If anyone ever believed that charter schools are a “progressive” cause, please consider the reaction in New York to the Republicans’ loss of control of the State Senate.
Governor Cuomo and the Republicans who were in charge of the State Senate showered the charter schools with money and favors, because of the hedge fund money behind them.
But now the Republican grip has been broken and charter advocates are rightly worried. Not progressives, but Republicans.
This article appeared in Newsday on Long Island, the epicenter of the parent boycott of high stakes testing, where several representatives were felled in the last election by parents.
By Michael Gormley michael.gormley@newsday.com @GormleyAlbany Updated November 12, 2018 6:00 AM
ALBANY — One of the losers in Tuesday’s election is the charter school movement, which lost a big and reliable advocate when Republicans gave up control of the majority to Democrats in the State Senate, both sides said.
“There’s no question it’s going to be challenging,” said Robert Bellafiore, a consultant who works with charter schools. He also was part of the team under former Gov. George Pataki that authorized charter schools in 1998.
The strongest backer of charter schools now is Democratic Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, who wields extraordinary power in crafting state budgets under New York law.
“What that means is you can stop bad stuff, but it doesn’t mean you will see an expansion,” Bellafiore said.
Advocates had hoped the legislature and governor in 2019 would lift a cap on the number of charter schools that can be created. The cap is 460, including a limit of 50 in New York City where demand is strongest. As of September there were 358 charter schools approved to operate or already operating. Five are on Long Island. Charter schools must be renewed every five years by showing they are successful.
Since 1998, Senate Republicans continued to support the publicly funded, but privately run schools. Many Democrats say charter schools unfairly compete for students, and the state and local aid attached to them. Advocates of charter schools, including some urban Democrats, say they are a needed alternative to failing traditional schools. Charter schools, for example, are free of some regulations, which allows them to experiment with instruction models such as longer school days. Supporters point to long waiting lists for these schools as proof of their value.
“This is a moment for charter schools,” said Andy Pallotta, president of New York State United Teachers, which has opposed expansion of charter schools and seeks greater transparency of their operations. “I think they lost their influence in the Capitol.”
Senate Democrats wouldn’t say what their plans are for charter schools or if the new majority would support any expansion.
“Senate Democrats care about providing a quality education for all New York’s children, including those attending charter schools,” said Senate Democratic spokesman Mike Murphy. “A Democratic majority will seek expanded opportunities for all our schools to ensure a brighter future for students regardless of the type of school they attend.”
There was no immediate comment from Cuomo or the Senate’s Republican conference.
NYSUT takes credit for part of the Democratic wave that ended Republican control of the Senate. Pallotta said the union’s more than 600,000 members were galvanized when Senate Majority Leader John Flanagan (R-East Northport) said the union was among groups acting “almost like the forces of evil,” spending millions of dollars to create a legislature led by Democrats.
“There was a red-hot reaction to that,” Pallotta said. “I believe it was a very bad move on his part.”
The charter school movement has also been a big contributor to Republican senators, until this last campaign, records show.
New Yorkers for a Balanced Albany is a major funder of pro-charter school candidates. Two years ago in the final critical month of the legislative elections, the group spent $2.8 million on TV ads and mailers and in direct campaign contributions, state records show. In the same October period of this year, according to the latest filings, the group spent $69,950.
The group supports StudentsFirstNY, a charter school advocacy group.
“Charter schools give parents in low-income neighborhoods school choices like parents have in affluent communities,” said executive director Jenny Sedlis in a prepared statement. “In New York City, we don’t have enough great school choices. We look forward to working with legislators to ensure all kids have access to high-quality schools.”
Wealthy supporters of charter schools are also big funders of Cuomo’s campaigns, but he has come under increasing pressure by liberal Democrats over his support of the schools. Teachers’ unions, which are also major campaign contributors, argue that charter schools reduce state aid for traditional schools.
“Governor Cuomo and the Republicans who were in charge of the State Senate showered the charter schools with money and favors, because of the hedge fund money behind them.”
It seems amazingly shortsighted though. Ed reformers could have probably remained in power if they had simply supported BOTH public schools and charters/vouchers.
Instead they became the people who promote charters and vouchers and impose hated testing regimes on public schools. One would think they could have come up with SOME upside for public schools, but I guess no one in the echo chamber even gave that any thought.
Ed reform for public schools means “testing” and that’s ALL it means. It’s wholly negative. One would think all that high-priced marketing talent they have would realize this.
Can you blame public school voters? “Hi! We’re here to test your kids, scold your teachers, cut your budgets and tell your students to enroll in charters and private schools”
Chiara, this is your best post I have read and right on especially with the last paragraph.
‘Can you blame public school voters? “Hi! We’re here to test your kids, scold your teachers, cut your budgets and tell your students to enroll in charters and private schools” ‘
Love it!
I am so thankful that the Democrats regained the NY state legislature. They will help to keep crooked Cuomo in check. They will be watching if Andy and his hedge fund cronies try to raid the stable, well funded New York pensions of public employees. They can also watch over how public funds are allocated for public education and counterbalance Cuomo’s alliance with hedge funds. I hope Eva’s reign as queen of New York’s public money comes to a halt.
Eva has her way
Success on every day
A Cuomo call
Is really all
It takes to get her pay
I wonder what is going on now in the Eva Moskowitch camp. Does Eva think the gravy train has crashed or does Eva still think her test scores trumpet – no pun attended – our precious public schools.
Yes Eva my dear, the days of Michael Bloomberg and Joel Klein are a distant memory. So now we just have those test scores to brag about.
And apparently these newly elected Dems are fighting to block state subsidies for the new Amazon facility in favor of helping with student loan debt: https://splinternews.com/will-new-york-resist-the-urge-to-give-amazon-literally-1830404202
If they keep this up I might have to start voting Democrat again.
That is, if I lived in New York.
I wonder how many actual jobs will result from Amazon in NYC. The cost of living in NYC is very high so the low paying jobs Amazon is known for won’t go very far the city. Bezos will probably mechanize as much of the operation as he can.
Amazon will cost NYC and Virginia much, much more than they will gain.
Granted, the jobs being “created” (ahem) are not the low-level warehouse type jobs. They will be more upper level management, executive, accounting, computer, etc. type of jobs, so they will probably pay pretty decently. But the demands that Amazon will make (has made) in exchange for those “good jobs” (that come with a side of cutthroat competition) will be astronomical.
I have heard some speculation that Amazon has driven up the cost of living in Seattle so much that they have a critical housing shortage and burgeoning homeless population.
@speduktr: What you are stating is essentially correct. Seattle is experiencing a boom in employment. Boeing and Microsoft are expanding, and Amazon has contributed as well. Housing has always been expensive in Seattle, and costs are indeed rising.
And there are many homeless people in Seattle.
Housing costs have gone through the roof in Seattle as have the number of homeless people
may truly progressive policy WAKE UP other states…
Hi dienne77:
Here are a few words to read and readers will understand what you provide a link:
[start a headline in NYT news]
Dominating Retail? Yes. – Reviving a City? No Thanks.
By EMILY BADGER
Amazon is NOT in the business of saving your hometown.
[end a headline in NYT news]
I hope that everyone will have time to read more in details on the link that you provide. Thank you dienne77. Please keep spreading news in order to motivate and to cultivate people, especially, to all laborers in any communities, or specifically in New York currently. Take care. May
Not on topic. Good News, Amazon is coming to Arlington VA. 25,000 new jobs, high-tech, and other work. Virginia Tech announced opening of a satellite campus, offering courses in web design, etc.
My wife works in real estate, and she going to earn more commissions.
Here is the article
https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-chooses-new-york-city-and-northern-virginia-for-additional-headquarters-1542075336
Congratulations. And may you get all that you hope for and more.
Much, much more.
Is this sarcasm? The politicians did not ask my opinion on getting Amazon to locate their HQ2 here.
I am not looking forward to the additional vehicle traffic. This area already has the worst commute in the USA.
Don’t forget all the tax accountants he will hire to avoid paying income taxes.
When one is a 160 billionaire, one can never employ too many tax accountants.
This is a disaster. Poor Eva Moskowitz is already barely squeaking by on less than a million dollars a year, plus whatever her gazillionaire husband brings in. What’s Betsy deVos gonna say when she hears they only have one measly yacht?
I would like to reprint an accurate and extremely intelligent paragraph from Professor Máté Wierdl’s paragraph on November 13, 2018 at 7:55 am
[start a paragraph]
The next word LDH (Linda Darling Hammond) should delete from her writings is “choice”, and replace it with “privatization”, then reread what she wrote the next morning, and she may see the true colors.
Optionally, she should also delete the word “tapestry”.
I think she writes with a politician’s eye, and she allows muddying her researcher’s vision with considering too many options and possibilities to please a larger audience than necessary for telling the truth. To me, she reads more like a politician than a prof, formulating sentences too carefully, at the expense of clarity—to her readers and probably for herself as well. What she misses is answering the following simple, basic questions to herself as a researcher,
Why do I think, charter schools provide something public school can’t?
What do charter schools provide public school can’t?
Why do I think, this country needs a “tapestry” of school managements? Isn’t “tapestry” of school contents (teachers, curricula, students) enough?
Is it really worth (in fact, is it prudent) experimenting with charter schools at the expense of public schools and kids?
After answering these questions, do I still think, charters are needed?
I’d rather read an article addressing these questions than one about how to fix charter schools, how to make privatization work. We have at least a 150 years of experience to strongly indicate that privatization cannot be fixed, but privatizers begin their articles with the assumption “charter schools are needed, they are good stuff”.
Stop experimenting with charters, confine every experiments, including educational ones, to labs.
[end paragraph]
In short, parents, students and all charters blindly followers or supporters need to or must be awaken to your own answers to the above 4 BASIC questions in order to GET RID of fake and corrupted corporate who intend to ruin American younger generations FROM:
1) to intentionally rob tax payers fund,
2) to destroy younger generations’ precious education,
3) To steal all conscientious Public Educators’ pension fund. Back2basic
Very good points, and insightful questions!
THANK YOU, Diane.
Great article.
Here’s one Singer wrote about that new FAD .. “Making kids GRITTY.” I sent it to a parent who was worried about her son being “GRITTY” enough. Honest can’t make this stuff up.
Here’s Singer’s piece on Grit.
https://gadflyonthewallblog.com/2018/11/08/grit-is-sht-its-just-an-excuse-to-do-nothing-for-struggling-students/
Here’s the latest STUPID.
There is no choice in NYC when 37% of the children are taking the test that enables them to HAVE a choice for HS and only 6.7% of those children will attend one of the “top schools” in the city?
And huzzah to the Dems if they follow through on their intention to “block state subsidies for the new Amazon facility in favor of helping with student loan debt” as dienne77 indicates… but I’ll believe that when I see it….
Hi wgersen:
Here are two “today” articles from NYT. You are ahead New York Time journal. Congratulations.
[start two articles]
1) A $2 Billion Question: Did New York and Virginia Overpay for Amazon?
By BEN CASSELMAN
The states offered tax credits, rebates and other incentives to lure the online retail giant and 25,000 jobs. Neighboring states offered even more.
2) Amazon Is Getting at Least $1.7 Billion to Come to Queens. Now Comes the Fight Over Whether It’s Worth It.
By J. DAVID GOODMAN
Amazon finally provided some details about its plan to open a hub in Long Island City, including tax subsidies and other benefits.
[end two articles]
We all hope that the wave of fresh and incumbent Senators plus House Representative from both Democratic and “conscientious” Republican party will be bipartisan on STOPPING Amazon’s greediness and harmfulness to New York population. Back2basic
“Advocates of charter schools, including some urban Democrats, say they are a needed alternative to failing traditional schools. Charter schools, for example, are free of some regulations, which allows them to experiment with instruction models such as longer school days. Supporters point to long waiting lists for these schools as proof of their value.”
That’s too simplistic.
First: “…failing traditional schools”? Those schools are “failing” mainly due to the poverty in their neighborhoods and the culture of crime, violence, and hopelessness that the conditions engender. The charters that come in may help the few who are admitted (if they remain profitable to their investors). Those students remaining in the public schools (many more than went charter) will suffer from even more budget cuts and space taken away from their schools. The “C” and “B” students, especially, will bear the brunt.
Longer school hours are not an “experiment”. Most of the teachers I’ve known through the years stay late at school and/or do their work at home. “Officially” longer school days don’t necessarily translate into stronger academic performance, either. Some high performing nations have longer school days, but their teachers are respected and well compensated for their service. The longer day is often divided into more recesses between periods, as well, to keep everyone alert and happy.
One thing the longer school day will guarantee, however, is extended free day care for the parents. No small thing for many.
“Charter schools give parents in low-income neighborhoods school choices like parents have in affluent communities,” said executive director Jenny Sedlis in a prepared statement.”
Right…?
Another snippet of well worn propaganda. Who really believes that?
Some may benefit. Most will not. And, just to be real: it’s not just the low-income neighborhoods that the charter movement is and has been targeting.
Even in it’s best light, I liken the charter school and voucher movements to putting a bandaid over a bullet hole.
Many professional educators have been railing against excessive testing for years. Classroom teachers complain about “teaching to the test”, etc. I find most of their complaints to be justified.
Many (not all) school choice advocates also are opposed to relying on testing to show the value of schools/instruction.
I am glad to see people on both sides of the choice issues, making common cause.