Archives for the month of: December, 2018

Lots of readers of this blog don’t like to hear what conservatives, Republicans, or pundits like Thomas Friedman have to say. I disagree. The only way that Trump will ever be reined in is by the leaders of the GOP. No matter how many progressives are elected to Congress, the fact remains that Trump has two years left in his term, and Republicans control the Senate. He won’t be impeached unless 19 Republican Senators join with the Senate Democrats and tell him the country can’t afford to keep him in the presidency as Tweeter-in-Chief, listening to no one but him gut, destroying the western alliance and the economy. Are there 19 Republican Senators willing to face the wrath of Trump and his angry base?

Thomas Friedman wrote that the time has come for the leaders of the GOP to step in and stop the damage to our country and the world by telling Trump that he is toast. I don’t agree that Trump voters wanted disruption. I think he was elected by a coalition that included longtime Hillary haters, disgruntled workers hoping for jobs, people who believed Trump’s lies that he alone could fix the problems of the country, and racists who came out from under the rocks where they had been hiding for years.

Friedman wrote:

Up to now I have not favored removing President Trump from office. I felt strongly that it would be best for the country that he leave the way he came in, through the ballot box. But last week was a watershed moment for me, and I think for many Americans, including some Republicans.

It was the moment when you had to ask whether we really can survive two more years of Trump as president, whether this man and his demented behavior — which will get only worse as the Mueller investigation concludes — are going to destabilize our country, our markets, our key institutions and, by extension, the world. And therefore his removal from office now has to be on the table.

I believe that the only responsible choice for the Republican Party today is an intervention with the president that makes clear that if there is not a radical change in how he conducts himself — and I think that is unlikely — the party’s leadership will have no choice but to press for his resignation or join calls for his impeachment.

It has to start with Republicans, given both the numbers needed in the Senate and political reality. Removing this president has to be an act of national unity as much as possible — otherwise it will tear the country apart even more. I know that such an action is very difficult for today’s G.O.P., but the time is long past for it to rise to confront this crisis of American leadership.

Trump’s behavior has become so erratic, his lying so persistent, his willingness to fulfill the basic functions of the presidency — like reading briefing books, consulting government experts before making major changes and appointing a competent staff — so absent, his readiness to accommodate Russia and spurn allies so disturbing and his obsession with himself and his ego over all other considerations so consistent, two more years of him in office could pose a real threat to our nation. Vice President Mike Pence could not possibly be worse.

The damage an out-of-control Trump can do goes well beyond our borders. America is the keystone of global stability. Our world is the way it is today — a place that, despite all its problems, still enjoys more peace and prosperity than at any time in history — because America is the way it is (or at least was). And that is a nation that at its best has always stood up for the universal values of freedom and human rights, has always paid extra to stabilize the global system from which we were the biggest beneficiary and has always nurtured and protected alliances with like-minded nations.

Donald Trump has proved time and again that he knows nothing of the history or importance of this America. That was made starkly clear in Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis’s resignation letter.

Trump is in the grip of a mad notion that the entire web of global institutions and alliances built after World War II — which, with all their imperfections, have provided the connective tissues that have created this unprecedented era of peace and prosperity — threatens American sovereignty and prosperity and that we are better off without them.

So Trump gloats at the troubles facing the European Union, urges Britain to exit and leaks that he’d consider quitting NATO. These are institutions that all need to be improved, but not scrapped. If America becomes a predator on all the treaties, multilateral institutions and alliances holding the world together; if America goes from being the world’s anchor of stability to an engine of instability; if America goes from a democracy built on the twin pillars of truth and trust to a country where it is acceptable for the president to attack truth and trust on a daily basis, watch out: Your kids won’t just grow up in a different America. They will grow up in a different world.

The last time America disengaged from the world remotely in this manner was in the 1930s, and you remember what followed: World War II.

You have no idea how quickly institutions like NATO and the E.U. and the World Trade Organization and just basic global norms — like thou shalt not kill and dismember a journalist in your own consulate — can unravel when America goes AWOL or haywire under a shameless isolated president.

But this is not just about the world, it’s about the minimum decorum and stability we expect from our president. If the C.E.O. of any public company in America behaved like Trump has over the past two years — constantly lying, tossing out aides like they were Kleenex, tweeting endlessly like a teenager, ignoring the advice of experts — he or she would have been fired by the board of directors long ago. Should we expect less for our president?

That’s what the financial markets are now asking. For the first two years of the Trump presidency the markets treated his dishonesty and craziness as background noise to all the soaring corporate profits and stocks. But that is no longer the case. Trump has markets worried.

The instability Trump is generating — including his attacks on the chairman of the Federal Reserve — is causing investors to wonder where the economic and geopolitical management will come from as the economy slows down. What if we’re plunged into an economic crisis and we have a president whose first instinct is always to blame others and who’s already purged from his side the most sober adults willing to tell him that his vaunted “gut instincts” have no grounding in economics or in law or in common sense. Mattis was the last one.

We are now left with the B team — all the people who were ready to take the jobs that Trump’s first team either resigned from — because they could not countenance his lying, chaos and ignorance — or were fired from for the same reasons.

I seriously doubt that any of these B-players would have been hired by any other administration. Not only do they not inspire confidence in a crisis, but they are all walking around knowing that Trump would stab every one of them in the back with his Twitter knife, at any moment, if it served him. This makes them even less effective.

Ah, we are told, but Trump is a different kind of president. “He’s a disrupter.” Well, I respect those who voted for Trump because they thought the system needed “a disrupter.” It did in some areas. I agree with Trump on the need to disrupt the status quo in U.S.-China trade relations, to rethink our presence in places like Syria and Afghanistan and to eliminate some choking regulations on business.

But too often Trump has given us disruption without any plan for what comes next. He has worked to destroy Obamacare with no plan for the morning after. He announced a pullout from Syria and Afghanistan without even consulting the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, or the State Department’s top expert, let alone our allies.

People wanted disruption, but too often Trump has given us destruction, distraction, debasement and sheer ignorance.

And while, yes, we need disruption in some areas, we also desperately need innovation in others. How do we manage these giant social networks? How do we integrate artificial intelligence into every aspect of our society, as China is doing? How do we make lifelong learning available to every American? At a time when we need to be building bridges to the 21st century, all Trump can talk about is building a wall with Mexico — a political stunt to energize his base rather than the comprehensive immigration reform that we really need.

Indeed, Trump’s biggest disruption has been to undermine the norms and values we associate with a U.S. president and U.S. leadership. And now that Trump has freed himself of all restraints from within his White House staff, his cabinet and his party — so that “Trump can be Trump,” we are told — he is freer than ever to remake America in his image.

And what is that image? According to The Washington Post’s latest tally, Trump has made 7,546 false or misleading claims through Dec. 20, the 700th day of his term in office. And all that was supposedly before “we let Trump be Trump.”

If America starts to behave as a selfish, shameless, lying grifter like Trump, you simply cannot imagine how unstable — how disruptive — world markets and geopolitics may become.

We cannot afford to find out.

Robert Rendo, educator and citizen, sent the following email to the New York Board of Regents:

Dear Honorable Regents,

As a private citizen and taxpayer, I urgently call upon you to reconsider Mary Ellen Elia’s position and to demand her resignation with a replacement that will truly advocate for children, families, taxpayers, and do what is right empirically and non-politicized for public education; that includes promulgating strict laws to prevent data mining and to protect student privacy, as well as increased funding to reduce class sizes and supplement far more greatly populations at risk.

As it stands to date, Commissioner Elia:

1. Has ignored parents: Even though more than 1 in 5 NYS parents have refused the state’s tests, the tests and the standards on which they are based remain largely unchanged.

2. Has deceived parents: Under her guidance, the state education department has misrepresented minor changes in the standards and tests as more significant than they really are.

3. Has formulated and implemented polices that are damaging to children and teachers: Rather than championing developmentally-appropriate practices based in research, Elia’s State Education Department has pushed policies like untimed testing (which may actually be illegal as well as abusive) and canned curriculum (which stifles creativity and engagement for students and teachers alike).

4. Has misplaced priorities: The state should be focused on insuring equity of resources, not on punishing schools.

5. Has not shown the will to forcefully protect all children–whether from racist school board members, data-mining corporations, or indefensible assignments (like the one where students were asked to make arguments in defense of the Holocaust).

I, along with dramatically and rapidly growing numbers other state residents and taxpayers, vehemently call for Ms. Elia’s immediate removal and replacement, and I hold you, along with our state legislators, accountable and will continue to watch hawkishly your governance as you continue in your noble and critical path for public education and our precious children and families of NY State.

Thank you for taking this under your careful review.

Sincerely,
Robert Rendo
Ossining, NY

cc: NYS Allies for Public Education Steering Committee
Jamaal Bowman
Deborah Abramson-Brooks
Chris Cerrone
Jeanette Deutermann
Amy Gropp Forbes
Johanna Garcia
Kevin Glynn
Eileen Graham
Leonie Haimson
Michael Hynes, Ed.D
Jake Jacobs
Kemala Karmen
Marla Kilfoyle
Jessica McNair
Lisa Rudley
Janine Sopp
Bianca Tanis
Katie Zahedi, Ph.D

cc:
Diane Ravitch
Carol Burris
Susan Lee Schwartz
Leonie Haimson
Assembly Woman Sandra Galef
State Senator David Carlucci

Some of you may recall that Masha Gessen, a Russian-American journalist and dissident, was quick to express skepticism about Putin’s efforts to intervene in the 2016 election. In this article, where she interviews Kasparov, a chess champion and an activist, that skepticism has disappeared.

The excerpt begins with a response to her question by Kasparov:

I suspect that they made a conscious decision to create not a Chinese-type system of blocking access to information but its opposite: a flood of information. They created a deluge. For example, they create entire troll debates. You think that there is an argument raging on the Internet, when in reality it’s a script.

When a political system is unstable, something like this can play a serious role. It shouldn’t have been hard to imagine that Putin would decide that, since he has been able to influence Holland, England, Germany, and Italy, to say nothing of Moldova, Romania, and Bulgaria, he would try his hand here. But everyone subscribed to the traditional mistaken belief that Putin is a regional player. Considering the resources Putin has, it was obvious that sooner or later he would challenge the world’s strongest country, because that’s his way to demonstrate his own invincibility.

How well thought-out do you think this strategy was here?

At first they were using Trump mostly as an icebreaker. They expected Hillary to win and wanted to discredit her completely. Trump was the perfect vehicle for discrediting not only Hillary but the entire electoral system. Putin’s great advantage is that, unlike Soviet propagandists, he is not selling an ideology. I call him the merchant of doubt. His message is, We are shit, you are shit, and all of this is bullshit. What democracy? Trump was the ideal agent of chaos.

Trump kept saying that the election will be rigged. This was the Kremlin line. I think their main script was that Hillary would win in a close battle and #ElectionIsRigged would be a hashtag that would discredit her. She would be paralyzed. She’d be facing a Republican congress, which would immediately begin impeachment proceedings.

And then they saw that they had a shot at the jackpot. In its last stages, the campaign changed. They started using WikiLeaks when they sensed that they had a chance of getting Trump into office.

At the same time, Putin held his annual Valdai Club meeting for foreign experts on Russia, and that year it was designed to build bridges with the Hillary Clinton Administration they were anticipating.

Some things take time, even in a dictatorship. Valdai was planned ahead of time. And I’m not saying they had any certainty. Hillary was their main expectation. But they saw that they had a chance. They are card sharks. They stow an ace up their sleeve and keep playing the game.

Later, they thought that they may be able to pull off something even bigger. If you analyze what was happening between November and January, during the transition period, you will see that they were getting ready for a grandiose project. Henry Kissinger played a role. I think he was selling the Trump Administration on the idea of a mirror of 1972, except, instead of a Sino-U.S. alliance against the U.S.S.R., this would be a Russian-American alliance against China. This explains the Taiwan phone call. [In December, 2016, Trump spoke on the telephone with Taiwan’s President, Tsai Ing-wen, breaking decades of protocol and earning a rebuke from China.]

But it all went off the rails on December 29th, when Mike Flynn called the Russian Embassy. Flynn is a few weeks away from becoming the national-security adviser. And still he calls the Russian Ambassador. He calls to say, “Don’t do anything in response to the sanctions the United States has just imposed.” [The Russian foreign minister, Sergei] Lavrov has already announced that Russia will match the sanctions, Cold War–style: the U.S. has expelled thirty-five people and taken away two buildings, and we are going to do the exact same thing. And then Putin, effectively renouncing Lavrov, says, “You know what, we are starting a new life. We are not expelling anyone, and we are inviting American diplomats’ children to our New Year’s celebrations.”

A dictator can’t afford to look weak. He can act this way only if he is absolutely certain that Flynn is speaking for Trump. This means they trusted Flynn absolutely. The were sure that they were going to win in this situation.

Are you perhaps overestimating their intelligence? You are assuming that they had good reasons for trusting Flynn.

Let’s not underestimate Putin. He follows K.G.B. logic. Remember, when several countries expelled Russian diplomats, Putin went tit for tat. I think he even expelled a Hungarian. And yet he didn’t respond to the Americans that time. He was expecting to win big.

My conclusions come from looking at Kissinger’s trip to Moscow and, from what I see, his long-standing connections to Gazprom. It was obvious that China was being distanced and Trump was ready to give himself over to Putin. They were readying the ground for denouncing nato Article 5. This is the picture I get when I add it all up.

Harold Meyerson of “The American Prospect” tells the story of Republican perfidy in overturning the will of the voters regarding minimum wage.

Republican voters approve minimum wage hikes; Republican legislators overturn them.

On Election Day earlier this month, Arkansas voters went to the polls and approved a ballot measure to raise the minimum wage. It wasn’t close: 68 percent of them voted Yes. Just to their north, in Missouri, voters also approved a minimum wage hike, with 62 percent of them voting Yes.

Though Arkansas and Missouri are among the reddest of states, these results shouldn’t surprise anyone. Every ballot measure to hike a state’s minimum wage over the past few decades has been approved. Indeed, the only group of Americans dead set against such raises appears to be Republican legislators.

On Wednesday, demonstrating just how removed those legislators are from the concerns of the American people, Republicans in the Michigan state senate voted to gut a minimum wage increase they had approved before the November elections—in a way that allowed them to rescind their approval once the elections had safely been dispensed with.

Earlier this year, progressive activists had gathered more than the required number of signatures to place a measure on November’s ballot that would have raised the state minimum wage to $12 by 2022, and the tipped worker minimum to $12 as well, but phasing it in more slowly. At that point, Republicans in the legislature intervened to enact a law identical to the ballot measure, but with the proviso that they could amend that law later this year. By so doing, they knocked the measure off the ballot. Had it remained on the ballot and been passed, as it surely would have been, it would have required the votes of three-quarters of the legislators to amend it. By passing it as a law, however, the Republicans ensured that it could be amended by a simple majority vote.

And on Wednesday, the simple, if devious, Republican majority in the state senate amended the law. In place of the stipulation that the minimum be raised to $12 by 2022, the Republicans pushed that back to 2030. The minimum for tipped workers was scaled back from $12 to $4, with that figure not to kick in until 2030 as well. The measure now goes to the House, where the Republican majority is expected to follow the Senate’s lead and send it to the desk of Republican Governor Rick Snyder, of Flint-deadly-water fame. The reason for this unseemly haste is that come the new year, a Democrat, Gretchen Whitmer, will succeed Snyder as governor, and she’s made clear there’s no way she’d sign such changes into law.

Michigan voters swept Democrats (all of them women) into every major statewide office in November’s voting; Republicans narrowly retained their state legislative majorities through the grace of gerrymandering. With Whitmer as governor, they won’t be able to carve such sweet-deal districts for themselves in the post-census redistricting, but for now, their gerrymandered moats and gerrymandered minds insulate them from the concerns and desires of their fellow Americans. ~ HAROLD MEYERSON

Can you imagine a small foundation that is more generous than the Gates Foundation or the Walton Family Foundation, although it does not have billions of dolllars like them.

This is the difference between philanthropy and villainthropy.

The Nathan Yip Foundation makes grants to underfunded rural schools in Colorado. It responds to requests and gives money for things that schools need.

“They deserve a chance”: Family gifts thousands to rural Colorado schools in son’s name

It doesn’t tell schools what they should do to get the money. It doesn’t tell them how to evaluate teachers. It doesn’t demand that they fire anyone.

The Yip family created the foundation in honor of their only child, who died in a car crash.

“A Colorado couple has quietly given more than $260,000 over the last two years to tiny, cash-starved schools hunched on the state’s wind-blown eastern plains, in the lush San Luis Valley and near the dusty Four Corners.

“Jimmy and Linda Yip admit the money they’ve donated through their foundation is not on the scale of, say, Bill Gates. The Nathan Yip Foundation’s operating budget is only about $350,000. One of its larger purchases was for a fume hood and improved ventilation so students at Eads High School, 173 miles southeast of Denver, could complete simple chemical experiments without inhaling toxic fumes.

“We are a small foundation, we don’t have millions to give,” said Linda Yip, who, along with her husband Jimmy, decided to help out small, almost forgotten educational outposts — first around the world, then closer to home — at the urging of their son Nathan, who was killed in a car crash in 2001.

“But the foundation’s funding is highly targeted to meet specific needs in schools where budgets strain to keep ancient science labs running and basic equipment in the hands of students and teachers.

The Yips gave $14,000 to Peyton High School near Colorado Springs to upgrade its automotive program and $1,100 for math books and other tools for primary grades at Byers Elementary. They also handed $22,500 to Cortez Middle School for 72 Chromebook computers and school science materials, including microscopes, digital scales, sensors, monitors and molecule modeling sets.

The Yips have provided more than 40 laptops to students and families on the Ute Mountain Ute Reservation through Tech For All, which gives away recycled computers to schools. And at Center Consolidated Schools in the San Luis Valley, the Yips gave more than $16,000 for high school math textbooks and $27,000 to pay for stipends for teachers to conduct home visits to students enrolled in Center schools

Center High School Principal Kevin Jones said some teachers collect $100 per visit and, thanks to the grant, now make at least five home visits per semester. Once in the homes, teachers learn more about their students in an effort to keep them in class in an area dogged by poverty and homelessness. It’s also rewarding teachers who otherwise would leave the valley for better paying jobs elsewhere, Jones said.

“The home visits that I have conducted have really impacted my job as principal and our students’ ability to get a quality education,” Jones said. “If I could, I would do a home visit a day.”

Joe Wagner loads a new 3D printer in his science classroom on Dec. 13, 2018, in Eads. The Nathan Yip Foundation recently donated money that allowed to Eads to buy the printer.
Leveling the playing field for rural schools

The projects the Yips fund are not grandiose, but they are creating some hope for many teachers, students and district administrators in rural Colorado, who feel ignored and grossly underfunded, Linda Yip said.

“We think kids in rural schools should have the same opportunities as kids in bigger schools,” she said.

School leaders also like that all it takes is a letter to ask for funding. There are no long forms to fill out or worries about putting up matching funds, which is often required for state or federal grants.

Meanwhile, the turnaround for a grant from the Yips is about two to three months. That’s largely because the foundation relies on a 10-member Rural Colorado Education Advisory Committee that includes experts in education, technology and business. They meet regularly to process all of the requests, visit each school, and work to identify the projects that will make the biggest impact, said Mike Kalush, president of the Yip Foundation’s board.

“We know that these teachers can apply for large grants, but the grant process can be overwhelming,” Kalush said. “We make our process simple by asking for a letter first and then if it is something we believe we can fund, we ask for more information.”

Schools often are visited by the Yips, who play off each other well. Linda is lively and outgoing while Jimmy is quiet and low-key. But they are curious about classrooms and their goals are the same.

“We want to level the playing field for these kids in these rural schools,” Linda Yip said. “They deserve a chance.”

“It’s something our son would have wanted,” added Jimmy Yip.

“Concentrating on our own backyard”

The Yips, who live in Aurora, are now retired, but had been real-estate entrepreneurs. They also ran Peliton, which offers companies human resources services, before it was sold two years ago.

Though they grew up in Taiwan and Hong Kong respectively, Linda and Jimmy Yip met in Colorado 40 years ago. They fell in love and were married, and found themselves drawn to help those not as fortunate.

Their foundation is largely made up of volunteers and holds three fundraisers a year, including one in February to coincide with the Chinese New Year. The foundation is named after Nathan, who traveled the world with his parents and particularly was struck by the poverty and lack of opportunity in rural China.

After that trip, Jimmy and Nathan talked about forming an educational foundation to help forgotten kids, the Yips said. They created the foundation soon after 19-year-old Nathan, a freshman at the University of Denver, was killed as a passenger in a car crash in December 2001.

Nathan was their only child, but Linda said she and her husband now have “thousands of children all over the world.” She was referring to students being educated at schools the Yips went on to build through their foundation in China, Mexico and Rwanda.

But the course of the foundation changed when Eads High School science teacher Joe Wagner wrote the Yips in 2016, asking for the fume hood. Wagner also wrote about the needs of students in some of Colorado’s most under-served communities, almost all dotting the vast stretches of land outside of the Front Range.

He told the foundation “due to the district being rural and low-income, this would provide much-needed improvements for our classroom and students.”

The letter was simple, heartfelt and pointed out a problem the organization could easily fix, said Kalush.

“I think about that time we decided we could do a lot of good concentrating on our own backyard,” he said.

Filling critical funding gaps

After visiting Eads, the foundation gave more than $30,000 to completely renovate the science classroom. Besides fixing the ventilation and fume hood, the grant also paid for the classroom’s first SMART board — an interactive display — as well as iPad accessories, a 3D printer and virtual reality goggles. The change sparked wide enthusiasm in Wagner’s classroom.

“It’s the type of hands-on learning that kids really respond to,” said Wagner, a quiet guy who lights up when talking about science. “And the fume hood and ventilation will actually allow us to do experiments safely.”

Senior Blake Stoker said the upgrades were “pretty nice.”

“It’s great for me, since I’m not the type to sit down and read and study a book,” Stoker added. “It gives a good hands-on feel to the classroom.”

From son’s loss, a world of children

Kiowa County School District Superintendent Glenn Smith said the help provided by the Yips is invaluable. Like many rural districts, its enrollment has steadily declined over the past 20 years, and so has the state funding tied to each student. The district’s enrollment dropped from 320 students in 1996 to 170 this year, Smith said.

“And with that we’ve also had increased costs for health insurance, salaries and just a decline in the number of people living here,” said Smith, a no-nonsense administrator who also doubles as the K-8 principal. Unlike other small districts, there are enough teachers for each subject, but not much else.

“We really can’t offer art because we don’t have a teacher for that,” Smith said.

Still, the Yips are filling a critical funding gap.

“They came along and really helped us,” he said. “They are helping a lot of schools.”

Dear Friends,

I hope you enjoy Christmas Day. As a Jew, I have great respect for people of all faiths. I believe in live and let live.

I am aware that for many people, Christmas is a sad time because they think of their childhood and their memories are aglow with presents and family, but also thoughts of loss.

The best antidote to sadness is to reach out and help others. Volunteer to work in a soup kitchen. Former President Obama visited a children’s hospital in D.C. and brought joy. A man in Arizona found a child’s list of wishes for Santa, attached to a balloon that landed on his ranch, and he tracked her down–a little girl in Nogales, Mexico–tried to find everything on her list, and brought Christmas gifts for her and her little sister. He and his wife crossed the border into Mexico to spread joy. They had lost their only child and missed having children in their lives.

There is so much good around us, and so many opportunities to do good for others.

Do whatever you can to ease the pain of those who are less fortunate than yourself.

As for this blog, here are my plans. I should take a break for the next week, but people keep sending things that I want to share. So I am going part-time. I will post whatever interests me. Maybe one post a day, or two, or three.

Stay tuned.

2019 will be a great year for the Resistance!

Diane

The Waltons are an especially cynical bunch of billionaires. The family collectively is said to be worth something between $150-200 Billion. Alice Walton, at $46 Billion, is the richest woman in the world.

They have a family foundation, the Walton Family Foundation, which proclaims its love for children by funding privately managed charter schools. They boast that they have funded one of every four charter schools in the nation.

If they really cared about children, they would pay their one million employees at least $15 an hour. That would do more to help children than all their charter schools. But, as is well known, they pay low wages and are vehemently anti-union. When Walmart comes into a town, they drive every mom-and-pop store out of business, then give mom and pop a part-time job as “greeters” at the new big box store. If the Walmart is not profitable, they close it and move on, leaving all the small towns within 25-50 miles with empty main streets, their stores closed.

Now the Waltons, we learn from this excellent article by Sally Ho of the AP, have decided to target Black communities, to woo them away from public schools and to promise them the world in their privately managed charter schools. They woo them to enroll in a school where parents have no voice and children have no rights. If they don’t like it, they can leave. And by luring them away from their public school, the Waltons guarantee that the public schools will lose funding, fire teachers, have larger class sizes, and not be able to offer electives, while possibly eliminating recess and the arts.

This is not philanthropy. This is villainthropy. Nobody does villainthropy better than the Waltons. They have already forgotten that Sam Walton, the creator of their family wealth, graduated from a public high school, the David H. Hickman High School in Columbia, Missouri. He would be ashamed of what his progeny are doing: Destroying the public institution that served the public good and made it possible for him to rise in the world. The entire Walton clan and everyone riding their gravy train should be ashamed of themselves. Probably they are not capable of shame.

Amid fierce debate over whether charter schools are good for black students, the heirs to the Walmart company fortune have been working to make inroads with advocates and influential leaders in the black community.

Walton family, as one of the leading supporters of America’s charter school movement, is spreading its financial support to prominent and like-minded black leaders, from grassroots groups focused on education to mainstream national organizations such as the United Negro College Fund and Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, according to an Associated Press analysis of tax filings and non-profit grants data…

While some black leaders see charters as a safer, better alternative in their communities, a deep rift of opinion was exposed by a 2016 call for a moratorium on charters by the NAACP, a longtime skeptic that expressed concerns about school privatization, transparency and accountability issues. The Black Lives Matter movement is also among those that have demanded charter school growth be curbed.

When NAACP leaders gathered to discuss charters in 2016, a group of demonstrators led the Cincinnati hotel to complain to police that they were trespassing. The three buses that brought the 150 black parents from Tennessee on the 14-hour road trip were provided by The Memphis Lift, an advocacy group that has received $1.5 million from the Walton foundation since 2015.

Please open the link to see the graphic that shows how the Waltons are funding leading black organizations, to buy their support for the privatization of public education, where parents have voice and children have rights.

Can you imagine learning civics in a Walton-funded school? Do they teach poor children and black children not to vote? Do they learn to sing the praises of unbridled capitalism? Do they learn to despise the common good? Do they teach deference to your betters? Do they teach children that protest is wrong and that rich people should never be taxed?

I’m reminded of a visit I paid to New Orleans in 2010. I was speaking at the historically black Dillard University. The audience contained many fired teachers. I spoke and we had a dialogue about what had happened to New Orleans. One woman got up and said plaintively, “First they stole our democracy, then they stole our schools.”

Black families should be wary of anything that the billionaires are promoting. If they won’t pay their workers a living wage, they can’t be trusted with the children of the workers.

Let’s hope that the Waltons are visited by the ghosts of Christmas Past, Christmas Present, and Christmas Future.

I wish all of you a very Merry Christmas, and I wish the Waltons the gift of a soul and a conscience and a new birth of concern for their fellow men and women.

Texas Superintendent John Kuhn tells the story of two districts in adjacent districts, which are unequally funded but held to the same standards. Who should be held accountable? Look to the folks at the top, who make the crucial decisions about have and have-not schools and districts.

This video came out a year ago and has been viewed nearly two million times.

Bob Shepherd, author, educator, curriculum and assessment designer, and frequent commenter, lives and teaches in Florida. He posted these post-election thoughts.


Tis the Season, I Think

For a while there—for several years—
I didn’t see ANY frogs here in Florida,
which is odd because, you know, Florida, frogs.

Where did all the frogs go? I kept asking
anyone who would listen.

Maybe they were on a Carnival cruise in Norway
or someplace cold like that
because when it rained hard here, recently,
the frogs appeared, suddenly, again,
THOUSANDS OF THEM on the lawn.
Only they were no longer green.
They were pasty, white, like milk
with a dash of Crème de Menthe in it

as though Fellini and John Carpenter
and Tim Burton had made a movie together
and had cast frogs as elderly albino people
streaming through the big cruise line station
in the pouring rain.

Yesterday, there was an election,
and Floridians went out and voted
against themselves again—
against themselves and the frogs.

They are righteous about how practical
they are being in pursuing this course
of killing themselves and the frogs.

And today the President held a news conference
and boxed, soundly, the ears of numerous journalists,
which he really shouldn’t have done
because not one of them even mentioned
That he must have worn goggles earlier,
when his keepers applied orange spray tan to his face.
Politely, I thought, NOT ONE OF THEM mentioned
that he looked as though a child
had painted big white racoon eyes
on an angry pumpkin.

Perhaps these are connected—
the sickly white frogs and the white-eyed Trumpkin.
Maybe I missed that we are now celebrating,
as a nation, twelve days of Halloween—
like, you know, the twelve days of Christmas.

But I’ll know when we officially switch
to celebrating the next holiday season because
I’ll hear in my head, as I do every year,
the voices of the ghosts of the Indians
who helped the white settlers to survive
after their first hard winter in New England—
voices of the ghosts of the Indians saying,
what the f**k were we thinking?

And then it will be again
the most joyous time of the year,
when our President rallies the country
to oppose the War on Christmas.
You know the holiday?–Christmas?–
the one you wouldn’t hear anything about
if it weren’t for his reminding us about it?
That’s leadership.

And what do horror movie ghost frogs say?
Knee deep. Knee deep. Come in.

Los Angeles high school teacher Glenn Sacks explains why it is important to reduce class sizes and why studies that say otherwise are misleading.

He writes:


As a January teachers’ strike looms, 50,000 teachers, parents, and students marched at a United Teachers of Los Angeles’ demonstration Saturday, demanding that LAUSD address students’ needs. UTLA’s central demand is that LAUSD reduce class sizes. At my high school, for example, we have over 30 academic classes with 41 or more students, including nine English/writing classes as many as 49 students, and three AP classes with 46 or more students. Yet some of UTLA’s opponents assert that class size doesn’t matter, citing studies that did not find a link between class sizes and educational performance.

These studies are significantly flawed. Economist Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach of Northwestern University, a prominent educational scholar, explains:

“The academic research has many examples of poor-quality studies…perhaps the most common misinterpretation is caused by low-achieving or special needs students being systematically assigned to smaller classes. In these cases, a simple correlation would find class size is negatively associated with achievement, but such a finding could not be validly generalized to conclude that class size does not matter or that smaller classes are harmful.”

For example, the current LAUSD norm for Special Education Mild to Moderate classes is 12-14 students. These students take the same standardized tests (albeit sometimes with minor modifications) as General Education students do. To include the small class sizes and low academic performance of these classes to judge the effect of small class sizes on overall student performance is beyond absurd.

Of particular relevance to LAUSD is Schanzenbach’s finding that smaller classes are particularly effective at raising achievement levels of low-income and minority children, and that these students are the ones most harmed by class size increases. Of LAUSD’s student population, 76 percent live in poverty, and 90 percent are minority.

She concludes, “Class size matters. Research supports the common-sense notion that children learn more and teachers are more effective in smaller classes.”

Critics like to cite student-to-teacher ratios—numbers which generally sound reasonable–to make UTLA sound unreasonable. Yet these ratios count special education and other specialized teachers who normally have much smaller classes than regular classroom teachers do. Class sizes are significantly larger than standard student-teacher ratios indicate.

It makes a big difference whether a teacher’s weekly grading ritual involves grading 180 students’ essays and tests or only 125. The extra time it takes to grade those is directly taken away from our students. Every teacher has a long list of things they’d love to do better or more often for their students, if they only had the time. My list includes:

• Call in the disengaged, failing kid sitting in back—the one researchers say is often hit the hardest by large class sizes—and discuss (and then implement) a plan to get them interested in the class.

• Every class has someone like my government student Jonathan, who participates in class with gusto but routinely underperforms on tests. One solution is an oral exam. It’s a legitimate test—if Jonathan doesn’t know his stuff, there’s no way he could hide it from me.

• Students often send me video clips, songs, memes, and articles related to something we’ve studied. When a student connects a lesson to something that they’ve taken note of in current politics, it fuels their motivation and interest. I try to review and (when appropriate) incorporate them into upcoming lessons.

• Going to their athletic or academic events. Students often ask—they like their teachers to see what they’re doing, and it helps teachers build bonds with their students.

• As I grade tests, look for students who have been struggling but who did well, and text their parents the good news. It’s nice to hear a student say, “Thanks for that. It made my mom happy.” It’s also important to share the positives with parents, as opposed to communicating only when there’s trouble.

All of these things take time. The time that excessive class sizes cost us can turn a great teacher into a good one, a good one into an average one, an average one into a struggling one, and a struggling one into an ineffective one.

LAUSD’s own figures show they could reduce class sizes to pre-2008 levels for $200 million — only 10 percent of their current reserve. There’s much debate by educational researchers about various ways to improve our educational system. But there’s no debate about class sizes. Lowering them would be the quickest, surest way LAUSD could help our students.