There are many reasons why I would like to support Mayor Pete Buttigieg. He’s young, he is well-educated, he is smart, he has an admirable record of service to his country, he’s brimming with ideas. I find him very attractive on many levels.
But on education, he is a stealth corporate reformer.
I had an inkling of this when I read a review of his autobiography, which described his formative years at McKinsey and his data-driven, technocratic approach to solving problems. But I didn’t reach a judgment.
Then I learned more when a friend sent me an invitation to a fundraiser for Mayor Pete, hosted by Reed Hastings. Hastings is the billionaire founder of Netflix who is a charter school zealot. He served on the California State Board of Education where he used his influence to minimize any regulation of charters. Since then, he has given many millions to charters as well as to the charter lobby, The California Charter Schools Association. He created a fund of $100 million to promote privatization of public schools by charter expansion. Hastings has said he looks forward to the day when all schools are run by corporations, not elected school boards.
I tweeted the invitation and it got a lot of attention. Carol Burris heard from Pete’s National Political Director, Stephen Brokaw. He wanted to correct any misperception we at the Network for Public Education had about where Mayor Pete stands on education. He is against vouchers. He is against for-profit charters. He (or his team) visited Roxbury Prep in Massachusetts and was very impressed with their high test scores. Brokaw cited Roxbury Prep as the kind of nonprofit charter that offered lessons to public schools.
Carol responded that the issue is not whether charters are for-profit or nonprofit because many nonprofits are run by for-profit organizations. Only one state in the nation—Arizona—allows for-profit charters. In Michigan, for example, for-profit charters are prohibited but 80% of the state’s charters are managed by for-profit companies. She also pointed out that Roxbury Prep has very high suspension rates, the highest in the state, and the state has repeatedly admonished Roxbury Prep.
Carol suggested that he speak to me. Brokaw then invited me to have a conversation with Sonal Shah, who is National Policy Director, and Sally Mayes, who is “helping” the campaign on education. Shah, I learned later, is amazingly accomplished, but I saw to my dismay that part of her commitment to innovation was to “incubate” Teach for India. In the past, I have been contacted by union teachers in India who complained about Teach for India, echoing the complaints often expressed here about TFA. Wendy Kopp created both TFA AND the international “Teach for All,” which includes Teach for India.
We three spoke last week. It was a frustrating conversation because we were at opposite poles. We disagreed about whether charters are effective, whether they are sufficiently regulated, whether they need more oversight. We disagreed about the value of annual testing. I said that no high-performing nation has annual testing for every child in grades 3-8 as we do. They said I was wrong and cited Japan and South Korea. I corrected them and said those nations have periodic testing, not annual testing. I asked whether their candidate wanted to appeal to the 6% who send their children to charters or the 90% who don’t. I did not get an answer.
I subsequently learned from LinkedIn that Sally Mayes is senior director of Teach for America’s Leadership for Educational Equity, where she has worked for six years. Its board consists of two billionaires—Emma Bloomberg and Arthur Rock (who subsidizes TFA interns who work for Members of Congress) and someone from McKinsey.
I had subsequent emails with Sonal Shah, who is an economist at Georgetown University and who previously worked at Google, Goldman Sachs, and directed the Obama administration’s Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation in the White House. She told me that the campaign has reached out to consult with John King, Jim Shelton, and Randi Weingarten.
John King succeeded Arne Duncan as Secretary of Education. King was previously the founder of the no-excuses Roxbury Prep. Then he was Commissioner of Education in New York, where his fierce advocacy for Common Core and testing outraged parents and helped to create the opt-out movement.
James Shelton had a leadership role at the Gates Foundation, worked for Arne Duncan in charge of innovation grants for Race to the Top, then ran the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.
Mayor Pete may have many things going for him, but his education agenda is not one of them. If he were President, he would continue the failed Bush-Obama agenda.
If he runs against Trump, I will of course support him and vote for him. I will vote for anyone who wins the Democratic nomination.
But not in the primaries.
I am willing to change course if Mayor Pete makes clear that he supports fully public schools that are accountable to an elected school board and that he would eliminate the federal Charter Schools Program, created by the Clinton administration in 1994 and funded with $6 million to help jumpstart new charters; that program has grown into a $440 million slush fund for corporate charter chains, which is far from its original purpose. There is a long time from now until the primaries and I will keep an open mind.
I could easily support Mayor Pete as well, but not just on the basis of any statements he may make to lead us into believing he has changed his position on charters. For me, it would take a partial or full sweeping out of the folks advising him on education. The fact that Obama bundlers are raising large sums of money for Mayor Pete also raise red flags.
The only candidate who has presented the most supportive platform for K-12 public schools to date is Bernie Sanders. Anyone else who comes along will be a Johnny-Come-Lately in my eyes.
In other words, he is very much like Cory Booker. These ed “reformers” can’t get it through their heads these schemes have been complete failures. Education is not a business. Schools cannot be run like businesses. Kids are not widgets. Teacher “effectiveness” cannot be measured by test scores which the kids can easily botch.
Pete B. is another one to scratch off my list.
With Cory Booker, there is a straight line to him on his zealous support of charters. Is Mayor Pete’s a straight line or guilt by association or in this case by fundraiser?
please don’t be a single issue voter
In the absence of a positive, pro-public education agenda, all we have on Mayor Pete are his associations and inferences we can make from his ideology. No thank you x 1000. (“Associations=donors=political clout=another Democrats anxious to sell our public education.)
John Butz,
This election IS based on one issue
Trump is that issue.
No other issue counts.
Once the U.S. gets rid of Trump and elects a normal politician (doesn’t matter if we like him/her), we can get back to fighting over all the other issues.
So far, I haven’t seen any candidates running for president even close to being as horrible as Donald Trump.
I agree totally. I taught in LAUSD for 23 years and witnessed the horrible transition from dedicated educators being in charge to money grubbing business people stealing control and ruining the schools. So many programs humanistic and artistic programs have been cut to ‘improve test scores”. Children are not machines, they are human beings who need the Arts, which teach discipline in a constructive way as well as developing creativity, the MOST needed skill for the future. Dirty politics follow those corporate types which is also destroying public schools as teacher morale is destroyed.
Pete Buttigieg already said he supports Bernie’s proposal to ban for-profit charter schools. He said they are as problematic as for-profit prisons, which he has said many times must be abolished. Also, have you seen his newly released labor plan? Teachers’ Unions love it. Buttigieg’s husband is a teacher. When he releases his detailed education plan, it will be the best in the field, just like his other comprehensive plans. He’s rolling them out strategically over the course of the campaign season. Don’t make your mind up too early, please!
Nicole, If you are going to defend Mayor Pete, provide links to reliable sources that show and/or quote Mayor Pete saying everything you claim he has said.
If you cannot do that, your defense of Mayor Pete is an empty bucket with no water in it.
That water is the evidence you need to support your allegations.
Don’t worry, Nicole. Most of us have not made up our minds. The primaries are still awhile away. The discussion about candidates is important, but as Lloyd said, “Where’s the beef?!” We need references to evidence that Mayor Pete is not owned by the deformers. His choices for advisors would suggest that he is.
I’m imagining myself as a strategist for one of these candidates who’s an advocate for education reform.
As hardcore as it might sound, they might see the urgency of getting Trump out of office as a means of circumventing the education issue.
I have to review the candidates’ platforms but the pushback against testing and charters doesn’t seem to be a front and center issue for many if any of them at all.
I suspect that in the long run education will not be a major policy issue in the election. We already know we don’t what Betsy and what she represents. I can’t think of any candidate that would keep her she is so toxic, but there are so many other issues that will require immediate attention–foreign affairs, climate change, economy, healthcare–that I don’t see that education has a chance of driving the election, especially when there is no clear and compelling difference between the candidates on this issue. That is one reason why I will vote for the Democrat who faces Trump in the general election no matter how vague his/her stance on public education and privatization is. Even if someone who sounds like they “get it” ends up the Democratic candidate, anyone who thinks there is still not a long fight ahead is dreaming.
That pretty much sums up where I’m at, to date, speduktr.
“The only candidate who has presented the most supportive platform for K-12 public schools to date is Bernie Sanders. Anyone else who comes along will be a Johnny-Come-Lately in my eyes.”
Bernie Sanders supportive public education platform is from all of 2 months ago! He supported “public charters” in 2016. He was campaigning for a DFER Democratic against a pro-public education Democrat in the Virginia Gov. primary in 2017.
I am thrilled that Bernie Sanders now is a strong supporter of public education and I would never call him a “Johnny-Come-Lately” because it took him until 2 months ago to see the light. And I welcome other candidates among the Democrats who are running who may offer even STRONGER pro-public school positions. (FYI, de Blasio’s position on charters and public schools is even stronger than Sanders but for the record, Sanders’ position on charters is still EXCELLENT!!)
Mayor Pete’s position on public education sounds similar to Elizabeth Warren’s. I am hoping that like Bernie, they come to see what is wrong with charters and I’d love if Elizabeth Warren went even farther than Bernie and embraced de Blasio’s strong stance against charters, period. (Not simply the moratorium until there is “better oversight” which allows a lot of leeway in defining what good oversight is — NY State is often considered an oversight model by progressives who support charters and it does terrible oversight).
There is no reason to call any progressive (or moderate) Democratic candidate who comes to see the light as Bernie did 2 months ago as a “Johnny Come Lately”. It would be wonderful if they do the same and I would take them at their word just like I take Bernie at his word that his new positions are what he now believes.
I’m with Diane Ravitch and will vote for the primary candidate whose position on public education is good. I prefer Bernie over de Blasio even though de Blasio’s position on public education is somewhat preferable to me because overall I prefer Bernie and his position on charters is still good. And I hope other candidates like Elizabeth Warren also develop better positions on charters. If they do, I will accept their new positions as real just like I did when Bernie offered a much better position than he previously held just 2 months ago.
He’s not in favor of charters – a statement he makes in his book. He also worked with the local centers and schools to provide after school program funding for things like the Riverbend community math center which focuses on STEM education and, surprising (to me as I was looking it up) indigenous math circles. https://www.wndu.com/home/headlines/Buttigieg-promotes-Project-Lead-the-Way-279820772.html
https://riverbendmath.org/partners/AIMC
The “experts” on his staff are major charter supporters. Also TFA and high-stakes testing. Did you love Race to the Top? Want more? Bring in former Secretary of Education John King, who founded a no-excuses charter school and lives Common Core. And Jim Shelton of Gates, Zuckerberg and RTTT.
Liz Marsh, in other words: Mayor Pete must publicly (in a big way so the country notices who and why) get rid of the people on his campaign staff who are major charter supporters and bring in real public school teachers who are totally against publicly funding all private sector charter schools, voucher schools, virtual schools, et al.
In fact, I suggest Mayor Pete contacts Diane Ravitch and/or the Network for Public Education and runs the names of anyone he is considering to replace the major charter supporters on his staff to make sure he gets it right.
https://networkforpubliceducation.org/
Until he does that, I, for one, will never trust him or any of his supporters that leave comments here.
Personnel is policy to quote Sen Warren and actions speak louder than words. Any candidate who has a preponderance of advisors from the ed privatization sector (TFA, LEE, or anyone from the Duncan team) is signaling their future actions on education policy. If the Democrats think they can play a game of bait & switch by equivocating on charters they’ll loose to Trump again. We’ve watched too may teachers & families suffer from their disastrous reforms. We also know much more about the games the Democrats play with their base. We won’t be sops again:
From Aug 29, 2011:
https://www.epi.org/publication/grading_the_education_reformers/
“The reformers’ arrogance is best on display when Brill gloats about the charade of appointing anti-reformer Linda Darling-Hammond to lead Obama’s official post-election education planning, while DFER, with funds from Eli Broad, wrote a secret memo for the “informal yet real education transition team.” Jon Schnur organized the effort and strove to calm his nervous fellow-reformers, assuring them that the Darling-Hammond appointment was only a sop to a faction that would have no real influence, while DFER’s secret memo set forth the Administration’s actual policy – including the naming of key Gates Foundation and Teach for America operatives for crucial administration policy posts, and calling for use of student test scores to evaluate teachers. It is disclosures like this that make Brill’s book something less than the unambiguous morality tale he aimed to present. Had the reformers been a little less sure of themselves, they might have less to answer for when their program, as it certainly must, eventually implodes.”
With you 100% on this.
I appreciate their openness. I agree with your non-support, Diane. I would look for more before considering giving it, including refusal to support the current testing status we see in federal legislation.
To be fair, there are many other candidates for the Democratic nomination who share his views but aren’t as open to what they would do as president. The national unions should do a better job of exposing where candidates stand on education issues. Additionally, no endorsement should be given without the knowledge of a candidate’s education policy specialists.
Thank you very much, Dr. Ravitch, for this information. As intelligent as Mayor Pete is, it is disheartening he has both feet planted firmly in the privatization movement.
Thank you, Diane, for informing me about your interactions with the Buttigieg campaign. I too admire a lot about Pete Buttigieg but will not support him in the primaries unless he drops his charter school connections and advocates for public education. As I have written on my blog, so far the only candidate who has a policy firmly in support of public education is Bernie Sanders. My detailed analysis of both Biden’s and Sanders’ plans for education brought me firmly in support of Sanders’ plan.
His selection of education advisors reflects the fact that he does not value expertise in public education.
Staff selection is most telling. Yes.
Very helpful and revealing about B, thank you. Like Aaron Barlow above, I agree that Bernie Sanders is the only candidate who has seriously addressed the public school crisis. All the others are evading the issue or safely inside the mainstream support for charters and their billionaire backers.
And yet VT has a system whereby private entities receive state support to create schools. I wonder how he would translate that system into a national model. The schools have to jump through a lot of hoops to get that state subsidy unlike charters in other areas, and the system is developed for a largely rural state in which creating quality schools has had its own challenges. My knowledge of the whole system is rudimentary but it is worth wondering if he envisions private school access to some public monies.
That being said, any candidate whose main talking point is that they don’t support for profit charters is really being dishonest given what we know about charter management. I would vote for Buddigieg over Trump, too, but it would be hard knowing that he would continue to undermine public schools. I would also like to see him get some seasoning/experience by running South Bend. I don’t think we really know him yet. There are too many holes.
Speduktr, there is already a national program doing that, in fact there are several – the New Markets Tax Credit, federal loan guarantee and credit enhancement programs, empowerment zone programs, etc. that allow private entities like the Gates and Waltons to expand charters while rewarding investors.
I am wondering what Bernie would do. VT’s education system is not like the national charter giveaway, so drawing comparisons is probably not productive. Nobody is investing in a string of charters to make big bucks, but I am wondering how he would respond to the charter juggernaut that has hit more populous area of the country.
It’s not as if Bernie somehow can do anything about VT’s budget, anyway. He’s not a state senator.
I”m not implying that he can or should have influence over VT’s budget although he certainly has an activist history within the state. I truly am wondering how he would deal with charters on a national level. Remember he originally was quite wishy washy about them. I am guessing his previous amorphous stance had a lot to do with public education in VT. As a small rural state they have had a lot of challenges in trying to provide education to a myriad of small communities scattered over the landscape. They have crafted a system that includes private-public partnerships.
A lot of the small towns in Vermont are strapped for the financial resources that are necessary to accommodate the special needs kids. Especially those who require specialized equipment.
Some friends of mine in the Northeast Kingdom cited one child whose needs ended up taking up about 2/3 of the school’s budget for equipment and supplies.
Part of the problem lies in the Fed not upholding its part in the bargain regarding funding for special needs kids. When IDEA was signed into law, part of the funding to make the act possible was supposed to come from the federal government. This is pretty crucial, especially for the smaller and/or poorer districts throughout the nation and there hasn’t been any follow through on it.
I met a young Bernie at a small picnic luncheon in the late ‘80s when he first went to congress. He was advising the local dairy farmers to form cooperatives due to the chokehold that agribusiness was using on his colleagues in the Senate. I liked him a lot then and thought he was a viable candidate during the 2016 primaries. Not so sure now, though. I think that with so many candidates holding somewhat similar policies, the voters are being splintered. Don’t think his base is as large and strong as last time. I’d be happy to be wrong on that one.
Regardless; as Lloyd and many others have said: priority number one is to put a candidate in the race who can beat Trump. Even if that candidate doesn’t fully represent our personal beliefs and interests. It’s at least a starting point.
“Even if that candidate doesn’t fully represent our personal beliefs and interests. It’s at least a starting point.”
You will get no argument from me.
We have to avoid the “my way or the highway” stance that will certainly lose us the election in more places than just at the top. I’m beginning to think this country has forgotten all those kindergarten lessons we learned about how to play together.
Well said. Kindergarten indeed.
gitapik, There are many reasons SPED across the country is losing funding. One is the failure of Congress since 1975 to fund 40% of IDEA (SPED federal law) for states. Another is the the charter voucher industry draining state & local ed dollars leaving districts desperate to fund the very minimum for all programs.
A more insidious policy was when ESSA allowed states to mix Title I & IDEA funding. ESSA allowed block grants of those 2 pots of money. States could now decide where & how to spend it. No longer was IDEA and Title money directly earmarked to fund those 2 distinct programs. The problem with that is both programs are competing for a finite amount of money to serve the neediest children in the districts. By making those two funding streams into 1 block grant Congress can send less & less money every year. Hence, we see the results in real schools with larger classes, fewer assistants, related service providers with huge caseloads. Block grants fly under the radar so the public has no idea how these tweeks in the laws slowly choke off the amounts Congress appropriates to public programs. After years of starving SPED & Title I, districts & states can “prove” they are failing and outsource them to private providers.
A perfect summary for this busy teacher; I’ll follow your lead on this.
Data driven, data driven, data driven.
Because we can only rely on data. All else is too subjective or too open to corruption. Kind of like the classic distrust of ‘the establishment’.
But people must interpret the data, and the data itself is almost always flawed and skewed, and often immensely misleading or meaningless.
Data should be tertiary. Professional insight, philosophy and vision should be first. Observable reactions and progress, second. Data as confirmation or contraindication, third.
The Ivy League keeps churning out these bright neo-liberals that want to do nothing other than collect data. Schools need far more investment than data, which we know in the wrong hands, results in erroneous conclusions.
Anyone that sees merit in Teach for America is an enemy of professional public education. Mayor Pete should stay in Indiana so he can smooth over relations with black residents his policies have alienated. What should be done in his own backyard requires a lot more than just data collection.
You’re right: there’s a cult of data. Data is worthless unless you have a strong foundation of knowledge with which to analyze the data. These callow youth think data plus a sharp mind equals wisdom. Wrong.
That’s where Kamala went wrong with her truancy policy. She relied solely on data rather than the facts/reasons behind the data.
Minor correction:
“But people must interpret the education data, and the data itself is always flawed and skewed, and always immensely misleading and is totally meaningless.”
That’s the irony in all this–these are people who profess their concern with, their care about, the “data”make disruptive (read “destructive”) decisions based on that “data” without ever questioning its validity (or any meaningfulness at all). GIGO.
Think of your troglodyte uncle at the family get-together who, after he has had a couple, starts spewing about how the country is going to hell and telling anyone who will listen what he would do if he were in charge. Think, you know, Trump. Well, that guy and the typical neoliberal education deformer have this in common–they think that things are simpler and have simpler solutions than they in fact do, and their simple solutions (build a wall, innovate via charters and personalize learning) are extremely destructive.
Pete is profoundly ignorant of education but, like that uncle, thinks he understands it because he has been to school and he is married to a teacher. He clearly doesn’t understand the damage that has been done to US curricula and pedagogy by the Common [sic] Core [sic], the fact that many nonprofit charters are run for profit, that charters undermine public schools by siphoning needed funding from them, that data-driven accountability–VAM, merit pay, school grading, standardized testing–has proven to be a total scam and has dramatically distorted US K-12 education. He has a LOT to learn, and he isn’t going to learn it from the Deformer Mafia he has surrounded himself with.
“He’s young, he is well-educated, he is smart, he has an admirable record of service to his country, he’s brimming with ideas.”
Those are among the reasons I would not support him. He is the epitome of the Silicon Valley phenomenon. Youth and smarts and “ideas” are more important than experience and understanding of the system. Even if the system needs to be fixed, you need to understand how and why it got the way it did in the first place before you go “disrupting” everything and de-stabilizing people’s lives. You need to listen to the people in the system, and listening is not something these young hot shots are known for.
BTW, he’s not really a “stealth” rephormer. His years at McKinsey tell you all you need to know about his positions on privatization and profit.
YEP!
Believe me, a “local” and a lifetime public educator in the South Bend area….
Pete is very practical, listens intently and intelligently, and our region is not by any means akin to Silicon Valley. Pete “came home” to South Bend, remember?
Sadly he has surrounded himself with Duncan retreads and technocrats.
Buttiguige has clearly chosen who he will listen to on education policy. He’s chosen individuals who are not professional educators. TFA does not produce professionals, they produce business managers & are behind efforts to de-professionalize teaching. He’s chosen Duncan acolytes who already know how to write DoEd policies that enforce the rapid expansion charter schools and evaluating teachers on the basis of their students’ test score growth.
These policies ARE Silicon Valley ideas. They were cooked up in the minds of a few boys who are too self-righteous, greedy, or socially clueless to recognize that their ideas for educating children are failing.
“We disagreed about whether charters are effective, whether they are sufficiently regulated, whether they need more oversight. We disagreed about the value of annual testing.”
This is like “disagreeing” that the earth is round. There are some debates simply not worth having because the evidence is so strongly stacked on one side that there’s not really even a debate to be had.
YEP!
“I am willing to change course if Mayor Pete makes clear that he supports fully public schools….”
But why would you change course and support him over Bernie who has already made that clear? And who hasn’t worked for McKinsey? And who has a clear record on progressive social issues?
Well-state, Dienne!
The charter movement is unnecessary and messes up the accounting for locally controlled and funded (with federal assistance as necessary) schools.
I agree with this post 100%. Even though they were much different Presidents, I found very little difference in public educational policy between Bush and Obama. Hated both policies. It’s time we stick up for public education. And I agree, I will support any Democratic candidate against, can’t even say his name (actually won’t say his name).
MIchael, you may have noticed I can write his name, but never use the adjective “President”
How about POTUSSR, POS, the Buffoon or Number 3, the third to be impeached by the House.
“Titus’ announcement brings the number of pro-impeachment House Democrats up to about 109, which is nine short of a majority for the Democratic caucus.”
tRump is my moniker.
No. 3 and 4 Sen. Democrats now back inquiry into tRump.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/29/senate-dems-impeach-1440546
Vlad’s Agent Orange; IQ45; Part-time President Donald (J for Jabba) the Trump; Teflon Don, the Sequel; The Dope White (Supremacist) Hope; the Don, Cheeto (“Little Fingers”) Trumpbalone; Prez Pinocchio; Trumpty Dumpty; Don the Con; The Man with the Plan and the Tan-in-a-Can; Dog-Whistle Don—Oh, for a Muse of fire! Oh, for the proper invective to be fully reflective of the vileness of the occupant of the Whiter House!
Yes–I could never say “President” either, just 45.
& you, Diane, improved that to IQ45!
Child-Man in the Promised Land, Putin’s Dongle, The Inflated One, The Grating Trumpkin, Trumplestealskin
He who gave America and the world the DTs.
Select the proper answers, as many as you think are correct. The meaning behind DT’s name means:
A. Delirium Tremens.
B. Deep Throat
C. Don’t Trip
D. Dream Theater
E. Dark Templar
F. Dick Tease
G. Duck Tape
H. Double Trouble
I. Designated Talker for the Orally Impaired
Pete Buttigieg is like a McKinsey consultant you might hire to conduct a research analysis, the recommendations of which, following due consideration by the Board, you would decide not to take.
So is Democratic Party candidate Andrew Yang.
Sometimes you just need people on the scene to do their jobs. Not layers upon layers of “experts” interjecting their (self-serving) “solutions.”
Fascinating to discover that Buttigieg ACTUALLY WAS a McKinsey consultant. Nothing wrong with that. Probably higher quality thinking process than the average run of political candidate. But Diane is right to focus on the original design. Bottom up democracy. Not layer upon layer of top down command and control. Which amounts to empty blathering. And huge waste of time and “Other People’s” money.
“Nothing wrong with that.”
Actually, there’s a lot wrong with that. McKinsey is completely amoral. They will sell to the highest bidder, whether that’s Saudi Arabia looking for advice on how best to acquire U.S. weapons with which to smoke Yemen or or multi-billion dollar companies looking for advice on how to take even bigger slices of the public pie.
YEP!
For what it’s worth, he worked in grocery pricing for them right out of college and left after a year or two, saying it was interesting, but not at all fulfilling and that he needed to work in service to others instead. So I think the McKinsey talk is blown out of proportion.
Thanks Diane for engaging with Pete’s team of establishment Dems and for exposing his plan to gut Main Street by eliminating the economic multiplier effect of local education taxes, spent locally. I think we can presume Pete’s platform will be almost identical to CAP’s, where the two distinguished senior fellows are Neo-liberal, Austan Goolsbee (Univ. of Chicago) and Larry Summers, friend of the architect of Russian privatization, Andrei Shleifer.
It appears Pete follows the money of the tech monopolists and Wall Street. So, if he’s elected we should expect lobbyist, Tom Dasche, to continue to achieve legislative wins for the wealthy clients of his BiPartisan Policy Center (Daschle is CAP’s board chair).
Presumably, if Pete was advised to go to Flint and betray the people, he would, just as Obama did.
One substantial problem with CAP and Pete relates to their view of women. Women are relegated to 2nd class citizenship, when teaching, the career that lifted the most women into financial independence, is eliminated. I speculate that Pete’s Sally and Sonal are similar to Sheryl Sandberg, as described by Jezebel, “only seem to view feminist progress in terms of their individual success climbing the corporate ladder and making bank”.
If Pete wins the primary, it will be like 2016, die-hard Dems will vote for him, Republicans won’t cross over and, the rest will view him as the wealthiest’s stooge. So it will be a battle
between an old, stupid, populist showman posing as the people’s champion and, a young, smart, economic DINO posing as the people’s champion.
Thank you very much. I love Mayor Pete for all the reasons you listed at the beginning, but this is a very important issue, near and dear to my heart as a retired public school teacher. I will vote for the Democratic candidate and will use the primaries to reach out to their campaign to get the facts.
Thank you, Diane, for this important work. The fact that they had no answer to the 6% question is telling that they seriously don’t know the depth and breadth of what charters do to public schools and also what they DON’T do for the public in general.
No Booker, Biden, Buttigieg, Beto, Harris either.
Christine, why do you include Harris in the same list as the terrible privatizer Booker?
Her truancy program in California raises huge red flags for me. She didn’t appear to realize that the poorest families would be the most harshly affected. This for me is in keeping with her general acceptance by the Center for American Progress folks who were fans of Obama’s approach to public education.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/kamala-harris-truancy-arrests-2020-progressive-prosecutor_n_5c995789e4b0f7bfa1b57d2e
Perhaps she has “evolved”. The New Yorker has a terrific profile of Harris here: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/07/22/kamala-harris-makes-her-case
I’m in San Francisco, where that happened, and I agree — it’s a huge concern.
Kamala Harris was California’s Attorney General who went to court to overturn the Vergara court decision in Los Angeles that took away due process rights from public school teachers. She appealed to the state’s Supreme Court and won.
Other than that, I don’t know where she stands regarding corporate charter schools.
I am beginning to think we have to be very careful to put actions of candidates in the context of the times. I am wondering if Kamala Harris’ truancy policy came during the era defined by “tough on crime,” which seemed to translate into a general feeling that we had been too soft on “rule breakers” in general.
Biden, too, has been criticized for going along with the crime bill. Apparently, the bill passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support, which tells me that few people had any idea of the consequences. It apparently had widespread popular support from blacks and whites as well. Now, years later, most people have seen the folly of the get tough stratagem. It makes it so much easier when politicians, or anyone for that matter, come right out and admit mistakes.
What I call “magic bullet” solutions seems to be part of our nation’s culture. I’ve lived long enough to see lots of these “magic bullets” come along and fail repeatedly.
For instance, weight loss “magic bullets” seem endless and how many actually work?
Tim Ryan is a corporate DINO (Third Way).
And don’t forget Bennet. His meteoric rise is due to the “Denver Miracle” NOT!!!
Adding Bennet – he’s so far down the list of contenders, I’ve ignored him.
100% agreed on Harris’ vicious truancy laws. When you’re a cop, every “solution” involves incarceration.
Diane, have you been able to dialogue yet with Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris about these issues? Thank you
No. I’ve reached out to the Warren campaign but they were “on a roll” and too busy to talk. No contact yet with Harris though I would love to talk to both. Biden too. Hope to make it happen.
I just finished reading Pete’s book and I was also worried about all the “data” talk, but I’m really hoping that he could modify his views on that enough to be palatable. Obama was much worse for education than even Bush, who was the worst president up til then. I hardly recognize my profession any longer with all the testing and inappropriate expectations of young children. Much as I despise Trump for the constant stream of inappropriate comments and confrontational policies, I appreciate the relative peace we have had since he took over. Because he doesn’t care, yes, but at least he isn’t implementing a whole bunch of new and worse initiatives. His team is pro-charter, but it doesn’t seem like there is any big change there either. I worry as much about a well-spoken Democrat based on my Obama experience.
Ellen, Trump turned over the destruction of the public schools to a billionaire that supports privatizing education at the public’s expense.
That billionaire is Besty DeVos and the reason she is the Secretary of Education is that she bought that position for the
“Besty DeVos, Trump’s Big-Donor Education Secretary”
“Trump’s choice of DeVos delivers on his campaign promise to increase the role of charter schools, which she has long championed”
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/betsy-devos-trumps-big-donor-education-secretary
The damage to public education by the Trump administration is there but you don’t notice it because Trump doesn’t tweet about it and Betsy the Brainelss doesn’t tweet at all.
In fact, while almost everyone in the country is focused on Trump’s endless lies, tweets, and hate rallies, the damage to our federal government and the U.S. Constitution is being carried out on a daily basis by all the corrupt people he appointed to lead the agencies of the federal government.
Trump’s antics make him the distractor in-chief so his appointed minions can do as much damage as possible to our government. His endless distractions as he feeds the muckraking media are helping them get away with literal murder and robbery.
I appreciate the history on Mayor Pete. I am opposed to privatization in all of its forms and permutations and you have always kept us informed about attempts to mask privatization in other ways. I hope you might approach Mayor Pete himself to get further some clarity about his commitment to public education. He’s very smart and also very slick so I’m waiting for these next two debates to see what he has to say. I can understand your non-support but I really appreciate your support for the Democratic nominee. I am fully supportive of that decision.
When Buttigieg first appeared on the scene, like many others, I was very impressed with his intellect, articulateness, and apparent ability to think on his feet. I grew less impressed as the weeks wore on. He has shown a striking inability to listen and respond adequately to race relations and racial injustice – especially economic – in his own city, has presented no original policy proposals, and has staked out a middle ground that ensures the Democratic Party status quo is not disrupted.
Buttigieg’s education positions fit perfectly within this frame; they are not a departure from it. If they were I would still consider supporting him. I do not decide for or against a candidate based on their position on a single issue, but even if I did, education policy would not be that single issue for a presidential candidate.
O’Rourke went through the same type of beginner public adoration until his charter school and economic connections became clearer.
I gave Beto many donations when he ran against Cruz. I didn’t realize how deeply embedded in Charter World his family is. I would still support him against the abominable Cruz. Not president.
This is absolutely not true and it takes just a little bit of research to debunked it. What Buttigieg has done in the past to respond to race relations and racial injustice is there for anyone to see. It is something he has talked about all along, nothing new. And most recently he has addressed it mode widely with his Douglas Plan. As for education, he has talked about, like I mentioned before, and more specific policies will come in time. His candidacy is new and we are very early in the primary process. He has started his talk giving emphasis on values trickling down to policies as his candidacy matures. You have not either listening to what he has to say or is bias.
I don’t know to whom your comment is addressed but I assure you I have no bias towards Mayor Pete. When a candidate turns to John King and James Shelton for advice on education, it is a very clear signal that he admires the Arne Duncan policies.
I said this in a previous comment but I think it needs repeating.
There are a lot of new names popping up defending Mayor Pete and without any substance behind their defense of him.
I could be wrong, but I strongly think these fresh names might be his staff ganging up on this site in his defense.
If they keep this up, I know I will not vote for Mayor Pete even with his combat record unless he is the last one standing after the primaries.
Mayor Pete must come out and clearly and publicly show (through his mouth and not his minions) his support for public schools:
One: he must make is crystal clear that he does not support any corporate charter schools profit or non-profit that is run by for-profits.
Two: that there must be a total mortarium on charter school growth until there is legislation that holds the existing charters to the same standards that public schools must follow.
Three: that any private schools in the United States must be held accountable to the same legislation and laws that guide public schools. This is what Finland does and it works.
Lloyd,
I noticed the same thing. ESP the lack of substantive comments. Just disagreement.
And seriously, Roxbury Prep?!
Still showing a suspension rate of 27%; 53% for SWD, for 2017-18 SY. The state averages are 5% and 9%, respectively.
http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/ssdr/default.aspx?orgcode=04840000&orgtypecode=5&=04840000&
53%?????? That should be criminal.
And yet the charteristas claim that Boston’s charter sector is the best in the nation. Talk about damning with faint praise.
The Vermont Governor’s race includes a candidate who was a public school teacher who has staked out opposition to vouchers:
https://rebeccaholcombe.com/meet-rebecca/
I remember reading good things about her–she was VT’s Sec. of Ed. for 4 years–in this very blog, I believe.
A # of years back, there were posts about “which was the best state for public education?” & VT was listed in one of those posts, along w/info. about Sec. of Ed. Holcombe.
Rebecca Holcombe is outstanding
ironies abound: bravo to Diane for investigating all of these onerous connections (some based on Obama Admin, which still is widely admired (for some reason). Pete has just put out the most pro-worker and pro-union platform regarding the gig economy, whereas Harris is deeply compromised by her sister/campaign manager married to Uber counsel. There’s a deeply significant battle in CA over regulating the gig economy and incredibly, Buttigieg is leading on this issue. Bravo to him on that and let’s hope he hears you (and others) on education.
Harris’ sister Maya was one of 3 senior advisors to Hillary’s campaign agenda.
“Wendy Kopp created TFA”. Adding, Kim Smith, in her bio., claims co-founding status of TFA. In addition to TFA Smith founded or co-founded New Schools Venture Fund, Pahara, and Bellwether, all Gates-funded.
‘I asked whether their candidate wanted to appeal to the 6% who send their children to charters or the 90% who don’t. I did not get an answer.” And it is that complete silence which resounds in the real world.
It’s funny how silence can be so deafening.
Well, this is disheartening, though I, too, will vote for any of the Democratic candidates over Donald Trump, whom I consider frightening in the extreme. If Trump were to squeak through to another victory and were to retain control of the Senate, he would, ofc, take this as a mandate for building his Whiter House and pursing his millenarian, tribalist, exceptionalist, racist, nationalist goals. He would continue to goosestep us backward by appointing troglodytes to key executive positions, ignoring quite real existential crises, and stacking the judiciary, with which we shall live for a long, long time. A Trump court could VASTLY change the kind of country we live in.
Pete is, ofc, far, far more decent and intelligent than is IQ45. I know that that’s not saying much. (Parasitoid wasp larvae have a more highly developed moral sense than Trump does.) But losing the 2020 election to Trump could well be as consequential for the Untied (spelling intentional) States and for the world as was the German Enabling Act of 1933.
I hope that Buttigeig is at least a bit rattled by this opposition to his education trajectory and that he will come to his senses about this. But defeating Agent Orange is job 1.
Thank you, Diane, for keeping the welfare of kids front and center.
Disruptive tech billionaire Reed Hastings does not donate money. He invests. When he holds a $500/plate fundraiser for Mayor Pete, he expects a return on his investment. Buttigieg represents the status quo that enriches Reed Hastings at our expense.
If Mayor Pete wins in the primaries, I will vote for him against T____. If Bernie wins, I won’t just vote for him; I will bring teacher energy to campaigning for him. No other candidate will have that kind of Berniementum in 2020.
Diane, do you have a policy brief that outlines a path forward to improve our public school system? I want to be for public education except it’s getting harder and harder to have faith that we can turn it around. A brief could be something a candidate could latch onto.
You could start with the prescriptions in my book “Reign of Error.”
Her suggestions are great and thoroughly achievable. And shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who has paid attention to public education.
What does NPE have?
Kate,
If it’s “harder and harder” for you to have faith in public schools, it must be difficult for you to accept the funding cuts that have devastating effect on the poor and middle class, public education among them. It must be hard for you to tolerate the Gates, Zuck, Hastings, Walton attacks on public education, They are billionaires scheming to further concentrate wealth. It must be hard for you, as it is for me, to watch communities denied their right to democratically elect school boards, which is the Koch bros. plot.
So, his campaign people are going to be meeting with Randi for some advice? Guess what folks….the biggest teacher’s union will now be endorsing Mayor Pete for Prez whether you like it or not. Randi is only concerned with having that top position at the USDE so she will drool all over wonderful non profit charters and sell out public school teachers, yet again. I can already see history repeating itself….it wasn’t pretty then, it isn’t pretty now, and I’m sure it won’t be pretty when it happens again.
Advice?
Or endorsement?
The Weingarten
The wine is very nice
In garden, with some ice
And rubbing elbows too
Is what I love to do
Actually, the AFT is not quite as large as the NEA, but yes I can certainly see an endorsement on the horizon.
Thank you, Diane, for this information.
Thanks very much for this! The public needs to know. I am a retired Chicago Public School teacher, 32 years. In my 10 years of retirement it has been so frustrating watching the wheel being reinvented by non-educator know-nothings.
Thanks again!
Diane, I appreciate how thorough you and Carol Burris are regarding who you talk with and what is discussed.
Transparency is good. They’re public schools. We should know who sets policy for them. Thank you for always recounting these discussions you have to all of us.
It’s wonderful to have such principled advocates as these two!!!
I do love Mayor Pete, but his position on Reforms and the people connected to his campaign are disturbing. He has done little to reach out to the public school community, and if he is connected with TFA, it would stand he isn’t for unions.
Maybe Pete wasn’t aware of the many strikes across the country.
I hope this gets back to him and he finds better education advisors. Although he better not pull an Obama like getting LDH as his ed advisor, then dumping her for Duncan.
He better not get LSD as an advisor and dump her for Mary Jane either.
Pete has an open mind. If this is the only policy you do not like that He has then he is in great shape. Pete will work across the isle and govern his ideas with others with the same compassion as you do.
“Work across the aisle” like the BiPartisan Policy Center does so that wealthy clients/donors get the legislation they want. America’s been there, done that which explains a judiciary led by the Federalist Society, a decimated middle class and health care costs that average $28,000 a year per family.
Pete made it very clear at his event yesterday that he was no fan of Betsy DeVos, which certainly puts him closer to the side of strong public education over charter schools.
Of course he is no fan of DeVos. But he is a fan of former Secretary of Education John King (pro-Charter and pro-testing) and James Shelton (Gates, Duncan, Chan Zuckerberg).
NO ONE is a fan of DeVos, except a couple of total Trumpies. That doesn’t mean Buttigeg is going to support public education.
If the metric for a “Democrat supporting public education” is not liking DeVos, then almost everyone, including Attilla the Hun, is a Democrat.
He fully supports public education and has stated as such. But hey, who needs facts?
Charter schools are not public schools.
Pete is advised by two leaders of the charter privatization movement: John King, who founded Roxbury Prep, a charter with the highest suspension rate in Massachusetts, and Jim Shelton, who worked for Gates, Arne Duncan and Mark Zuckerberg, all supporters of charter schools. His lead education advisor comes from Leadership for Educational Equity, a part of TFA, which is an arm of the charter movement.
Hey, Angela. Who has written books on this topic?
Pete’s smart. He knows education dollars forfeited by communities to tech tyrants and Wall Street will bankrupt Main Street. He knows the loss of teaching jobs will decimate the middle class…labors’ kids, their education, irrelevant to him.
He doesn’t care because he anticipates campaign help from Hastings, Zuck, Gates, Waltons, etc.
Thank you for this post. As someone who’s been a BAT since its inception and who also digs Buttigieg, I wasn’t aware until now of his reputation in these circles. Also, thank your for allowing him the space to prove himself rather than judging him immutably based on where he once worked. After all, I’m a graduate of the same private Christian college as Betsy DeVos, and converts make the best allies. 😉
Are you ready to drop your jaw to the floor? Here’s an essay by Pete Buttigieg admiring Bernie Sanders:
https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/education/profile-in-courage-essay-contest/past-winning-essays/2000-winning-essay-by-peter-buttigieg
Nineteen years after writing the essay, Buttigieg met with neoliberals at an event organized and funded by billionaires called What To Do About Bernie, plotting to keep Sen Sanders from winning the election. What happened to young Peter?
Thanks for the link.
“What happened to Pete”… the precipitating event, McKinsey?
It’s funny what a lust for money and power will do to some. I’m very disappointed after reading that essay….he seemed to have “gotten it”.
Unfortunately, even among political Left activists, education policies are not of primary importance. Your very astute and on-point post should be disseminated to every candidate and education policy should be elevated to the top tier of important issues to be addressed starting with tomorrow’s debates and continuing throughout the campaign.
At this point in the run up to the Democratic primaries, Buttigieg is in 5th place according to Real Clear Politics.
Biden is at 31.3 percent – – – – Buttigieg at 5.8.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html
For Buttigieg and the rest of the pack lagging behind him to move up, something dramatic will have to happen to the top four candidates to knock all of them out between now and the primaries.
I wish the world was as black and white as you’ve painted this debate, Diane. Charters do remarkable things in many communities. I like Mayor Pete, and hope he brings an open mind to the serious issues in public education, in spite of the significant $ invested. I have no such hope that lifetime teachers’ union members will ever get it. Their own self/interest too often rules the day. All monopolies eventually suffer from hubris, and a lack of creative thinking. And they always have their defenders…
Eva Moskowitz (Success Academy) has written, and reported brilliantly on the subject. It’s so much more interesting and thought-provoking than This one-sided screed. But, thank you for posting on a subject so important.
Tessaro, Atlanta
Ed, I have written hundreds of posts about corruption in the charter industry. Have you read them?
Ed is probably a minion of the Charter School Industry paid to say what he did in an attempt to subvert the voice of truth. The only other option is that Ed is an ignorant fool like most it not all of Trump’s supporters that doesn’t know what is going on and doesn’t want to know.
Every community has its own school district with its own school board. That’s not a monopoly. That’s the opposite of a monopoly. And, as a teacher and a union member, I stand and fight collectively for equality, lower class size, and better resources for my students. But thank you, Ed, for insulting me and my heroes. Awesome!
Ed’s “monopoly” comment gave him away. The monopolies of the tech tyrants and the self-interest of the Wall Streeters, both of whom champion charter schools are a convenient omission for him.
The independent analyses and the motives of teachers i.e. the middle class, are clearly better than those of John Arnold, Dan Loeb, the Koch’s, DeVoses, Walton heirs,…As example, the DeVoses and Waltons lost millions to the nothing of Theranos and John Arnold was Enron.
“For-profit charter schools should not be part of our vision for the future,” Buttigieg told reporters. “And I think the expansion of charter schools in general is something that we need to really draw back on until we’ve corrected what needs to be corrected in terms of underfunded public education.”
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/unchartered-territory-2020-democrats-back-away-charter-schools-n1014706
If your litmus test is to eliminate all charter programs, you’ll be without a real candidate at all. I agree with your position philosophically, and hope we can all steer the conversation that direction, but I am very troubled that you would torpedo a candidate who seems to largely share your goals and vision.
Rob-
Go back in the thread and read how meaningless the “non-profit” verbiage is. As example, an ed tech firm COO is on the board of a charter school network. Her firm sells products to the charter school.
It’s but one way the “non-profits” have devised to personally benefit. Compare the compensation of non-profit charter management to public school administration.
Only one state allows “for profit charters” but many states allow for profit management corporations to operate “nonprofit charters.” In Florida, nearly Half the “nonprofit charters” are managed by for profit corporations.
How to Profit from a Non-Profit Charter School
Good day, class, and welcome to Florida Man Five-Minute University, where we teach you the inside secrets that make Florida the capitol of the con. It’s not just selling swampland to Yankees anymore, folks! Today’s topic: how to run a nonprofit charter for profit.
Here’s the deal: because you are pretending to be a type of public school, you get a set allocation, per student, from the state. So, anything you don’t spend on students and teachers, you can divert to your own enrichment. So, the two keys to making you rich enough to buy a membership at Mar-a-lago are a) to spend as little as possible on students and teachers and b) to divert funds to yourself.
But first, a few preliminaries:
Locate your new charter school in a fairly affluent district with conservative, middle-class parents. Because standardized tests measure socioeconomic status, doing this will save you a lot of headaches later on. You won’t have to worry about low test scores and school grades.
Create admissions tests and forms that are complex enough to exclude challenged students. They will bring down your test scores.
Create a no-excuses, three-strikes-and-you’re-out discipline policy that provides you with another means for kicking out low-performing students.
Make 80-90 percent of the curriculum, in math, English, and other tested areas test prep. Depersonalized education software is great for this.
SPENDING AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE ON STUDENTS AND TEACHERS
Keep class sizes as high as the law will allow. Again, there’s no union for teachers to complain to.
Build a large, impressive-looking structure with good signage outside, but furnish it minimally with student desks. Used school furniture can often be bought in bulk, at bargain prices, from failed charters around the nation.
Don’t build or furnish a gymnasium, science labs, art labs, a library, an auditorium, or a theatre. An empty field for track and calisthenics and field sports like football and soccer will do. If you must, build a combination tennis court and basketball court outside—simply some asphalt with a carport-type (but taller) aluminum cover will do. Your golf team can practice at local golf courses, and parents can pay for that. Your baseball team can practice at community facilities, and again, parents can pay any necessary fees. School meetings can be held at the cafeteria.
Keep staff to a minimum. One or two part-time janitors doubling as audio-visual supply persons is enough, and one or two part-time cafeteria people.
Order premade frozen lunches and charge a large markup for these. Place lots of vending machines in the cafeteria. These are real money-makers. You don’t need a school psychologist, nurse, security guard, or librarian. You will need a guidance counselor to deal with student schedules.
You will need a testing and an internet connection so that students can take standardized tests. The cheapest alternative, there, is to buy dumb, refurbished terminals from a third-world country. You will need a computer company to service these and keep them operating. For the benefit of parents, refer to your testing center as the Media Lab and Library.
Don’t provide supplies for your teachers beyond a bare minimum at the beginning of the year. When your teachers arrive, they should find in their mailboxes, say, small box of paper clips, one row of staples taken from a box of staples, one red Bic pen, one black whiteboard marker, and one ream of white paper. What are the teachers going to do? Complain? They don’t even have a union. Tell your teachers that they can request that their homeroom students bring in classroom supplies. Teachers can distribute a list of needed supplies to these students at the beginning of the year.
Require your teachers to decorate the school hallways and classrooms with bulletin boards and student work (always approved by you), at their own expense.
Keep class sizes as large as the law will allow and larger if you can get away with it.
Arrange with textbook companies to get new free or reduced-cost textbooks in exchange for piloting new textbook programs. Where you can’t do that, purchase cheap online depersonalized education software in lieu of texts. Students can access these from their computers at home. Furnish every teacher with a refurbished laptop and a projector for displaying text or online software in the classroom.
Don’t purchase dedicated whiteboard projection systems. Create a parent committee to run fundraisers to purchase these over several years.
Pay your teachers the least allowed under the law and provide minimal benefits.
DIVERTING FUNDS TO YOURSELF
Raise money from investors to build a building and outfit it. Tell your investors that you are not in the school business, really, but in the real-estate business. Lease your building to the school at considerably more than the cost of your repayments to investors.
Start a for-profit management company to manage the school. Staff it with your cousins, golfing partners, mistresses, spouses, and yourself; pay all of these people very large salaries; and provide them with handsome benefits packages. Make the management fees adjustable so that at the end of the year you can zero out any balance in the school coffers, leaving just enough to pay your principal and assistant principal during the summer.
Start companies to do janitorial services, tech services, heating and air conditioning, accounting and personnel services, and so on for the school, or have your cousins, golfing partners, mistresses, or spouse to this. Charge the school a management fee for managing these services.
Build that equity in your building and property at taxpayer expense!
There is one benefit that I saw here: If they hire their mistresses (for sure, local streetwalkers), that will get some prostitutes off the streets and they won’t have to sell their bodies to thirty or fifty men a day – just one.
I would not assume that positions held by people who support Pete are his positions. “For-profit charter schools should not be part of our vision for the future,” he told reporters. “And I think the expansion of charter schools in general is something that we need to really draw back on until we’ve corrected what needs to be corrected in terms of underfunded public education.”
Diane – thank you for this report. Given the current headlines on Trump’s continuing descent into racism, please add to your arsenal with presidential candidates data on how much charters are re-segregating students and staff by race, disability, native language, wealth, test scores, and sexual orientation. Discrimination is anathema to all the presidential candidates and, more importantly, to Democratic Primary voters. Your report seemed to come close to this on suspensions, but it would be even more powerful to show the racial and special ed. data on those suspensions.
If you can provide me some of this data, I may have a way around the palace guard of charter school backers to get that information directly to Mayor Pete. Let me know.
I hardly think that it’s productive to cite, as evidence of successful educational systems, countries that have numbers–and educational expectations–like these: https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/05/health/japan-youth-suicide-intl/index.html
https://bpr.berkeley.edu/2017/10/31/the-scourge-of-south-korea-stress-and-suicide-in-korean-society/
Thanks for the link.
Excellent point, Ms. Everard!
Diane,
Did you consider offering your opinion as an OpEd. I’m sure there are many papers that would print it. It would also be a wake up call to Mayor Pete!
Good idea schoolgal but let’s just call him Pete. No other candidate assigned himself a title for the campaign, not former V.P. Joe nor Senators Bernie, Kamala and Elizabeth.
“Mayor Pete” sounds like PR, paid for by deep pockets.
As I understand it he has been going by Mayor Pete since he first became mayor in 2012, due to his difficult-to-pronounce name. I don’t think any “deep pockets” were involved.
He’s alone among the candidates- no other Pete.
Ridiculous article by a one-issue voter.
You DO know that his husband, Chasten is a teacher… right?
Read the post. His husband’s occupation is irrelevant.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m seeing a lot of names I’ve never seen comment here before and they are all defending Mayor Pete.
Very suspicious!
Sheigh- That “one issue” will (1) bankrupt Main Street. First, there was Walmart monopoly retail and now, Silicon Valley education. (2) decimate the middle class – elimination of teaching jobs (3) dissemble the ladder that the most women climb to financial independence- teaching careers (4) concentrate wealth (5) divide the nation. Public education unifies a diverse population. (6) deny communities the right to elect school boards and, (6) eliminate the places where democratic governance is learned.
It’s a VERY, BIG issue with huge ramifications.
He was a teacher – at a private Montessori school. Not at all the same as a career public school teacher.
It really doesn’t matter where Pete’s husband teaches. What matters is who is advising him. Personnel is policy. His staff is reaching out to Arne Duncan types. Haven’t we had enough of Race to the Top and NCLB?
Completely agree, Diane, especially when it’s the excerable John King and Roxbury “Most Suspensions!” Prep.
Making a deal of a candidate being teacher-adjacent is a poor means to discern a candidates’ policy on public education.
I checked the website of the Montessori private school that employed Chasten Buttigieg. The website says the school does not accept vouchers.
You realize Pete does NOT support charter schools correct? But yes let’s attack something so easily refuted because you want someone else to get the nomination.
This right here is why we might lose in 2020.
Read the corporate-funded Center for American Progress paper posted at its site, “Corruption Consultants”. Pete has crafted his response to privatization very similarly. Like CAP, Pete won’t commit to communities’ right to democratically elect school boards (the schools the local taxpayers fund). Hillary’s campaign was run by people connected to CAP which is why she lost.
Pete, if he wants to win, should understand that the hypocritical CAP is not the right path.
Diane, when you talk with Biden find out how his education program would depart from Obama’s. If he is going to continue to surround himself with people like Bruce Reed, we are going to be in big trouble. Reed who had been Biden’s chief of staff was formerly president of the Broad Foundation. He regarded New Orleans as an amazing success story. Where public schools were replaced by charter schools, unions destroyed and teachers were fired and replaced mostly by TFA.
I agree with the post above, suggesting offering your opinions as an OpEd to national news papers. Frankly, unless I hear one of these Democratic candidates state that Diane Ravitch. or one of your board members, is being considered for Secretary of Education as part of their education platform this nation is going stay entrenched in the “reform movement”.
Thanks for the clarity about Biden.
Feelin’ the Bern!
I agree with your concerns. I am a citizen of Michigan and work with young people in Detroit. I’ve seen all kinds of educational experiences. But the so-called public charters are by far the most deceptive and driven-by the bottom line of their controlling corporation. We have an excellent new DPS superintendent—a Detroit native son who came to us from a success fun as superintendent in JAX, Florida. I remain hopeful that with good leadership, support from state and city, collaboration with good partners, and strong family support we can set and keep all public schools on an upward spiral. I am also concern about Cory Booker!s well-documented record in his failed project working with corporate and Silicon Valley interest groups to improve the schools in Newark. I’m also unhappy with the relative neglect of educational policy reform (except around college funding) by all the Democratic candidates so far. We need a full court press to strengthen public education, strengthen unions and the image of teachers as professionals, and greatly limit the choice movement to dismantle it, and a strong push (again) toward excellence and equity in education for all (not just Medicare for all).
Susan,
You make excellent points. Thanks for adding your comment.
We must counsel people to stop calling charter schools, “public”.
The FTC and state attorney generals should be prohibiting the fraud. The correct term is contractor schools. General Dynamics receives money from taxes and provides a service. Charter schools do the same.
A public, government entity is defined by characteristics e.g.
the transparency of FOIA requests and state sunshine laws, citizen ownership of assets, democratic governance, etc. None of which apply to charter schools. The Ohio Supreme Court ruled charter schools are not public citing the fact that records like their expense reports are legally protected as proprietary business information.
The term, charter schools, was a PR effort aimed at providing cover for politicians and duping citizens. Billionaires with agendas like those of Bill Gates benefit from the duplicity when schools are falsely called public.
It is a bit of a disappointment to hear that Mayor Pete is a supporter of charterization. He is one of the better speakers on the Democratic debates with his ideas ably presented.
It is good to hear that there is support for Bernie as he is one of the person’s that I could willingly give my vote to.
As Ms. Ravitch mentioned she will vote for the person who goes up against Trump; many of us feel that way. I will be voting for Democratic candidates up for the Senate also. However, it is dreadful to feel that I am voting against Donald instead of voting for a candidate who presents a set of qualities which I gladly support. But under the present circumstances our votes are morally conscripted to the blues.
Hopefully teachers, their unions, NPE and other education watch groups will be able to reduce the influence of the privatizers to near zero.
see what Pete says if he gets asked about charters. He is against “for profit charters.”
Is he also against for profit operators of nonprofit charters?
Would he, as President, abolish the Charter Schools Program that currently gives $440 million a year to corporate chains like KIPP?
Does Pete demand as policy, the right of communities to democratically elect the boards of the schools their taxes pay for? Does he demand for the citizens, the right that tax-supported schools adhere to Sunshine laws? Does he demand the right that communities own the assets they pay for? Does he demand the right for citizens that school administration records are transparent as public records?
Nobody is going to get their perfect candidate because that person does not exist. I will vote blue because DT has to go. I do not expect to get a President or Congress that will fulfill my every need or desire. I expect to have continue to pay attention to what is going on and to support efforts to move the country in a more humane and equitable direction. I do not expect to get single payer universal healthcare without a lot of discussion and compromise as we move that way. In fact, I hope it takes awhile. We are more likely to find more of the kinks in a plan if we have to chew on it a bit. I do not expect us to up and remove our military from Afghanistan and Syria and from the myriad other places where we maintain forces. I am not sure what global role we should play, but I am sure we need to play one. Our system of government is being attacked from more than one direction. In the end we should be voting for those, flaws and all, who we think are most capable of helping us to restore a government of, for, and by the people.
Get in touch with Mayor Pete and see if he will meet with you. Maybe he needs to be presented with another point of view by qualified educators.
After having read through these comments again (because I fully expected to see more of them tonight), the one I am most concerned with–& doesn’t even have anything to dowith charter schools–is the comment made by Left Coast Teacher, July 29th, at 6:54 PM RE: young Pete’s essay praising Sanders but, now, his meeting w/a group of neo-liberals, “at an event organized by billionaires What to do About Bernie, plotting to keep Sen. Sanders from winning the election.” Is that why he’s running? LCT, do you (or does anyone else) know more about this? (Calling Laura Chapman!)
This is pretty serious stuff, IMO.
The “next generation” wants Pete about as much as they want the, for-profit, McKinsey international.
WaPo, June 11- “…CAP’s findings seemed to be incorporated throughout (Buttigieg’s) speech.”
Politico, July 18- Jess O’Connell is Pete’s new senior adviser …she held a senior role at CAP…worked on Hillary’s 2008 campaign.
Are CAP’s people zombies that are brought back from the dead by billionaires?
Yes.
In other words, if he wins the primary, you will vote for him… thus, you will vote for his education policy. So, why waste your time writing this insightful piece?
I will vote for any Democrat running in the general election against Trump.
But I will support only those who support public schools running in the primaries.
Debra Zawlocki,
Do you prefer not to know all about the primary candidates before you decide which one to support? Your comment only makes sense if you believe that voters in the primary should not learn anything about the candidates’ positions before choosing which one to support. Why do you think that is a good idea?
Why waste your time writing this comment? As you know, everyone who is not a neo Nazi racist will be voting for whichever candidate gets the most votes in the Democratic primary and runs against the awful and terrible Trump.
But we all get to decide which candidate we will support to be that nominee who will send Trump packing. As you know every single candidate in the democratic primary is 10000x better than the dishonest racist Trump and no one who has any integrity is going to vote for Trump.
Well said. The primaries count, and I will not be voting for neo-liberal, corporate supported Mayor Pete in the primaries.
As President, he will be ten-thousand times better than Trump, but I do not see much difference between mayor Pete and the Obama-G.W. Bush twin presidents.
Debra,
The question is, why does Diane ‘s endorsement of a candidate matter?
The answer is Diane is described as the foremost voice of education. Her blog has 33,000,000 views. She is quoted in major and minor publications. She is invited to speak throughout the U.S. Her interviews are broadcast on radio and T.V. She talks with and listens to the representatives of America’s working people. She talks with politicians and when they are willing to forego billionaire campaign funds, she can convince them to represent the 99% who are their constituents.
Everyone knows the vested interests like Reed Hastings (Netflix) and Zuck want their man elected to office. Diane’s recommendation isn’t bought, it reflects the interests of the nation and its people.
In the United States today, elections depend upon big money contributions, and the big money is all behind the privatization movement. Furthermore, the Ed Deformers pour a lot of money into PR that provides smoke screens for candidates to hide behind–e.g., “I only support nonprofit charters.”
There is much to love about Pete Buttigeig. I have, in fact, fantasized on this blog about seeing him debate IQ45. I compared that to seeing John von Neumann debate the foundations of mathematics with Tom Cruise. Pete is brilliant, learned, capable, kind, decent–everything that Agent Orange isn’t. He needs to know more about Ed Deform and GERM generally–about charters, VAM, school grading, the Common [sic] Core [sic], high-stakes standardized testing, depersonalized education software. And a great place for him to start would be by reading Diane’s new book, coming out this January. It is indeed troubling that he has these rapid Ed Deformers in his camp. The Arne Duncan education department was a disaster for American schools. A whole generation of U.S. kids has had humane education in the arts, literature, writing, science, and history stolen from them, and it looks as though at present, Pete doesn’t understand this or why it has happened, and, in particular, how that theft is connected to the puerile Gates/Coleman bullet list of standards [sic] and to standardized testing. What a pity.
Pete, if you are listening: Parents and teachers LOATHE the standardized testing. Research suggesting that they are willing to tolerate it is cooked stuff from Ed Deform advocacy groups. Strong support for repealing the annual federal standardized testing mandate would win a LOT of votes.
Thank you for this enlightening article.
Data? What data? What these Philistines use are meaningless standardized test scores, which do not reflect teaching quality nor kids’ intellectual capabilites. Mostly multiple choice questions, easily gamed via test prep, the speciality of most charters
exactly
Data? What data? The neoliberals use test scores as pseudoscientific “data” Poor measures of teaching quality and of kids’ intellectual capabilities. Multipal choice questions that are easily gamed, a specialty of the charter industry’s test prep curriculum
Thanks for your insightful commentary about Buttgieg’s ideas on education. Let’s all stay tuned.
I will be posting about several candidates.
María Hinojosa at http://www.latinousa.org has posted interviews with several presidential candidates. Unfortunately, not much attention paid to public education.
Buttigieg: https://www.latinousa.org/2019/07/26/petebuttigieg/
Castro: https://www.latinousa.org/2019/02/13/juliancastro/
Booker: https://www.latinousa.org/2019/06/14/corybooker/
I have substitute taught for 8 years. I find many teachers to be selfish and lazy. I am a socialist and working in schools makes me wonder if all people in unions just phone their jobs in because they have job protection. Although teachers are in unions, I find that they have zero solidarity with other working people on the planet. They barely participate in their own unions, never mind showing up to support other workers when they strike or picket. The abysmal conditions of the last 40 years, where wages stagnated and the government allowed the housing market to be highly comodified seemed to be of little concern to teachers. Teachers educated folks and then did not care that they were entering adulthood to participate in an economic system that was completely untenable. It was astonishing to learn how uninvolved and uninvested teachers are about the lives of their students and about the lives of their fellow citizens. Still, it was astounding to learn that the NEA believes that 40 percent of their teachers voted for Donald Trump.
So I am not shocked that your only problem with Mayor Pete is that he supports charter schools. The fact that he went straight to Wall St and billionaires should be alarming in and of itself. Billionaires and the culture that allows them to exist is a huge part of the problem. They are destroying the planet for profit and using all of use humans, animals, plants, and minerals as fodder in their insane quest for more money, and money is a completely abstract concept. I agree he is a fantastic public speaker. It is brilliant that he uses scripture to support the progressive viewpoint, but he is not trustworthy. He will be similar to Trudeau and Obama on climate change; one day he will be lamenting climate change, and the next he will be celebrating the expansion of natural gas pipelines. School privatization is about one thing and one thing only- the conservatives inability tolerate one dollar in existence that is not available for them to make a profit off of. Somehow Mayor Pete falls in line with the conservatives and the capitalists. That should be alarming beyond the his support of charter schools. His data driven campaign to demolish 1000 homes in black and brown neighborhoods leading to the gentrification of those same neighborhoods should be very disconcerting to all Americans everywhere, but especially to teachers whose job brings them in contact with every person who is going to be an adult in the job and housing market some day.
Those are quite a lot of generalizations about teachers you have there. While I am inclined to agree that many teachers seem to believe that the union will take care of them when times are tough and don’t necessarily get involved, many do. Furthermore it isn’t a fair characterization that teachers are lazy or don’t care since they have job protection. My experiences can be just as anecdotal as yours and they paint a very different picture of public school teachers. The ones I work with are caring and involved individuals in their communities and especially with their own students. They are not phoning anything in. They fight to get services for their students and run community projects for their students to complete. Sorry to say, you are a victim of the same propaganda your conservative counter-parts spew. It might behoove you to do some meaningful research on public schools teachers before making claims about unionized teachers.
I don’t think I have ever seen this poster here before. Suspicious.
I thought LG was an appliance manufacturer out of South Korea called LG Electronics.
Definitely got my radar up. All the boxes checked off:
Lazy: check
Self serving: check
Union protected: check
Etc: check
Man…don’t we suck? Truly public enemy number one of the people. Get rid of us and all will be well with the youth of America.
With all of us working-class adults gone, billionaires like Bill Gates, Besty the Brainless, the Koch brothers, the Walton family, even the faux billionaire Donald Trump, et al will mold the children but not like soft clay.
They will take a chisel to them like they are granite and make sure to sculpt them into the slave class, the autocrats really want.
I use my initials, LG, because they were what I used for my name on my email many years ago when I first started following Diane’s blog. They’ve since changed from my marriage six years ago, but I kept the name on here. It’s also the name of an appliance/tech company. 😉
Sorry for the confusion, LG. I recognize you. It’s “Progressive do not take billionaire dollars” that I was referring to.
No apology necessary. I knew you were referring to the “Progressive” handle. I think Lloyd was the one asking about LG. I’ve been a lurker for several years after a lot of interaction, so he might not have remembered me.
Progressive … wrote, “I have substitute taught for 8 years. I find many teachers to be selfish and lazy.”
And I call what you “find” BS!
I taught for thirty years in public school (1975-2005) and never met a teacher that was “selfish and lazy”. I met a few teachers that were burned out and should have left teaching but didn’t because they had bills to pay. Survival comes first even when you know you are burned out.
Teaching is the toughest job I ever had (I worked in the private sector for 15 of the 45 years I worked and all of the jobs I had outside of education were easier), and I joined the U.S. Marines out of high school and fought in Vietnam.
This needs repeating: I taught for THIRTY YEARS and never met a teacher that was “selfish and lazy”. The teachers I met worked long hours outside of the classroom correcting student work and planning lessons and spent their own money for classroom supplies as I did.
And, after I earned my teaching credential through an urban residency, I also substitute taught (FULL TIME) for two years in seven districts (the first district that called got me for that day) before landing a full time teaching position. I didn’t meat any “selfish and lazy” teachers then, too.
“I have substitute taught for 8 years. I find many teachers to be selfish and lazy. I am a socialist and working in schools makes me wonder if all people in unions just phone their jobs in because they have job protection. Although teachers are in unions, I find that they have zero solidarity with other working people on the planet. They barely participate in their own unions, never mind showing up to support other workers when they strike or picket.”
I’m wondering where you subbed and saw this kind of behavior on a regular basis. How many schools and in what area of the country.
I’ve been teaching 26 years in the New York City Board/Dept of Education and the teachers you’re describing have been in the vast minority my entire tenure. I saw many more slackers when I was working management in the private sector. 10 years of that.
“I have substitute taught for 8 years. I find many teachers to be selfish and lazy. I am a socialist and working in schools makes me wonder if all people in unions just phone their jobs in because they have job protection. Although teachers are in unions, I find that they have zero solidarity with other working people on the planet. They barely participate in their own unions, never mind showing up to support other workers when they strike or picket. The abysmal conditions of the last 40 years, where wages stagnated and the government allowed the housing market to be highly comodified seemed to be of little concern to teachers. Teachers educated folks and then did not care that they were entering adulthood to participate in an economic system that was completely untenable. It was astonishing to learn how uninvolved and uninvested teachers are about the lives of their students and about the lives of their fellow citizens. Still, it was astounding to learn that the NEA believes that 40 percent of their teachers voted for Donald Trump.”
Interesting to find someone labeling him/herself as a “Socialist” so against our unionized teacher workforce but not unheard of. I suppose it would be similar to calling oneself a “Communist”, yet railing against the bastardization of the term when put to practical use in our world’s recent history.
That said, I have to agree with Lloyd and others, considering my teaching experiences in the NYCDOE (largest teaching union in the country). I’ve both subbed and taught full time for 27+ years at multiple school/site locations with many different student populations. Were there slackers? Yes…but they were the extreme minority, ime. Repeat: EXTREME minority. I saw more negligence and apathy in management when I worked corporate. Don’t know where you taught, but it wasn’t anywhere near to where I did.
“So I am not shocked that your only problem with Mayor Pete is that he supports charter schools. The fact that he went straight to Wall St and billionaires should be alarming in and of itself. Billionaires and the culture that allows them to exist is a huge part of the problem. They are destroying the planet for profit and using all of use humans, animals, plants, and minerals as fodder in their insane quest for more money, and money is a completely abstract concept. I agree he is a fantastic public speaker. It is brilliant that he uses scripture to support the progressive viewpoint, but he is not trustworthy. He will be similar to Trudeau and Obama on climate change; one day he will be lamenting climate change, and the next he will be celebrating the expansion of natural gas pipelines. School privatization is about one thing and one thing only- the conservatives inability tolerate one dollar in existence that is not available for them to make a profit off of. Somehow Mayor Pete falls in line with the conservatives and the capitalists. That should be alarming beyond the his support of charter schools. His data driven campaign to demolish 1000 homes in black and brown neighborhoods leading to the gentrification of those same neighborhoods should be very disconcerting to all Americans everywhere, but especially to teachers whose job brings them in contact with every person who is going to be an adult in the job and housing market some day.”
Got my support on this one.
Don’t assume that someone who declares he is a “socialist” is telling the truth. Socialists don’t attack unions. Trolls do.
Yes…so they do.
Honest question for you all, Diane, and followers. You make the point that only 6% of students in this country go to charter schools. Is this the most important issue to you? I’m pretty concerned about outcomes for our kids, the troubling pattern that if a family lives in a low income community that their schools likely are not very good, and that we are not keeping up internationally. I remember being a teacher before any testing, and we let anyone in the building teach whatever they wanted. It was not good for students. And we rarely got any objective feedback of whether students were truly learning. Why so much attention for a problem that is only 6% of our country? Where do we as teachers stand up and say, “these are the real issues and here are solutions?” Could we take a pause on the privatizer story and focus on improving out existing schools? I’m not trying to be controversial, but really want to hear from folks about whether we want to devote this much time and energy to a 6% issue versus truly trying to improve teaching and learning in our country. I’d welcome any honest thoughts back from any of the readers here.
I agree with you. We should be focused on improving our existing public schools. Somehow the privatizers make charters and vouchers the only issue that matters. If you try to focus on what matters, they still talk only about charters and vouchers.
The problem isn’t just 6% of the resources spread across the country. That 6% of students tends to be concentrated particularly in urban areas, so the loss of funding is hitting some communities much harder.. The schools losing $$ still have fixed costs that can’t be reduced because the charter down the road is getting subsidies that come out of the public school(s) budget. And now, even though their sales pitch was to provide a superior education for less, charters want an equal share of the tax dollars!
I don’t know what school you taught in, but the schools where my kids went and those in which I taught did not let anyone teach anything. The feedback I got from classroom teachers about my kids was far superior to that of any standardized test, which, I assume, is what you are calling “objective.” The only time I ran into the situation where teachers taught outside their certification was in a poor community with limited resources where there were no qualified candidates. Improve our existing schools? Well, one obvious way to do that would be to not take funds from them to start schools that serve a select group of students and are not accountable to the communities they serve. I see no good reason to be raiding our public school budgets to fund a private school system.
We are currently wrapped up in the whole privatizing movement. If we weren’t, we might soon find ourselves without public schools, which charter schools aren’t. There are other blogs that still spend more time on pedagogy, but between CCSS, high stakes testing/accountability and charters, the focus here has narrowed over the years. Go back through the archives if you want to read about Common Core and high stakes testing and how learning has been warped by the process. We have had lots of discussions that would probably be more to your liking. With the elections looming, though, it does seem prudent to focus on trying to redirect the national direction of education policy, which has been cheer leading for charters for far too long.
Diane… y don’t you somehow force him to make a public Declaration of his views on public verses private school policies.
Most politicians fudge over differences between public schools and private charters. They try to play both sides. Because the charters are backed by Big Money.
I find it interesting that you will support some one if they are willing to lie to you.
people running for president have a track record to run on. they will not ignore what they have done for decades.
look at the long termer.
ditch those telling you what you want to hear.
Joe,
When I wrote that post, I had just learned that Pete’s education advisors are John King and Jim Shelton, both vets of the Obama administration. King started a no-e curses charter school in Mass. In NY, he was a fervent proponent of high stakes testing and Common Core. Shelton worked for Gates and Chan-Zuckerberg.
We don’t need the failed policies of the past 20 years. We need fresh thinking.
you missed my point.
you are letting your vote go to someone if they are willing to whisper the sweet nothings of a campaign promise in your ear.
We don’t need Obamaland.
We need Sanders for as long as we can have him.
The track record for me starts when he chains himself to a couple of African America women trying to get decent housing and he has not stopped.
Look at where they been to tell you where they are going.
Great article with many salient points made. I would have liked more on-the-ground examples of successes and failures of charter schools with Ravitch’s reasons for both.
As an advocate for public schools, I think it important that, rather than solely blame unions, we examine the areas where problems exist, starting with the bureaucracies and the waste in running them.
Saving public education is fundamental to saving democracy. It has been well documented that overall charter schools have not faired better on the sanctified school testing measure. Testing is fraught with failures when it comes to assessing the overall accomplishment of a student’s progress.
Furthermore, until charter schools accept blindly students from the across-the-board populace as public schools are compelled to, we will never get a true reading of its comparative results.
Pity that Shanker fought decentralization way back when. Parents would have had more say in their communities and how they wanted budgets spent, as long as those funds remained committed to guaranteed union rights and other fundamental oversight measures.
Frank,
If you read this blog, you would see hundreds of examples of charter failure and damage.
Start by googling Gordon Lafer’s study for “In the Public Interest,” about how charters drain funding from public schools.
Read my book “Reign of Error.”
Then go to Twitter and search for #AnotherDayAnotherCharterScandal”
Do you know how other candidates weigh in on the issue? I respect your views, but I also respect Pete. I’ll check out is website now to if his educational policy is explained there.
Sanders and Warren have both spoken out against privatization via charters. The other candidates have not made their views known even though this is one of the most important political issues draining funds from public schools and threatening their existence.
Excellent, articulate article! I will still stand with Mayor Pete, as I believe he is the best overall candidate, with sound ideas, and a hope for a more united country. That said, I still believe in the best PUBLIC education system, and it can not be contracted out for profit. Betsy DeVos is the VERY WORST person to be in charge of our future!
I would not vote for anyone who just changes his words.
Even Rahm Emanuel, has done a half-hearted retraction of his support for the privatization agenda.
I still wouldn’t let him anywhere near public schools unless he took real, substantive action to undo the damage he did and clawback some of the taxpayer money these scammers have made off with.
One more strike for Mayor Pete are these foul remarks about our hardworking parents who struggle to provide a better future for their kids:
Either he believes this racist, classist trope or he doesn’t have the lived experience to see it isn’t true.
So glad we have better candidates to choose among this time round.
ICYMI: Michael Herriot reponded this way to Buttigieg:
https://www.theroot.com/pete-buttigieg-is-a-lying-mf-1840038708
Then Buttigieg called Michael Herriot to talk:
https://www.theroot.com/pete-buttigieg-called-me-heres-what-happened-1840055464?utm_medium=socialflow&utm_source=theroot_twitter&__twitter_impression=true
Pete is getting kudos for calling Herriot to discuss his article.
However, he never called Diane for her blog post. This is why I suggested Diane get it out as an op-ed in any newspaper!
I understand his reaching out to Herriot was politically motivated. But if Pete wants the support of teachers…the same teachers who turned Kentucky and Virginia! He needs to call Diane! And that won’t happen until this piece makes it to a newspaper!
Thank you. I think what this shows is that Pete is worried about the black vote, not the educator vote.
In the first paragraph you state you are basing it his on a review of his autobiography, that you haven’t read the autobiography yourself. I think your blog should be dismissed immediately for lack of integrity, laziness and being ok with forming your opinion upon other instead of actual facts and data
No, I based my judgment on conversation with education advisers. Too many Arne Duncan retreads.
Gee, where have you been AmandaK? Have you ever left a comment on this site before
OR
are you a paid hack that leaves comments on sites that do not support your dandidate to spread doubt?