Charter advocates have reacted with astonishment and outrage at the Trump-DeVos decision to fold the federal Charter Schools Program into a block grant to the states, along with 29 other programs. The Trump administration’s goal is to shift federal funding to states and let them decide how to spend the money.
Matt Barnum of Chalkbeat writes the story here, detailing the administration’s rationale and charter advocates’ reaction.
Jim Blew, formerly of the Walton Family Foundation, which claims to have launched one of every four charters in the nation, brushed off the charter lobbyists:
“The federal lobbyists for charter schools sound a lot like the lobbyists for all of the other competitive grant programs,” Assistant Secretary Jim Blew told Chalkbeat in a statement. “In their desperate communications, they have exaggerated the importance of CSP — just like other lobbyists,” he added, referring to the Charter Schools Program.
It’s not clear that the program is in real jeopardy, since Congress has previously disregarded the Trump administration’s proposed budgets. But the budget proposal and combative rhetoric suggest that charter advocates do not have as staunch an ally in the administration as they previously believed.
“We are saddened and puzzled by the Department of Education’s comments,” said Nina Rees, president of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, which has receivedfederal charter dollars. “We advocate for the federal Charter Schools Program because we believe it is a lifeline for students.”
Rees formerly was education advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney and to entrepreneur MIchael Milken, who engaged in education philanthropy after serving a term in prison for financial crimes.
Strangely, Barnum refers to Democrats for Education Reform (DFER) as “left of center,” which is laughable since they were founded by and funded by hedge fund managers, some of whom are billionaires and may not even be Democrats. DFER’s funding has gone to supporters of school choice, and their beneficiaries show no interest in funding, class size, teachers’ salaries, integration or other issues that matter to progressive Democrats.
It is ironic that the Republican-dominated charter industry will now have to count on Democrats in the House to save the federal Charter Schools Program, which DeVos has used to fatten avaricious corporate charter chains.
The federal CSP has funded a large proportion of the nation’s charter schools, acting like “the Small Business Administration” for charters entrepreneurs, as NPE executive director Carol Burris said recently on Twitter.
Barnum wrote:
A recent presentation from the Department showed the figure was slightly higher: as of 2016, more than 3,100 existing charter had received such a grant, with the program helping to fund close to 45% of all operating charters. (Morabito, the spokesperson, acknowledged the error when asked about it by Chalkbeat.)
For charters that opened between 2006 and 2016, the share was even higher — 60% had received a federal grant.
Studies of the federal Charter Schools Program by the Network for Public Education found that it was riddled with waste, fraud, and abuse. More than 1/3 of the federally funded charters either never opened or closed soon after opening. This is a program that should be eliminated.
What will the Democrats do?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“What will the Democrats do?”
Pick up the slack and propose more federal funding for private charter schools. It’ll be a bi-partisan effort. . .
Hey, fool me once shame on you-Dims, fool me twice shame on. . .
“Won’t be fooled again. . . ”
LikeLike
I don’t know what this means?
You think Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the squad are going to fight for more money for charters?
I do not understand why you would use “Dims” as an epithet the way Republicans use certain epithets to denigrate entire ethnic groups. I truly do not understand what purpose it serves when – unlike the Republicans – the democrats have never been united on this issue. There are lot more Independent and Democrat politicians who won’t fight for more money for charters than there have been in the past.
I completely agree with your criticism of certain Democratic leaders who are pro-charter, but other Dems, like Tim Kaine, have a much longer history of resisting charters and supporting public schools than Bernie Sanders. And Bernie’s change of heart on charters, along with AOC and the new progressives, is a very good thing. It does not help progressives to defeat Republicans if they are all smeared as “Dims” when some of them are not.
I don’t think that the democrats who are pro-charter have tried to fool anyone — I thought their views have been crystal clear for a while. Andrew Cuomo’s pro-charter policies were reprehensible, but he was certainly open about them and some people who are actually progressives still preferred Cuomo to Cynthia Nixon because of other policies that other unions (not teachers’ unions) liked.
Andrew Cuomo didn’t “fool” the people who voted for him, they just decided to balance the things they liked about him against the things they didn’t and decide which ones were more important to them. That’s how politics always works.
If I have a choice, I always vote for the candidates who do more than compliment teachers and talk about raising their salaries and talk in general terms about “good schools”. I vote for candidates who are willing to directly criticize charters. That’s how I know they support public schools. And while there aren’t very many of them, I haven’t been fooled.
LikeLike
Overall I was referring to the bipartisanship that brought us NCLB/ESSA. Yes, in that sense I do put the national Dims and Rethugs in the same category of disgust. When it comes to ,especially, but not limited to, national politics all are fair game for some verbal abuse of their actions. I’m sure everyone on both sides has good intentions. I’m not doubting intentions, just the results of their actions. Just how I see it.
LikeLike
Duane,
I’m right there with you at doubting their results and I also doubt the intentions of some the Democrats that voted for those!
I just meant that NCLB was a long time ago and while the Dems who supported it definitely deserve to be criticized, I worry that all the new (and some old) Democrats who are great on public education are being tarnished just because they are Democrats! And lots of good progressives made the mistake of not fighting against the ESSA which was more recent. I guess what I’m saying is I don’t really care what Bernie Sanders position was 10 years ago or even 5 years ago on public education — because people change as they learn more (look at Diane Ravitch!) and Bernie’s position now is excellent. Same with Elizabeth Warren.
I just don’t want the good guys to get tarnished because of mistakes by Democrats years ago but I support any and all criticism of the many Democratic politicians who have been rabidly pro-charter and hurt public schools and are still supporting those harmful policies (I’m looking at you, Andrew Cuomo, among many others — I’m sure everyone has their own list of most despised Democrat politicians.)
I’d sacrifice progressive on economic issues for being a strong supporter of public schools. And I still respect people who would sacrifice being pro-charter for a politician who is very progressive on all the other issues.
I think there are people whose posts I admire on here who own guns (are you one of them?) and are not as pro-gun control as many progressive politicians they support because those politicians are excellent on economic issues and strong supporters of public schools. I think that’s great because that’s what democracy is all about, right? Competing interests coming together and giving up some things to get other things. But perhaps not giving up on whatever it is that really matters to you.
I know the Republicans have succeeded in pushing through their policies with no compromises, but I’m not sure progressives can ever do that because the Republicans had to be so unscrupulous to do that and it has involved thumbing their nose at democracy and embracing lies.
LikeLike
Duane and NYCPSP,
This is an excellent point. Charters were the darlings of both parties, and Obama loved charter schools and school choice. I will only vote Democrat, but I think it’s okay to critique our own party and strive to improve it! The Democrats – most of them at the onset of education reform – signed onto privatization, charters, and testing mania. Shame on them! I also still think very much that it’s more than fine for third, fourth, and fifth parties to form and compete with the arthritic, artery-blocked duopoly we have now. Let’s wax Ireland . . . .
This was the formula for charters:
1: Defund public schools, and those most at risk will be on their own.
2: Mandate developmentally inappropriate standardized tests to label the child, teachers, and administration so as to create more “failing” schools.
3: As schools fail, push the propaganda machine that school choice is a way out for those victims trapped in impoverishment and urban decay (mostly people of color and immigrant children).
4: Siphon money away from public schools instead of fortifying those most at risk and give the money to management companies operating charter schools.
5: Deregulate charter school companies or hold stringent requirements and laws for them, but look the other way when it comes to actually enforcing them.
6: Cover your eyes and ears when charters shutter and children are out of a school to attend. They don’t count. They are not longer profitable.
Democrats signed onto this just as much as the GOP. It’s disgraceful. It’s a crime against humanity, a silent killer, a deadly disease unleashed upon those vulnerable, unknowing and less educated. Obama is a ___________. Betsy DeVos and Trump are just as bad, but in a somewhat different way . . . .
Neither party cares about an educated population, which is threatening to their grip on power. Weaken primary, secondary, and higher education, and you further divide people. “Divided” is a state of existence that makes it yet easier for the ruling class to dominate almost all of us.
Follow the formula, and you’ll be successful . . . .
Connect the dots . . . .
LikeLike
Duane, you are so right. This plays perfectly for the Wall Street Dims (dimwit Dems In Name Only) who try so desperately to make privatization sound progressive. Betsy DimVos’ support for charters and the CSP (Charter Slush Pool) has been a boon for progressives. I hope she keeps up the charter cheerleading. Students of color deserve the choice to escape from dead end grizzly bears, after all.
I’d like to think this proposed budget is good news—cutting the CSP should be good news—but I fear it’s not going to end well. Charters need to stay in their lane, the far Right lane. House Democrats should steer clear and merge Left. There’s too much traffic in the center of the beltway. Don’t cause a wreck.
LikeLike
“We advocate for the federal Charter Schools Program because we believe it is a lifeline for students.”
I think that should read: “We advocate for the federal Charter School program because we believe it is a lifeline for overpaid shills who might have to get a real job if the gravy train working to promote taking money from the most vulnerable children and giving it to the richest charter networks does not continue.”
LikeLike
Vouchers have always been the end game for right wing evangelicals like DeVos. Superintendents in Florida have noticed that voucher students often return to the public schools after a year or two, and the students are in much worse academic shape than when they left. Public money should not be available to religious schools that discriminate. Public money should remain in public schools.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is such an enormous generalization. Our charter is NOT affiliated with a religion nor does it discriminate. It is a lottery. ANYONE can get in. Also it is not for profit so all of these generalizations that assume charters are sucking money out of public schools is just not true. If my kids actually had a public high school that they could go to with under 3000 students I would have considered it but that’s not an option here. Also the middle schools are between 800 and 900 students for two grades. My child would become another fly on the wall with absolutely zero individualized attention. Moving my kids to a charter school has been the best decision I have ever made. BTW..all three of my public schools are CLOSED to open enrollment because they are bursting at the seams. So, again, at least I’m my area public charters are not gouging the public district schools.
LikeLike
Of course charters take money from public schools. Read Gordon Lafer’s study “The Breaking Point” documents the fiscal
damage that charters do to public schools. You exercise choice and it hurts the kids who don’t.
LikeLike
Your point about too-large public schools – and something that often comes with them, too-large classes – deserves front¢er attention in media & in local/ state politics. Too-large schools in particular seem to get zero scrutiny re: harm done to quality of education. Parents get this. Where are the studies? Absent info, I’m going to guess that they are admin-heavy thus expensive to run, have a chaotic environment making it difficult to learn, & have comparatively poor results. I’m also going to guess that the politics behind them reflects indifference to the education of those with little political influence, & serves to marginalize them further.
The charter escape hatch is a temporary bandaid for a few at the expense of the many. It’s run on laissez-faire-market rules which means the inevitable devpt of monopolies swallowing up smaller schools & unanswerable to locally elected boards. “School choice,” cloaked cynically in the language of civil rights, is a shiny object distracting voters from demanding better ed for the entire community.
LikeLike
can’t have the kids who are meant to be “kept down on the farm” knowing too much
LikeLike
Has there every been a time in American history when there were more attacks against the people who fuel the wealth of the upper class?
The attempts to destroy democracy and to dismantle the education system of 86% of the population include, Wall Street, the heirs to the largest businesses, the overwhelming majority of the richest tech tyrants, Catholic bishops and state Catholic Conferences representing 10% of the population, the leaders of the Christian Right representing 16% of the population, eager-for-donations politico’s from both parties, all corporate-owned media, all of the major “philanthropies”, ALEC, government employee associations like SETDA, think tanks, professors and universities, funded with tax sheltered dollars by the donor class and a cadre of “Impatient Optimist”-type lackeys funded by the rich, at least one NFL owner and pro-quarterback, grifters, some from the celebrity world scheming to take a buck from taxpayers, …and, government departments like DeVos’.
Diane is an freaking miracle worker !!!
LikeLike
Linda, did you finish the book?
LikeLike
Yes- I think it’s amazing- I’m working at writing an impression that does it justice but I am stymied by my inadequacy (a sentiment I plan to dispense with it in favor of output, however feeble).
LikeLike
I know, if it’s Tuesday it must be Guilford!
Sent from my iPhone
>
LikeLike
The tRump administration gets one 1/2 right by accident. The block grants should have been killed to, I do not like having to fight charters on a 50 state basis rather than at the single, federal level, much like the ESSA turn the fight into a 50 state fight when Dun-can’ts RTTT was ended by it.
LikeLike
I love how the ed reform echo chamber swings between advocating for charters and advocating for vouchers.
Apparently NO ONE works on behalf of the 90% of students who attend the unfashionable “government schools”, even the people we’re paying in government.
It’s true in the states they control too- Ohio lawmakers spend every legislative session either passing a charter and voucher law or fixing a charter and voucher law.
They haven’t contributed anything positive to the public schools or public school students in the state for a decade. No one can be bothered.
It’s a measure of what an echo chamber ed reform is that no one even questions this- it’s just business as usual to completely ignore 90% of students.
Imagine you’re an ordinary public school parent listening to ed reformers, and not engaged in their ideological crusade to replace public schools. Your child or their school is never mentioned other than to be ignorantly declared “failing” by the President and his appointees. That’s 90% of parents.
LikeLike
Was there anything about public schools in the President’s proposed budget?
I ask because that’s 90% of students. It would seem that ed reformers who are employed full time in “public education” could at least find the time to skim that portion. No?
Talk about a silent majority. Public school students seem to have completely disappeared. I imagine they’ll re-appear for “testing season”. That seems to be their only role in all this.
Maybe we should consider hiring a couple of government employees who have some interest in serving public schools. Innovative, I know. Wildly disruptive.
LikeLike
I found an ed reformer who mentioned public schools:
“Students may be better served by being in larger classes, if by hiring fewer teachers, a district or state can better compensate those who have demonstrated high ability and outstanding results.”
That’s Betsy Devos explaining how public schools can manage the budget cuts she hopes to put in.
Don’t say ed reform never did anything for you if you’re a public school student or parent. They have many innovative ideas on how best to gut your budget. Also- don’t forget their myriad contributions to testing! Just a hugely positive agenda, I must say. Budget cuts and tests. What’s not to love about this “movement”?
LikeLike
Here’s the sum total of ed reform’s work on “public education” in Ohio this year:
https://fordhaminstitute.org/ohio/commentary/house-plan-imperils-some-edchoice-recipients
Day 500 of pushing a voucher bill. Either completely irrelevant to 90% of students and families in the state, or, as in this case, actively harmful.
Yet we’re all supposed to hire and pay hundreds of these folks. They contribute absolutely nothing to 90% of US students, and if they capture your statehouse, as they have mine, they ensure no one will do any work for public school students, what with the annual charter/voucher battles.
My youngest will soon graduate an Ohio public high school. His entire tenure in public school took place during the dominance of ed reform- a period where public schools were either ignored or actively maligned.
It’s ludicrous. A ridiculous result.
LikeLike