I recently received an e-mail from a member of the California School Boards Association, whom I met last year in San Diego when I spoke at its convention. He wondered why the super-rich from in-State and out-of-State (like Michael Bloomberg of New York and Alice Walton of Bentonville, Arkansas) have given Marshall Tuck about $30 Million for his campaign to become State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Three Times What Tony Thurmond has raised. Tuck was a hedge fund manager who became CEO of Green Dot charter schools, then ran a small number of schools in the Mayor’s special district in Los Angeles. He performed no miracles. Those schools performed no better and mostly worse than comparable public schools. Why are the billionaires so intent on putting him in charge of all California’s schools?
He wrote:
Here’s my question:
Why is there so much $ going to Charter Schools?
Why is there so much money flowing into Tuck’s campaign?
What is in it for these donors?
They are millionaires who would seem to have no interest in public education.
It simply cannot be all altruism, that they want to provide a good education for Black and Brown children, or the (mistaken) belief that our schools are broken and need Marshall Tuck (or whoever) to swoop down and fix them.
What will they get out of helping Marshall Tuck’s Campaign?
If Tuck wins, he will be able to create more charter schools, but why would these donors want that? There is some big money in it for them somewhere that I am missing.
Here is my response to the questions.
Dear Anonymous:
The charter industry and its funders are worried. They are not acting out of confidence, but out of anxiety.
They know that they have been pushing charters (and vouchers) since 1990, and have little to show for it.
They are desperate for a win. Even though they are harming public schools, they want to win an election to prove their power. They are surely not motivated by altruism because they know there is no evidence for the superiority of charter schools and school choice. At very little cost to themselves, they are prepared to undermine public education and harm the vast majority of American children to salve their vanity.
Once upon a time, they might have fielded their pro-charter candidate and assumed he would win because of the popularity of charters. But the mask is off. Betsy DeVos loves charters. The Koch brothers love charters. Cities around the state have seen their public schools stripped of resources that were transferred to charters. The charters pushed out the kids they didn’t want. The word “charter” is almost as odious as the word “voucher,” which is why the charteristas go to great lengths to disguise themselves as public schools when they are in fact private contractors receiving public funds, with minimal oversight or accountability.
The bloom is off the rose. The promises didn’t happen. Marshall Tuck says he is not all about charters, but his backers certainly are. The interesting thing here is that the charters pretend not to be at the center of the race because the public is suspicious of them. They are at the center of the race. Tuck’s money machine is counting on him to expand the number of charters and remove any oversight.
California has experienced many scandals and frauds. You can read about some of them in Carol Burris’s “Charters and Consequences.” California is a prime target for national charter corporations, who invade local districts, siphoning away students and resources.
Many people think that the goal of the charter industry is to turn a profit, and for some entrepreneurs, that is true. K12 Inc., which operates CAVA (the California Vitual Academy) is a for-profit Corporation, and despite the recent law banning for-profit charters, it will be around for several more years. Others make “profits” via exorbitant salaries.
The billionaires and millionaires have various motives.
Some naively continue to believe that charter schools are “saving poor kids from failing schools” and they don’t have time to learn the facts: that charters kick out the kids they don’t want and divert resources from the schools that take everyone.
Some have a passionate commitment to the free market and competition. Surely the billionaires don’t want to make money from charters. Some believe that market forces lift all boats.
Some entrepreneurs and investors are making money from real estate deals.
California voters will decide in a few days if they want Tuck or Thurmond.
The fraud can continue a while longer.
Eventually voters and the public will understand that school choice exacerbates segregation and provides no remedies.
Even the billionaires will have to face their own failure.
The question that we cannot escape is how long it will take to begin to rebuild a first-class public education system staffed by experienced teachers, offering small classes and wraparound services? How much longer will we follow false prophets and search for miracle cures?

There’s gold in them thar hills!
LikeLike
I am reaching you from Facebook. Diane and all California teachers and voters, it is imperative to find out if the LA Times HUGE ad for Marshall Tuck in the paper this AM, wherein Tuck claims that Bob Hertzberg, Ben Allen, and Henry Stern plus three others, all endorse him…had any truth to it.
This is urgent for these three legislators are all well known to me. I had
Bob Hertzberg talk on The Future of California at a Symposium I gave some years ago at UCLA. Up until today, I never had any reason to think they were Eli Broad and band of Billionaire Vultures supporters as they try to take over and privatize all public schools while killing off all unions…but who knows how much the gold glitters for these three legislators who I have always helped and admired.
Please get on this…time is of the essence for a retraction, if possible.
LikeLike
It is clear by now that the Corporate Owned Ripofflichen Party (CORP) aims to convert public education into just another Corporate Owned Service Industry (COSI) on the model of the telecom sector.
LikeLike
When Dr. Ravitch pens a piece like this post, her work is so profound that all Americans should be compelled to read the analysis. I believe that we, her readers, understand the importance of forwarding, to as many people as possible, her clear and cogent argument for democracy, which underpins “Why billionaires are pouring so much money into charter schools”.
Dr. Ravitch’s argument that the richest 0.1% have sunk so much of their reputations for superiority on a fatally flawed attempt to destroy the common good, that they can’t stop without invalidating themselves, is dead on.
LikeLike
My concern is how many poor students have to face the constant disruption with this misguided experiment with market based education. I can guarantee that if middle class students were constantly caught in middle of opening and closing schools, parents would be up in arms. They would not tolerate such a casual indifference to the children’s education. Poor students need stability more than anything, and they will do their best when they get it. Many poor students live in unstable, dysfunctional homes, and a certain level of predictability in school is what they need. Disruption is harmful to young people that live in poverty. These students need a shelter from the storm, not another storm.
LikeLike
“Shelter from a storm” -one more reason privatizing oligarchs and the the groups like Hoover Institute who carry their bags, deserve damning. The incidence of abuse in home schooled children is much higher. Before home schooling was promoted by the richest 0.1% and, the evangelicals who back them, there was refuge at school for the children from abusive homes.
LikeLike
Exactly right. This disruption strategy is imposed on the powerless.
LikeLike
Some billionaires also want the opportunity to bust unions, especially in a profession dominated by college-educated people, most of them women.
And many billionaires are seeking profits from social impact bonds (SIBS) and Pay-for-Success contracts–financial products tied to cherrypicking programs and students based on estimates of their financial value. SIBS and Pay-for-Success contracts are the major forms of “impact investing” popular among billionaires and their non-profits.
The latest expansion of “impact investing” is into career and technical education. Moreover, an expansion of Pay for Sucess contracts is supported in the recently passed Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act – also known as Perkins V. Perkins V includes a number of provisions that “promote innovation, modernization and the alignment of workforce skills with labor-market needs.” Perkins V works in tandem with the US. Department of Labor’s Department of Labor’s Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) which also authorized funding for a”Pay for Performance” program.
The following link shows how the new Perkins law intersects with ESSA and was written to satisfy multiple recommendations from the “America Forward Coalition” a federal policy arm of the national venture philanthropy fund New Profit.
New Profit’s America Forward Coalition organizes 64 groups intent on profit-making from reformy ventures. Among these groups are Teach for America, KIPP, and (wow) the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. All are on the “Education Taskforce” of the America Forward Coalition.
Of the 44 groups who are members of the “Education Taskforce” of the America Forward Coalition, 16 are also on the Pay for Success task force. Noteworthy is the presence of Teach for America on both of these groups.
These task forces work on policy proposals for members of Congress, using America Forward’s “Appropriation Strategy” and “Tool Kit.”
The Tool Kit is designed to help taskforce members intervene in the federal Appropriations process. One method for intervening is targeted “information briefings.” These briefings are crafted to reflect the funding priorities of task force members and with rhetoric framed to portray these funding requests as “results-driven evidence-based solutions to “our country’s most pressing problems.” These briefings focus on federal programs that already support the agendas of the task forces. They are also intended to protect programs that may be vulnerable to cuts.
In addition to briefings, America Forward offers a Tool Kit of sample communications “to your member(s) of Congress.” The samples include: an email about appropriations, a request for a site visit, sample messages by phone with concurrent posts on Twitter and Facebook, and how to use the “Stance” platform (takeastance.us).
It other words the NewProfit’s America Forward Coalition has a well-developed lobbying apparatus for Congress tied to specific federal programs.
Here is one example for ESSA.
Click to access America-Forward-ESSA-Policy-Platform-FINAL.pdf
LikeLike
Really surprised that you didn’t mention the New Markets Tax Credit program. Billionaires can get a 39% tax credit if they invest in charter schools in low income neighborhoods. This is why they do it. https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2013/09/10/charter-school-gravy-train-runs-express-to-fat-city/#74bb1d812be8
LikeLike
Why aren’t we asking, WHO is served by Charter Schools?
In addition to the motives mentioned to privatize public ed, the means of controlling and carrying out a process to divide the rich and the poor continues. Charter schools promise 1:1 tech devices luring families into a false narrative that jobs can only be had if kids are caught early and become proficient test takers. If is now said the average public school spends 16 hours of class time preparing for standardized and tests now described as “District Tests”. Recent reports in the NY Times indicated low income children of color are spending more time on screens and phones than white white children. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/style/digital-divide-screens-schools.html?action=click&module=Top+Stories&pgtype=Homepage&fbclid=IwAR1Hnt_4SMiXTZ6xb1i_ac5s31-y8o0kie_avHIl8LC15EzsfAJtE3R_ntY
At the same time, a new report from the Children’s National Medical Center is presented to the American Academy of Pediatrics. The report reveals “More kids are showing up in ERs with mental health crises” and includes findings showing the an increase in visits by low income children of color. The disparity of mental health services between those who can and cannot afford mental health services is obvious.
““When stratified by race and ethnicity, mental health-related visits to the nation’s emergency departments rose for non-Latino black children and adolescents at almost double the rate seen for non-Latino white children and adolescents,” said Dr. Monika Goyal, director of research in emergency medicine at Children’s.” https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/more-kids-are-showing-ers-mental-health-crises-n930506?fbclid=IwAR3hTEXPvGzKJ67scuzoadYZ7RU1nkAZ7ZBT8ha9qVTaTjFO7FtykyiUCds
Is there a study looking at the potential corollary effects Charter schools and 1;1 ed tech devices are having on low income students of color and whether or not the increase in mental illness is, at least in part, causing the increase in mental illness? After all, we know the Billionaire Vultures don’t let their children use the technology they are pushing on public school children. Has the plan Forward, to address the pipeline to prison methods of segregation been replaced by the pipeline to mental health and the big pharma drugs to address it? Are Corporate Education Raiders also vested in Big Pharma? Isn’t Pharma now close to 40% of America’s GDP?
How does access to student health data and big pharma play a role in the increase in student mental health emergencies? What, if anything might be said about the education policies made to control the flow of this data (perhaps more industry accessible when children are receiving services), including healthcare data when politicians are often backed by Big Pharma pressuring the Department of Education to release such data to the free market?
Politicians bow to Big Corporate Power and the Donors Rule. Julian Assange was recently interviewed in a piece by the World Ethical Data Forum. Assange suggests that the generation being born now is the last to be free. It’s worth a listen.
You can find the interview here: https://www.worlddataforum.com/
We all see the “teachers as facilitators” dogma playing out in our classrooms. What does it mean when teachers are told to instruct through the screen? What happens whey eye contact between the student and teacher becomes redirected to screen learning? The studies are proof that screen addiction contributes to mental illness in children. The billionaires, some invested heavily in big pharma know this. They are always ten steps ahead. They sacrifice our children and save their own.
PS – If it’s called “Forward” you can bet it’s the latest strategy for stratification and segregation.
LikeLike
edit:
Is there a study looking at the potential corollary effects Charter schools and 1;1 ed tech devices are having on low income students of color and whether or not the increase in mental illness is, at least in part by the increased use of screens on the developing brain?
LikeLike