities as well as in rural areas,” said Todd Ziebarth, senior vice president of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. “We don’t see that in every state.” A slowdown in California, he said, will have “a big impact on the national numbers (of charter schools), and given its size and diversity it is the place to look for lessons for why it is happening and how to jumpstart growth in California and across the country.”

Maybe the time for “jumpstarting growth” was a quarter century ago. Maybe that time is gone. Maybe parents are sick and tired of seeing their local public schools taken over by corporate chains.

Maybe the Gold Rush has panned out.