There has never been an election for State Superintendent of Public Instruction like the one recently concluded in California between Marshall Tuck and Tony Thurmond. Tom Ultican says that $61 Million was spent. It might eventually be even more.
This was an epic showdown between charter supports and charter skeptics.
The charter billionaires spent heavily on former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. He didn’t get to the runoffs.
“When Villaraigosa lost badly in the June 6 primary, many of the same billionaires listed above turned their full attention toward electing Marshall Tuck SPI.
“Following a brief career in investment banking, Tuck took a job at the politically connected Green Dot charter schools. Steve Barr a former chair of the Democratic Party who had served on national campaigns for Bill Clinton, Gary Hart and Michael Dukakis founded Green Dot charter schools in 1999. He hired Tuck in 2002 to be Chief Operating Officer (COO) and eventually promoted him to President and COO.
“When Los Angeles Mayor Anthony Villaraigosa was rebuffed in his efforts to take control of Los Angeles Unified School District, he convinced a few donors to underwrite the takeover of ten schools in areas which had suffered years of poor standardized testing results. They created a non-profit called Partnership for LA. Villaraigosa tapped Marshall Tuck to lead the Partnership.
“Tuck was extremely unpopular at the Partnership. The Sacramento Bee reported, “Teachers passed a vote of no confidence at nine of the schools at the end of the first year, leading to independent mediation.”
“During this education reform era in which connections are more important than skill, experience and training, Tuck remained in good standing with the Destroy Public Education (DPE) financiers. Subsequent to loosing the formerly most expensive SPI race in California’s history; Tuck’s benefactors took care of him. Despite no training as an educator, he was given a job as Educator-in-Residence at the New Teacher Center. Bill Gates provides much of the centers funding including grants totaling $26,305,252 since 2009…
“In Tuck versus Thurmond, the direct giving only accounted for 12% of total money spent. Although the direct money spent was comparatively small, it was revealing. In this race the contribution limit was $7,300 and it could be given twice (once for the primary and once for the general). Tuck received 377 maximum contributions for a total of $2,748,500. Thurmond received 170 maximum contributions for a total of $1,234,854.
“The race is generally viewed as a battle between billionaires and teachers unions, but that obscures some realities. Tuck’s maximum contributions came from 259 sources of which 257 were individuals. Thurmond’s Maximum contributions came from 129 sources of which 16 were individuals. Tuck received max contributions from 76 non-employed people, 65 financial industry employees, 39 corporate executives and 29 billionaires. Thurmond received a maximum contribution from one billionaire, Tom Steyer and two corporate executives, Stewart Resnick and Linda Ray Resnick, who also were maximum contributors for Tuck.
“The groups who gave maximum contributions to Thurmond were almost all organized by labor unions. Surprisingly, much of the money came from voluntary contributions and not union dues. For example, the California State Retirees PAC, made a maximum contribution to Thurmond. The largest amount contributed to the PAC by the 1404 contributors was $15.50. Another example is The California Federation of Teachers COPE which made two max donation to Thurmond. The money came from 1326 member organizations like the San Jose Federation of Teacher Local 957 whose members made voluntary contributions totaling to $73,391.
“It was the PACs who drove the election financially.”
You have to open the post to see the excellent LittleSis diagram of the billionaire funding of the Tuck campaign.
No doubt about it. Propivatization was the issue on the ballot in this race.
“When the year began, many supporters of public education were concerned because the candidate apposing Marshall Tuck was a one-term Assemblyman from Richmond, California with no name recognition. Not only that, he was a black man vulnerable to the race card. Then the Judases at the Association of California School Administrators endorsed Marshall Tuck for SPI.
“That might have been the point at which Thurmond demonstrated he was a special guy. On the weekend of January 20th he spoke at the CTA delegates meeting. He already had their endorsement since October, but in this speech the delegates met a charismatic candidate who brought them to their feet cheering. He declared “no privatization of public schools in California. Not in this state. Not on my watch.”
Why is it that so many investment bankers and hedge funders turn to the field of education?
Is it because all the practicioners in pretty much every other profession would simply laugh at their claims to being experts?
Investment wanker banker means you were too dumb and incompetent to get a real job so you had to become a parasite living off the value that others create in our society.
Too dumb and incompetent and or too dishonest
AGREE. SomeDam Poet.
“Why is it that so many investment bankers and hedge funders turn to the field of education?”
I think there is a simple answer. It is the nearly $1 TRILLION in education spending that draws them. It is the most promising looking new profit center out there. If they can privatize education, it could become as profitable as the military industrial complex.
Tom,
The billionaires don’t want to make money. But they believe in the magic of the free market. Bring entrepreneurs into the business of schooling, and someone will a better mousetrap. The fact that their efforts have failed and failed again doesn’t matter to them. The few millions they throw out there, trolling for eager takers, means nothing to a billionaire.
And even if they can’t ultimately privatize it, they will have sucked up truly massive sums of money along the way. For many, short term access to any type of “accountability” money describes their entire goal.
This question actually really hurts: “Is it because all the practitioners in pretty much every other profession would simply laugh at their claims to being experts?” This covers so much ground when describing our district’s outsider attack on schools — the “reformer” game allows so many people in through the front door who have no business coming inside. Everyone is welcome, apparently.
As the recent teacher strikes showed, teachers not only have a great deal of power when they use it, but they also have a lot of public support.
But it is no accident that the strikes were not led by the unions.
And unfortunately, I think teacher union leaders have really sold their members down the river.
The union heads should have been leading the charge against all these barbarians at the Gates (Gates, Coleman, Zimba, hedge funds, etc), preventing them from setting foot in schools.
Instead they were inviting them in and at the same time shackling the teachers and undermining their ability to fight back.
Stuff like VAM, which was used as an ax to be held over teachers heads to keep them in line, was largely supported by the heads of the largest teacher unions.
Even though the union heads now oppose VAM, that they EVER supported it SHOULD disqualify them from continuing in their job because it largely prevented teachers (under fear of losing their job and perhaps never getting another one) from doing what they felt was best for their students.
thank you for articulating this — and for capitalizing the word SHOULD
Reblogged this on Crazy Normal – the Classroom Exposé.
It boils down to one sentence.
Billionaires vs teachers and children … and the billionaires lost.
How sweet it is!
Second that!
I looked at the diagram on Tom’s site. It looked like campaign money laundering.
Maytags United
Charter is a laundromat
To clean the dirty money
Which politician got from cat
In land of Milken honey
The Land of Milken honey is Wall Street, former home to such Laundromat kings as Michael Milken, criminal junk bond fraudster
Maytags United is a reference to Citizens United, the John Roberts Supreme Court ruling that precipitated the current tsunami of corruption.
State Senator, Ben Allen, endorsed Tuck.
Allen became chair of the Senate Education Committee in 2017.
The Choose Children Campaign is the gateway set up for zero to five education. These kids will be set on a path for Living Wage jobs – those “career ready” pathways set up by so-called school counselors using Naviance, etc. to guide them.
https://www.thesvo.com/news/2018/1/22/the-svo-team-joins-real-coalition-at-retreat-hears-about-priority-ed-policies-in-2018
https://seattleducation.com/2018/09/30/saying-no-to-naviance-active-non-cooperation-is-the-best-form-of-resistance/?fbclid=IwAR0UOtDbDjYnCcIURuWV_UpxEQOafDhnODSJWMxH0_ptRb9pK0Ozb_ID9pU
The Choose Children Campaign appears to get their money from the Silicon Valley Community Foundation.
Many corporate billionaires are parking their money here, tax free, until they can figure out how it will best serve them. https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/networth/article/Silicon-Valley-Community-Foundation-s-assets-12704936.php?fbclid=IwAR3_UITADB2GtjCFMB4lsBo_dVnnlPQ8196PNfEMLtODv4M0RKMfSN98PvQ#photo-12873759
Amazon is another example of profiteering from Education. The Bezos Foundation has been pushing their app, Vroom, that guides parents while collecting their info and baby response information. I first learned about it a few years ago while being peddled in my community by local college board and city representatives. https://www.vroom.org/
Now the Amazon Foundation is giving $2 Billion for preschools and homeless outreach. They will create their own preschools – because these kids can be tied to the company store – Amazon. “where “the child will be the customer.”
The rest of the money will go to homeless outreach because there’s no direct profiting from the homeless…yet…
https://globalnews.ca/news/4446699/amazon-jeff-bezos-charity-preschool-low-income/
For some kids it’s the gateway requiring medications for ADHD prognosis…because if you can’t control them best to get them medicated. https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2018/11/28/harvard-study-children-who-start-school-early-more-likely-get-adhd-diagnosis-even-if-they-dont-have-it/?fbclid=IwAR0NDu8YTfKJpegr6sH-xShh7bg9UwvYikksXWEyA2k52I4dszpY80M__Dk&utm_term=.6e394c209c50