As the backlash against private charter schools intensifies, even Hollywood recognizes that the grand experiment in privatizing the nation’s public schools is a dying cause.
Reed Hastings, billionaire founder of Netflix, made charters a fashionable thing in Tinseltown, but critics have emerged to shatter the money-powered consensus. Some of them woke when charter founder and LAUSD Member Ref Rodriguez was indicted. Some no doubt did not wish to be allied with Betsy DeVos and the Trump administration. Perhaps some are graduates of public schools, like 90% of the populace.
In any event, the waning acceptance of charters and privatization is a sign of the changing times.
When LAUSD board member and charter school advocate Ref Rodriguez pleaded guilty in July 2018 to a felony count of conspiracy, it seemed that Los Angeles’ charter school movement had hit a critical low. Rodriguez’s unraveling over campaign finance violations tipped the balance of power on the seven-member board that oversees the nation’s second-largest school district, weakening its charter school block.
Tensions between proponents of public schools and of charter schools — which are started by parents, teachers or community groups and receive government funding but operate independently of state school systems — were already high. The January teachers’ strike won concessions for LAUSD public schools ranging from smaller class sizes to hiring full-time nurses but was marked by heated anti-charter rhetoric. Critics of charters say they continue to drain much-needed resources from public schools. “If LAUSD were properly funded, then I think the choice that a charter school gives would be a nice one,” says writer Audrey Wauchope (Crazy Ex-Girlfriend). “Unfortunately, it often seems that going charter is now just another way for parents to leave behind their neighborhood school.”
Public-school proponents contend that charters operate without sufficient oversight (proof of which came in May when California authorities arrested two men for allegedly stealing more than $50 million in state funds via a network of online charter schools). For their part, charter school operators argue that they provide parents with other, better options than LAUSD, which they say is failing many of the city’s underprivileged kids.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Yeah right, and charters don’t FAIL many of the city’s underprivileged kids? There is so much evidence that Charters are BAD.
Hollywood … I have little respect for Hollywood and that BIG SIGN on the side of the hill.
When people make decisions based on FALSE INFORMAITON … well … TROUBLE, big time.
I just don’t understand those who want to destroy Public Education. Is this just more Jim Crow? My answer: YES!
Almost everyone that works in Hollywood is a member of a union. Hollywood people that understand the value of democracy, community and equity should be natural supporters of authentic public schools. Private charter schools have formed an alliance with elitism, segregation, billionaires and the destruction of the common good. Hollywood has long been a laboratory of leftist leaning supporters.
I can understand that Hollywood’s financiers are supportive of right wing causes. In fact, Steven Mnuchin, former hedge fund manager, has produced a number of Hollywood films. Reed Hastings and Jeff Bezos are billionaires that are also producing Hollywood productions. Some actors that move in elite circles have been enticed to be associated with the privatization of public education when it was still considered socially acceptable to do so.
Since the election of #45, the appointment of DeVos, the failure of market based education has become better understood, and fewer actors want to be associated with such an unpopular, anti-democratic movement.
Matt Damon, whose mother is a career teacher, is one the few actors that understood the harmful impact of privatization on public education from the start. He has always supported public education. He has been criticized for sending his children to private schools. The difference is that he is using his own cash to pay for the school. He is not using public money to pay for his children’s education.
I never understood how critics get away with criticizing supporters of public school like Matt Damon because they send their kids to private schools.
On the contrary, what is appalling is those who send their kids to private schools and demand that public schools should be able to achieve miracles with far less disadvantaged students for $15,000 per student when their own coddled, overprivileged, tutor-enhanced child absolutely must have an education costing $40,000 per student in which not a single penny is wasteful.
Only rich coddled children deserve having $40,000/year spent on them while poor kids — who have none of the same advantages to begin with — are spoiled if their school gets $20,000/year to spend on them. That is what the real hypocrites who send their kids to private schools say. Our kids are better than yours and deserve much more.
What is less hypocritical than saying that every child deserves the small class sizes and resources that mine has? What is more hypocritical than saying “only some kids who we decide are worth it deserve a well-funded school”.
I’ve lived in L.A. most of my life, and met and dined with Hollywood stars many times. Not impressed with any of them. Never met Matt Damon, but I can tell he’s the true star, the veritable talent, the public school supporting icon, the real deal. Love Matt Damon.
LCT,
A few years ago, I spoke at Northridge and was introduced by Matt Damon. He is terrific!
Hollywood wouldn’t be divided if those in the entertainment industry had the facts.
“Charter schools tone deaf to marching band culture… New Orleans, the city that originated jazz used to have a solid niche for marching bands in its schools.” Evidently, when the white backers of privatization took over the schools, they didn’t see the importance of a culture of music, despite its connection to math. If Bill Gates isn’t musical, it might explain it. A unique culture that opened doors for future success and access to college scholarships- so cavalierly dismissed.
I called Fordham in Ohio to inquire if the schools it sponsors in the state had marching bands. The reply was, “To my knowledge they don’t. You’d have to call each school.”
The problem is that charters have absolutely no interest in teaching the students that LAUSD “fails”. That is why they force parents to jump through so many hoops and demand the absolute right to dump any child they don’t want to teach. That is why they refuse to exist unless they have a public school dumping ground to send kids they don’t want to teach and use things like “sibling preference” so that the families they do want to teach can make sure their kids always have spots.
Charters fail the same students but instead of admitting it so those students can get the resources they need, their CEOs blatantly lie about it and demand they deserve even more resources from the schools teaching those children because they have proven themselves so successful in teaching all the kids the LAUSD “fails”.
Demanding resources under false pretenses because it justifies overpaying their administrators is one of the main features of charters. I hope those in Hollywood are smart enough to understand why a system that depends on lying and misleading and denying they ever, ever cherry pick (even if they do demand the right to dump any student they want with no oversight) is never justified by claims that “well at least we help the kids we decide are worth helping.” Huh? It’s shocking to hear charter shills claim that on the very rare occasions that a reporter actually challenges their false claims of welcoming all the most severely at-risk children. Then they claim that they justify their high salaries by claiming they deserve it for giving the easiest and brightest students a way out. When it is convenient, the charter shills always find that the students that LAUSD (and other public schools) “fails” are expendable. They never cared about them at all.
There it is: “The problem is that charters have absolutely no interest in teaching the students that LAUSD “fails”. That applies to ALL districts.
Somone sent me the article and this is what I emailed to the writer:
Hi Mr. Kiefer –
A friend sent me your above-named article. I have copied your text and interlineated a few comments.
“Tensions between proponents of public schools and of charter schools — which are started by parents, teachers or community groups and receive government funding but operate independently of state school systems — were already high.”
Or much more commonly they’re started by multi-chain for-profit CMOs (Charter Management Organizations).
“California Teachers Association (CTA) spent $4.3 million on lobbying this year, much of it on anti-charter-school legislation.”
This is very biased language. Some consider it appropriate and necessary regulatory legislation to provide needed oversight to protect the public and the taxpayers’ money. #AnotherDayAnotherCharterScam is a popular Twitter hashtag for good reason.
“United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA), contend that charter schools are a front for libertarian, union-busting billionaires.”
And the tax scams that have enabled the proliferation of charters – and the CMOs who profit.
“The battle has put progressive Hollywood in an ideological pickle. On the one hand, charter schools help underprivileged students greatly outperform their peers at local public schools.”
Do you have evidence for this claim? Because I don’t have any nor does anyone else I know.
“former Vice President Joe Biden, Beto O’Rourke and New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker have all used language that has signaled more tepid support of charter schools than in the past.”
Biden’s brother owns a couple of charter schools, Beto’s wife works for a charter company and Booker has a long history of aligning with Republicans for pro charter schools. They may sound tepid but their records show they’re profiting off the charter dole.
“That said, I feel like the fight is against Trump and this feels like we’re wasting our energy.””
Nah, Trump doesn’t give a damn. Betsy DeVos is Pence’s long-time comrade. The real fight is against the corporate Dems, the “Democrats For Education Reform” group
Thank you. The language is truly biased.
Here is another example:
“On the one hand, charter schools help underprivileged students greatly outperform their peers at local public schools…”
Which was blatantly misleading and should have correctly been written:
“On the one hand, charter schools help selected higher performing underprivileged students who are acceptable to the charter because they have few learning issues and highly motivated parents greatly outperform students who are far more disadvantaged with far more learning issues who are at local public schools that aren’t subsidized with millions in donations from right wing billionaires…”
If every article was written with this truth, the rest of the article would have to change because the main question is whether you allow charters to use public money to cherry pick the best students and abandon the rest to public schools that are underfunded, and is this good policy.
I can’t imagine a public policy reporter being so ignorant as to write: “On the one hand, this private insurance company does a great job covering the medical bills of the healthiest children with no chronic illnesses, and they are overall so much healthier than their “peers” who are covered by the public insurance system that insures all children, so clearly giving public money to private insurance companies that are allowed to cherry pick who they serve make kids healthier!”
If billionaires want to help poor minority students get a good education, they have enough money to set up scholarships for poor students in some of the best private schools in the nation. They do not have to appropriate funds from under funded public schools to do it. They do not have to take public money the serves most students to give to a few chosen students, which what the current funding of private charter schools does.
Pseudo-liberals didn’t encounter conflict because the overt messaging for privatization was concern for people of color. It was when the covert message was exposed, a dog whistle of segregation, that pseudo liberals began to squirm. Marin County, Calf., showcased the duplicity. The charter scheme was condemned as “warped and wicked”, by the state attorney general.
Ref’s campaign money laundering didn’t help charters, and the subsequent election of Jackie Goldberg helped public schools. Of course, Betsy DeVapid revealed the hypocrisy of supporting charters in the Democratic stronghold of L.A. Charter theft scandals also made charter supporters gulp.
But the most important event was the strike. During the teachers strike in January, support for public schools was widespread and visible. It has had to be difficult for the big player Hollywood millionaires and billionaires in the hills of L.A. to hype charters when they saw unequivocal evidence that over 80% of the everyday people in the lowlands oppose them. No acting or special effects could hide the truth.
Interesting that the CCSA complained that we are trying to “kill” charters. Damn right we are! With good reason. When we compromise, we lose. When we fight, we win. They don’t write the script; WE DO!
LCT- Your messaging shows what CAP lacks. But then, CAP’s corporate owned which explains their, “never Bernie” mind set.
California charter schools- jumping the shark