Archives for the month of: March, 2019

 

Last Saturday, I attended a forum on public schools organized by Jackson Heights Parents for Public Schools. Thanks to the appearance of superstar Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortes, the event drew some of the city’s leading education stars, such as State Senator Robert Jackson, who has been leading the fight for increased state funding for the city’s public schools for many years. There were other elected officials and representatives of advocacy groups, including Carol Burris of the Network for Public Education and Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters. There were also eloquent advocates for bilingual education, a popular issue in this largely Hispanic neighborhood.

AOC is the member of Congress for Jackson Heights. She was there to listen and learn.

I arrived about an hour early with my son-in-Law and grandson. We went to the nearby heavily trafficked Roosevelt Avenue but quickly realized that there was nowhere to get a slice of pizza, our usual fast food, but many places to buy tacos. My 12-year-old grandson showed off his excellent Spanish, while Grandma could barely remember her high school Spanish. What was most striking about Roosevelt Avenue was that it was thoroughly representative of the new multicultural America that frightens Trump. Side by side are Spanish, Asian, and Arabic shops, peaceably coexisting. I suddenly thought of Reagan in Berlin, standing in front of the Berlin Wall, saying, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” I wanted to say, “Mr. Trump, come to Roosevelt Avenue in the borough where you were born and see the new America.”

Before the event started, I had about ten quiet minutes with AOC. She is warm, comfortable in her skin, somewhat taken aback by her sudden fame, and unpretentious. When I walked in, she jumped up and hugged me as though we were old friends. Or her grandmother.

When the event got underway, the mood in the room was one of unity and purpose. The 400 or so who crowded into the meeting hall were there to support public schools.

There were cheers for more funding, smaller class sizes, less emphasis on testing, and more bilingual education.

Liza Featherstone and Jessica Blatt offer a good summary of the meeting here. 

There was much talk about the importance of parents taking action by opting out of state tests. NYC has one of the lowest opt-out rates in the state, in some part because parents are warned that they won’t be admitted to the middle school or high school of their choice without test scores. It was a bit jarring to hear AOC say that she was treatedin the Yorktown schools as in need of remedial education because she was Hispanic, not mainstream, but, she said, “a-high-stakes standardized Test” revealed she was in the 99th percentile. No one stopped to point out that she could not be referring to any high-stakes test used for accountability purposes because they don’t rank by percentile. They classify students as 1, 2, 3, or 4. Her teacher must have given her a no-stakes individual test that produces a percentile ranking for diagnostic purposes. Well, she can’t know everything about everything. None of us do.

The only controversy occurred during the Q and A session.

Someone asked AOC what she thought about Mayor deBlasio’s interest in changing the entrance exams for admission to the city’s most select high schools. Almost on cue, a group of protesters stood up and held signs saying that any effort to change the entrance exams would be “anti-Asian bias.” It was a tense few moments, and AOC wisely responded that the issue was one that dividedpeople who should be in the same camp, fighting for better schools, and that the issue was the inevitable consequence of a “scarcity mentality.” Why aren’t there good high schoolsfor everyone?

Several members of the panel told their stories. One was Jessica Ramos, the newly elected State Senator, who said she passed the single high-stakes exam that is the sole requirement for the top high schools but chose a local high school and received an excellent education. Ramos was very impressive. A parent, Kemala Karmen, said that her own child likely could have passed the exams but choseto go to a nonselective high school, is being well educated there, and has been accepted by good colleges.

All in all, it was a very satisfying day. The enthusiasm for local public schools was very strong. The eagerness to join together to make them better was palpable. All of the electeds turned out and spoke up, pledging to support public schools.

The people of Jackson Heights felt happy that they have so many top-notch elected officials working for them.

This is democracy at work.

 

 

 

 

Ed Johnson fights day after day to try to budge the Atlanta School Board, which is following the disastrous path of corporate reform, which has failed everywhere. The Atlanta School Board is controlled by individuals who formerly were part of Teach for America, and it is their dream to turn Atlanta in a portfolio district with many privately managed schools.

He writes:

 

Does pursuing “Excellent Schools” make the APSL fit to even say the name Alonzo A. Crim?

 

“The anticipated closure of Crim High School creates a need to formally recognize the legacy of Dr. Alonzo A. Crim, a former Superintendent of Atlanta Public Schools and the first African-American to lead the school district in that role. The Board appointed an ad hoc committee to make a recommendation for honoring Dr. Crim. … [T]he ad hoc committee is recommending that the Atlanta Public Schools central office be named ‘The Alonzo A. Crim Center for Learning and Leadership.’”

 

Yes, it is proper and fitting for the Atlanta Public Schools (APS) central office to carry the name “Alonzo A. Crim.”  That need never be the question.

 

However, with is not proper and fitting is the obviously limited and racialist reason the APSL (Atlanta Board of Education members and Superintendent) state for formally recognizing Dr. Crim’s legacy.

 

Stating only that Dr. Crim was “the first African-American to lead” APS is insignificant in the face of the fact that Dr. Crim was, first and foremost, an “education man,” or educationist, unlike any one of them.

 

You see, Dr. Crim understood that people such as the APSL “who concentrate on standards, goals, performance, achievement, and such get school reform wrong.”  Dr. Crim understood “such people opt for a demand model of learning rather than a support model of learning.”

 

Dr. Crim understood that people such as the APSL “who concentrate on standards, goals, performance, achievement, and such get improvement wrong.”  Dr. Crim understood “such people opt for rigor and maximum difficulty rather than optimum difficulty.  Harder is better, they believe.”

 

Dr. Crim understood that people such as the APSL “who concentrate on standards, goals, performance, achievement, and such get teaching and learning wrong.”  Dr. Crim understood “such people opt to focus on uniform and specific skills rather than understanding.”

 

Dr. Crim understood that people such as the APSL “who concentrate on standards, goals, performance, achievement, and such get evaluation wrong.”  Dr. Crim understood “such people opt for critical reliance on standardized test results and all manner of measures rather than helping kids become better thinkers and learners.”

 

And Dr. Crim understood that people such as the APSL “who concentrate on standards, goals, performance, achievement, and such utterly misunderstand motivation.”  Dr. Crim understood “such people opt to force kids to overly focus on how well they are doing rather than on what they are doing.”  Dr. Crim understood “such people believe excellence means being top-ranked.”

 

How do I know Dr. Crim understood this about people such as the APSL?

 

Because I asked him, as did the AJC, at my invitation.

 

You see, back on 23 March 2000, Dr. Crim listened to Social Psychologist and former teacher Alfie Kohn lecture on and argue these understandings at Georgia State University.

 

At the end of Dr. Kohn’s lecture, I approached Dr. Crim, introduced myself as President of the Atlanta Area Deming Study Group, and asked his opinion of the understandings Dr. Kohn made.  To my delight, Dr. Crim replied: “Alfie is right on.  He gets it!”

 

With those words, Dr. Crim renewed my hope for the future of public education, in general, and Atlanta Public Schools, in particular.  Still, I had one concern: has Dr. Crim the moral and ethical courage to publicly lend his voice to the matter?

 

To put my concern to rest, I contacted the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC) reporter who covered Dr. Kohn’s lecture with the idea to interview Dr. Crim.

 

The AJC reporter subsequently interviewed Dr. Crim, and reported: “‘I think [Kohn is] right on the money,’ said one member of the audience, former Atlanta school Superintendent Alonzo Crim, now a GSU education professor.  ‘Just as Kohn said, we’re trying to go back to the ’20s and make our schools factories.’”  (“Uphill battle: Many teachers think using standardized tests to measure specific objectives will change education for the worse,” AJC, 16 April 2000.)

 

Obviously, the APSL do not “get it!”

 

For if they did “get it,” they would know their chasing after implementing The City Fund’s so-called portfolio of schools idea that is utterly and totally void of educational value and calling what they do “Creating a System of Excellent Schools” flies in the face of Dr. Crim’s legacy.

 

Words simply refuse to come for describing just how unfit the APSL are to even speak Dr. Crim’s name, let alone THEY put his name on anything.

 

The APSL putting the name Alonzo A. Crim on Atlanta Public Schools central office facility is on the order of David Duke saying he “has respect for” Spike Lee.  I mean, gosh damn!

 

Compounding the matter are members of what The Black Agenda Report say is the Black Mis-Leadership Class.  Without question, a chief among the Black Mis-Leadership Class members is Dr. Michael L. Lomax, President and CEO of United Negro College Fund (UNCF).

 

Lomax was a cheerleader for school reformer Beverly Hall, and we know how godawful that turned out.  Lomax was a cheerleader for school reformer Michelle Rhee, and we know how disastrously “rheeform” turned out.  In short, whether he realizes it or not, will admit it or not, Lomax’s record is one of continuing efforts to destroy the very thing that allowed the UNCF to come to be—you know, that thing called democracy.  His op-ed The Atlanta Voice recently published, entitled “I support APS’s upcoming vote on school-rating system,” proves the point, yet again.

 

Still, the mindboggling question is, how does such educated ignorance come to be?

 

Unlike Dr. Crim and the renewed hope he wrought for the future of Atlanta Public Schools, the currently serving Atlanta Board of Education and Superintendent, in partnership with Michael Lomax and other Black Mis-Leadership Class members, have utterly destroyed that hope.

 

They are nothing on the order of being the education man Dr. Crim was.

 

And, in their arrogance, they refuse to learn to know it.  Why?

 

“[Dr. W. Edwards] Deming was a visionary, whose belief in continual improvement led to a set of transformational theories and teachings that changed the way we think about quality, management, and leadership. He believed in a world where there is joy in learning and joy in work—where ‘everyone will win.’”

 

Ed Johnson

Advocate for Quality in Public Education

Atlanta GA | (404) 505-8176 | edwjohnson@aol.com

 

 

The Education Law Center is one of the nation’s leading legal organizations defending the civil rights of students.

In this important new report, it presents a critical analysis of Philadelphia’s charter sector and its indifference to the civil rights of students.

I urge you to read the report in full.

When charters take the students who are least challenging to educate, the traditional public schools are overburdened with the neediest students but stripped of the resources required to educate them. It is neither efficient nor wise to maintain two publicly funded school systems, one of which can choose its students, leaving the other with the students it doesn’t want.

Once again, we are reminded that charter schools ignore equity concerns in their pursuit of test scores, that they enroll proportionately few of the neediest students, and that they intensify segregation even in cities that are already segregated.

Here is a summary of its findings:

  • As a whole, traditional charter schools in Philadelphia are failing to ensure equitable access for all students, and the district’s Charter School Performance Framework fails to provide a complete picture of this concerning reality.
  • Annual compliance metrics and overall data on special education enrollment mask high levels
    of segregation between district and traditional charter schools. Traditional charter schools serve proportionately high percentages of students with disabilities, such as speech and language impairments, that typically require lower-cost aids and services. However, they benefit financially from a state funding structure that allocates special education funding independent of student need, leaving district schools with fewer resources to serve children with more significant special education needs.
  • District schools on average serve roughly three times as many English learners as traditional charter schools, and there are high levels of language segregation across charter schools.Roughly 30% of traditional charters have no English learners at all. In addition, nearly all of the charters at or above the district average of 11% are dedicated to promoting bilingualism, suggesting the percentages at the remaining charter schools may be even further below the district average.
  • Despite provisions in the Charter School Law permitting charters to target economically disadvantaged students, traditional charters, in fact, serve a population that is less economically disadvantaged than the students in district-run schools.
  • Students in Philadelphia charters are more racially isolated than their district school counterparts. More than half of Philadelphia charters met our definition of “hyper-segregated,” with more than two-thirds of the students coming from a single racial group and white students comprising less than 1% of the student body. This is roughly six times the rate for district schools. Conversely, 12% of traditional charters in Philadelphia enroll over 50% white students in a single school. This is more than twice the rate of district schools (5%). iii

We know from other research that certain underserved student populations – such as students experiencing homelessness and students in foster care – are underserved by charter schools. For example, Philadelphia’s traditional charter schools serve
only one third the number of students experiencing homelessness compared with district schools.iv

Both the district’s own Charter School Performance Framework and national research point to systemic practices that contribute to these inequities. Among them are enrollment and other school-level practices that keep out or push out students with the greatest educational needs.

A charter authorizing system that focuses attention on academic and financial performance to the exclusion of equity incentivizes charters to continue to underserve students with the greatest educational needs. To improve equity, the Education Law Center recommends that the Philadelphia Board of Education do the following:

• Ensure that its evaluation of new and existing charters includes and monitors equitable access findings.

• Direct the Charter School Office to build upon the existing Charter School Performance Framework to better center issues of equity during the application and renewal processes, including collecting and reporting key data elements regarding equitable access.

• Grant the Charter School Office additional capacity to provide appropriate oversight, including serving as a recognized resource for parent complaints and reviewing each charter school’s policies and practices.

 

 

We lost our dear friend, Phyllis Bush, today after a valiant struggle with cancer. Her beloved life partner and wife, Donna Roof, was by Phyllis’s side at every moment. 

Phyllis was truly a hero of public education, founder of the Northeast Indiana Friends of Public Education and founding board member of the Network for Public Education.

It is with profound sadness that the Network for Public Education announces the passing of one of our founding board members Phyllis Bush after a courageous battle with cancer.

NPE President, Diane Ravitch, remembers how impressed she was when she first met Phyllis. “I will never forget meeting Phyllis. I spoke at a university event in Indiana, and no sooner did I step off the stage, then I was surrounded by Phyllis and her team. She wanted me to know everything about what was happening in Indiana. I realized I was in the presence of a force of nature. When Anthony Cody and I began creating a national board for the new Network for Public Education, I immediately thought of Phyllis. She was loved and respected by everyone with whom she came into contact. We will miss her. I will miss her.”

Phyllis was a warrior for public education. A retired public school teacher, Phyllis taught English Language Arts to students in Illinois and Indiana for 32 years. Upon retirement, she devoted her energies to fighting high-stakes testing and school privatization. She founded the Northeast Indiana Friends of Public Education and devoted her energies to lobbying for sound public education policies in her state and the nation.

“Whenever I spoke with Phyllis, she was preparing for, or coming back from traveling to Indianapolis where she would speak with legislators about the importance of supporting public schools. It did not matter whether they agreed with her or not—she was walking
into their office and making her case. When she was not lobbying herself, she was organizing others to do the work. Grassroots groups in Indiana and Ohio looked to Phyllis for leadership. And she led them all with incredible smarts, dedication and a fabulous sense of humor.” said NPE Executive Director, Carol Burris.

This year Phyllis was delighted to help host the Fifth Annual Network for Public Education Conference in her home state of Indiana. During that conference, Phyllis presented the first annual Phyllis Bush Award for Grassroots Organizing. That award was presented to SOS Arizona, which stopped ESA voucher expansion in its tracks.

Teresa Shimogawa, a teacher from Anaheim, California, wrote about meeting Phyllis at the conference. “Life is short and painful and messy, but people like Phyllis use their fleeting time to champion noble causes. Saving public schools is saving democracy. Phyllis is a true patriot. Her legacy is something that will transcend her physical life.”

Phyllis is survived by her soulmate, retired teacher Donna Roof, who she married in early December of 2018. She also is survived by her son David, her two grandsons, her older brother and sister and her nieces and nephews.

We will miss Phyllis every day. Her humor, hard work and devotion to the public school children of our nation were extraordinary. She was a joy and inspiration to everyone at the Network for Public Education.

Please give to the Phyllis Bush Award for Grassroots Organizing fundso that we can continue to honor her memory for years to come. You can make a tax-deductible donation to that fund here.

I owe a huge debt of gratitude to Bob Shepherd. Bob is a professional writer, editor, graphics designer, and teacher. He has also worked in the design of assessments and curriculum. You have surely seen his many comments on this blog. He is a polymath.

A few months ago, I received a note from Bob offering to edit my new book as a gesture of appreciation for my work. I have never met a Bob except over the Internet. In 2006, he helped me with my book “The Language Police.” This time, he took on what turned out to be a nearly full-time job, reading, editing, suggesting better language, deleting my many superfluous commas, and so much more. He is a true professional. The book is now almost completely finished. I don’t know yet when it will be published and must wait to hear from my editor. I don’t even know the title. What I feel sure about is that it will change the landscape. My last ask to Bob was to request his reaction to several quotes that I wanted to use at the front of the book. He shared with me his laws of quotation and attribution. He said I could share them with you.

 

Bob’s Shepherd’s Laws of Quotation and Attribution in the Age of the Internet
1. In the age of the Internet, all quotations should be suspect but aren’t.
2. All quotations get improved by repeated transmission.
3. Few quotations on Internet threads resemble, even remotely, their originals, in the original source materials.
4. When in doubt, attribute a quotation, randomly, to one of the following: Aristotle, da Vinci, Lincoln, Bentham, Mill, Wilde, Churchill, Yeats, Russell, Einstein, or Gandhi. Any such attribution will be widely believed, which is all that matters.
5. When making such an attribution, don’t give the source because there isn’t one.
And finally, this, which I will leave unsourced because I am too lazy to look it up:
“You can’t believe most of what you read on the Internet.”
–Abraham Lincoln

 

In the last election, Democrats won the legislature in New Hampshire.

They hope to eliminate vouchers. 

An obstacle: the Governor, Chris Sununu, is a rockribbed Republican.

Gary Rubinstein has taken upon himself the thankless task of watching what Teach for America is up to.

Recently he has listened to the banal speeches of its CEO, who is spouting the same tired cliches about how terrible the status quo is.

“Zip code,” “status quo,” “great teachers,” blah blah blah.

Hey, it’s a living. TFA has about $400 million in the bank, and they continue to get fat “finder’s fees” for supplying ill-trained tyros to school districts who pledge to stay for two years, although some don’t last that long. Meanwhile, everyone at the top is making six-figure salaries.

 

 

 

Remember the Vergara case in California?

A stray Silicon Valley billionaire (or multimillionaire) named David Welch on behalf of a newly minted group called “Students Matter” filed a lawsuit against teacher tenure and seniority, claiming that these practices caused low-income children of color to fail, thus depriving them of their civil rights. At the lowest trial Level, a judge named Rolf Treu agreed with them, setting off a frenzy among Deformers and their admirers in the media.

The Vergara decision was hailed as the new “Brown” decision and even netted a cover in Time magazine (“Rotten Apples,” referring to teachers). Teachers endured a plethora of discussions about the great moment coming when all teachers would have no job protections, no due process rights, and all teachers would be great and no child would have low test scores. But higher courts in California overturned the decision, then dismissed the case. Cooler heads pointed out that the poorest kids had fewer tenured teachers than the districts with high scores, and the whole Vergara episode was illogical.

Ex-CNN commentator Campbell Brown, the then-new face of deform, glommed on to the legal strategy and her organization, the Partnership for Educational Justice (in partnership with hedge fund managers and billionaires) filed Vergara-style lawsuits in several state courts.  So far, PEJ has a perfect record of failing everywhere. Its lawsuit was tossed out in New Jersey and was just dismissed in Minnesota. It’s lingering in the New York court system but no one expects it to go anywhere.

Meanwhile as its legal strategy waswithering on the vine, PEJ expired. It was absorbed by 50CAN, the organization founded by Opioid King Jonathan Sackler. Brown decided to join Facebook to handle media relations. Vergara is no longer even a footnote.

Who will be the next face of Deform, now that Michelle Rhee and Campbell Brown have moved on? When last heard from, Rhee had joined the board of fertilizer company Scott’s, which makes Miracle-Gro.

 

I have recently been in touch with residents of Arkansas who are fighting the Waltons effort to destroy public schools in poor black communities. It is an uphill battle, to be sure, and they need our help.

Minister Anika Whitfield has been working with parents, teachers, and fellow clergy to forge grassroots opposition to resist the onslaught of the Wal-Mart empire.

Pastors are forming their own Pastors for Arkansas Children to defend the principle of public education.

Jitu Brown of the Journey for Justice Alliance will soon be in Little Rock to offer strategic advice. Jitu and J4J led the successful Dyett hunger strike, which blocked theclosing of the last open admission high school in Chicago’s historic Bronzeville neighborhood. As a result of a 34-day hunger strike, Mayor Rahm Emanuel reversed his decision to close the school and instead invested $15 millioninrenovating it into the Walter Dyett School of the Arts.

Please join me in helping the Resistance fight the Waltons and the Corporate Takeover of the state’s public schools by sending a check to:

Grassroots Arkansas

Arkansas Community Organizations

2101 South Main Street, LR,  AR 72206.

It is registered as a charitable organization by the IRS and is tax deductible.

 

This is a great article by New Yorker editor David Remnick about Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. It is almost funny how she has rattled the GOP. They hate, hate, hate her. Is it her youth, her idealism, her beauty, her brains? Is it because she has a heart and they don’t? Is it because she has a soul and they don’t? She frightens them. I worry for her safety.

 

David Remnick writes:

 

Sebastian Gorka, late of the Trump Administration, stood before the annual gathering of the Conservative Political Action Conference last week and made plain the inner frenzy of a party that must place its hopes for 2020 on a President who had just been described before a congressional committee as “a racist,” “a con man,” and “a cheat.” Hence the rhetorical smoke bombs. Wild-eyed Democrats are coming! Gorka declared, “They want to take your pickup truck! They want to rebuild your home! They want to take away your hamburgers! This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved!”

The Stalinist nightmare that Gorka had on his mind is the Green New Deal, a still rough proposal that calls on the U.S. government to come to the belated rescue of the planet with the same sense of urgency that it displayed in rescuing the economy during the Great Depression. To Gorka, such a proposal is a communist “watermelon”: “green on the outside, deep, deep red communist on the inside.”

The President, who dismisses climate change as “a Chinese hoax,” also waxed derisive at cpac. “New Green Deal or whatever they hell they call it . . . I encourage it,” he said caustically, in a sweaty, two-hour rant on Saturday. “I think it’s really something Democrats should promote. . . . No planes! No energy! When the wind stops blowing, that’s the end of your electric. ‘Darling, is the wind blowing today? I’d like to watch television, darling.’ ”

The focus of this fear campaign, the nexus of all danger, is a member of Congress who has been in office for two months: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who, at twenty-nine, represents parts of the Bronx and Queens. With Senator Ed Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts, she is a co-sponsor of the Green New Deal. Because she questions our habits of fossil-fuel consumption and industrial agriculture, her opponents reason, she can’t possibly be trying to head off global catastrophe. She just wants to steal your Chevy Colorado and your Big Mac.

“Apparently, I am a cow dictator,” Ocasio-Cortez told me. “What’s humorous to me is that we’re finally proposing a clear, ambitious, but necessary and grounded policy on the scale of the problem. And so it’s hard for the Republicans to refute the actual policy on its substance. They resort to mythologizing it on a ludicrous level. Ted Cruz says we want to ‘kill all the cows.’ How far have we slid in our discourse? But that’s what half our political representation is up to.”

Ocasio-Cortez upset a veteran of her own party in a primary race, and came to office as an unabashed idealist. The mocking attacks have been a constant on the right ever since. There are phony memes about her clothes, her makeup, her intellect, her boyfriend, her apartment building, her childhood, her high school, her relatives, her old nickname, her dance routine from her days at Boston University. There is a creepy dimension to some of them. A nude selfie made its way through social media—until it was unmasked as a fraud.

Members of the Republican caucus have been no more welcoming. As Ocasio-Cortez rose to cast her vote for Nancy Pelosi as House Speaker, Republicans booed. In the cartoon being painted of her, Ocasio-Cortez is both ideologically monstrous and intellectually limited. “Every time she opens her mouth, I think she’s kidding,” Jerry Falwell, Jr., the evangelical leader and president of Liberty University, told the delegates at cpac. Ed Rollins, an old Reagan adviser who appears frequently on Fox News, referred to her as a “little girl.” On Fox, mispronouncing “Ocasio-Cortez” is considered hilarious.

“It feels like an extra job,” she said of the attacks. “I’ve got a full-time job in Congress and then I moonlight as America’s greatest villain, or as the new hope. And it’s pretty tiring. I’m just a normal person. I knew that I was not going to be liked. I’m a Democrat. I’m a woman. I’m a young woman. A Latina. And I’m a liberal, a D.S.A. member,” she said, referring to the Democratic Socialists of America. “I believe health care is a right and people should be paid enough to live. Those are offensive values to them. But this ravenous hysteria—it’s really getting to a level that is kind of out of control. It’s dangerous and even scary. I have days when it seems some people want to stoke just enough of it to have just enough plausible deniability if something happens to me.”

The Trump family has attacked her from the start. Because she had the D.S.A.’s endorsement, last December, Donald Trump, Jr., posted a joke on Instagram about how in socialist countries people eat their dogs rather than walk them. (“It’s funny cuz it’s true!!!” he wrote.) Ocasio-Cortez’s office had no comment, but she did, tweeting, “Please, keep it coming Jr—it’s definitely a ‘very, very large brain’ idea to troll a member of a body that will have subpoena power in a month.”

In fact, last week, in her first major appearance as a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, Ocasio-Cortez approached the job of interrogating Michael Cohen with care. Republicans have accused her of being a knowledge-lite performer whose only talent is a mastery of Twitter. But, while most of the Republican committee members and even a few Democrats put on laughably self-regarding performances, Ocasio-Cortez followed a line of questioning that helped tease out important facts and responses from Cohen. Thanks in part to that exchange, we can expect to hear from some essential characters from Trump Tower, Misters Weisselberg and Calamari.

Ocasio-Cortez says that she has tried to keep her focus partly by avoiding watching Trump on television: “He relies and thrives on attention, and so the less attention he’s given, even if it’s just one set of eyeballs, the weaker he is.” She said that watching Trump in the House chamber at the State of the Union address made her feel “sick” and “underwhelmed.”

“He is such a small, mediocre person,” she told me. “I grew up with a real romanticism about America. I grew up in a first-generation household where your parents give up everything, and for me America was the greatest thing ever to exist. To be there on the floor of the House was beyond anything my parents would have ever dreamed of. But the person behind the podium was so unskilled. It was kind of sad.”

Ocasio-Cortez has proposed a set of left-leaning ideas: Medicare for All, a seventy-per-cent tax rate on income above ten million dollars, a guaranteed living wage. At first, she seemed to unnerve Democratic leaders. She supported and appeared at a sit-in outside Nancy Pelosi’s office with an environmental group, the Sunrise Movement. Pelosi was unamused and later referred dismissively to the Green New Deal as a “dream.”

But that was weeks ago. Pelosi has found a modus operandi with Ocasio-Cortez, and posed with her (along with Representives Jahana Hayes and Ilhan Omar) for the cover of Rolling Stone. The idea of a Green New Deal has won endorsement from Democratic Presidential candidates (Harris, Warren, Sanders, Booker, Klobuchar, Gillibrand, Inslee) and a growing number of senators and congressmen. Of course, it is not entirely clear, in detailed legislative terms, what exactly they are endorsing. In general, the idea is to pour government money into transforming the economy in ways that might head off the worst of climate change. At this point, the most salient feature of the proposal is a sense of urgency, its conversation-changing radicalism.

There is enormous value in that. So far, moderation has done nothing to override denialism. In an interview after her primary win, Ocasio-Cortez told me that one of the books she read in college that influenced her most was Martin Luther King, Jr.,’s “Why We Can’t Wait,” which includes his “Letter from Birmingham Jail.” There King wrote, “I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice.”

“I think King had a point,” she told me.

Moderation, to say nothing of science denial on the right, has certainly done far too little to head off the catastrophic effects promised by climate change in our time. Just before Ocasio-Cortez won her seat, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change declared that, if carbon emissions continue to rise as they are, the world will soon experience immense destabilization, with cities and regions with intolerable temperatures creating tens of millions of “climate refugees” forced to escape spreading deserts. Unique ecosystems and entire species will vanish. The Great Barrier Reef, already in dire condition, will die. Whole industries, like fishing, will diminish enormously. We have already seen the rise of extreme storms, floods, heat waves, wildfires. The window for meaningful change is closing. “The next few years are probably the most important in our history,” Debra Roberts, the co-chair of one of the I.P.C.C.’s three working groups, has said.

There is no question that the Green New Deal is more substantial in its sense of urgency and ambition than it is in its fine-grained detail. But what has the Republican Party offered, other than a phony restitution of a coal economy and a withdrawal from the Paris climate accord? The recent spectacle of a powerful Democrat like Dianne Feinstein dismissing a group of earnest schoolchildren and students imploring her to support a Green New Deal was maddening to watch. “I know what I’m doing!” she told the kids.

Agree with Ocasio-Cortez’s solutions or not, it’s to her credit that, in such a short time, she has helped change the terms of the debate. “Radicalism pushes the bonds of what liberals will jump on board with,” Saikat Chakrabarti, the representative’s chief of staff, said. “Every major social movement has worked that way.”

The Republican strategy—to brand the Democratic Party and its 2020 nominee, no matter who it is, a harebrained revolutionary—comes from a familiar playbook. Obama was routinely branded a socialist, even a Kenyan socialist, by the far-right opposition. This time around, Donald Trump, as he made clear in his State of the Union Address, will try to hang “socialism” around the neck of the Democratic Party and describe the Democratic candidate as the second coming of Kim Jong Un. But wait! The President “fell in love” with Kim Jong Un. Whatever. That will surely be the move, and Ocasio-Cortez, who is six years short of eligibility for the Presidency, will surely be a focal point of Trump’s tantrums.

Why? Well, first of all, she comes from New York, but not Trump’s New York. She grew up without great privilege. She is a person of color. And she is a woman. And, “In politics,” as Ashley Reese wrote for Jezebel, “women are often either characterized as hideous harpies like Hillary Clinton or pretty idiots whose ‘craziness’ is bound up with their sex appeal. . . . To her critics, Ocasio-Cortez is firmly in the pretty idiot category.”

When I read that to Ocasio-Cortez, she could only agree. “I feel like I predicted it from day one,” she told me. “The idea that a woman can be as powerful as a man is something that our society can’t deal with. But I am as powerful as a man and it drives them crazy.”

Was that the case with Trump? I asked.

“I can see Trump being enormously upset that a twenty-nine-year-old Latina, who is the daughter of a domestic worker, is helping to build the case to get his financial records. I think that adds insult to injury to him.”

Ocasio-Cortez’s staff members say that they often debate whether she is overexposed—if she is taking on too much or getting too far out ahead of the debate. So far, despite the occasional stumble and the endless attacks, she’s decided that the time demands a headlong direction. “When there is a fire, there are the people who run toward the fire and people who run away,” she told me last year. “I want to be with the people who run toward it.”

When I recalled that line, Ocasio-Cortez said, “It still feels terrifying every time. I am trying to pick my battles, but, until there are more people running toward the fire, it’s hard to take a break. The good news is that there seems like more people are running toward the fire. It’s scary running into a burning building. But what is the choice? It can’t be understated how imperilled our democracy is right now.”