Archives for the month of: August, 2020
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Teacher: A Day in the Life of a Hybrid Classroom

By dianeravitch
August 13, 2020 //
88

This post was sent by a teacher in Westchester County, New York, who prefers to remain anonymous:


Based on the hybrid/blended learning model described in the re-entry plan, this is what an average class period would look like in a typical 40-minute class. While an 80-minute class has more flexibility, the protocols are the same. This is a SMALL sampling of what life will be like for teachers and students in a hybrid model with the protocols outlined in the re-entry document.

This example would start at the transition between period 1 (which ends at 9:15am) and period 2 (which begins at 9:18am). In a 40- minute per class schedule, there are only three minutes between periods for all class periods. In an 80-minute per class schedule, there are only five minutes between periods for all class periods.

In this example, the “cohort” model where students stay in one spot and teachers move to them is not considered. It is not a practical solution for most classes—especially those that require supplies.

1. I just finished a class that ended at 9:15. I rush to my next class where another teacher is finishing a class that ends at 9:15. I do not like teaching in this room after this particular teacher because I do not trust that teacher to enforce social distancing and mask protocols. That teacher tends to be too lax. I need to go to the bathroom, but there were too many people waiting to get in (given the social distancing requirements). I did not want to risk leaving my students in the hallway given the risk of unsupervised interactions. Plus, the bathroom protocols are confusing. Overall, it’s unclear when I will be able to go to the bathroom at a safe time. I get to the room and I need to wait until all of the students from that class exit—presumably in a socially distanced manner (although that is unlikely since they will only have three minutes to get to the next class which starts at 9:18. My students are starting to arrive and begin to crowd me since there is no place to go. While waiting, I have no safe place to stand and there are students, teachers and other staff headed in all directions in the hallway. Once the classroom is clear, I rush in.

2. As the students from the first class leave, they encounter students waiting in the hallway who need to come in for my class. It is unlikely that they are following distancing or mask protocols because there is NO ONE supervising them, beyond a quick yell as a teacher passes–“hey get those masks on” “kids please separate–you can’t be closer than 6 feet.” It is highly unlikely that anyone will hear the teacher since it is quite loud (especially with multiple teens and pre- teens shouting for attention). The teacher will rush off to get to whatever class they need to get to. Or the teacher will ignore it entirely because the hallways will be the most dangerous places in the building–especially between classes.

3. Even if I arrive a minute or two after 9:15 (which is inevitable since I’m rushing from another class), I am concerned that my students will enter the room without monitored social distancing and mask wearing. The doors are propped open by protocol (to allow air flow), so there will be a period of time where the room is unsupervised.

4. Somehow in this time from 9:15 to 9:18, every surface is supposed to be disinfected. It is unclear who will do this or how it will be done. In all likelihood, it will not happen and as the day goes on, the room will become an ever-growing petri dish.

5. According to the protocols, students are supposed to wash their hands when they come in. After entering the room, some students make a beeline for their desks, while others head to the sink. There will be a breakdown in social distancing because it will be impossible to monitor this and have an organized method of entering, sitting, and washing hands. When there are only three minutes between classes, the transitions are inherently chaotic. A line forms in the crowded space leading to the sink. This will become a source of concern and I will have to say something like: “students please socially distance! Make sure you put those dirty towels in…..(not sure where that type of waste will go). Make sure you clean up that water that is now all over the floor and on the counters! That water is now contaminated— please try not to get water everywhere. Please hurry, we only have about 35 minutes for class. Oh, and I’m saying this on the opposite side of the room b/c I don’t want to be near you”

6. Eventually students go to their assigned square.

7. Students are carrying their supplies with them from class to class, so they put them………somewhere?

8. Now students students set up plexiglass that they are also carrying with them all day

9. About this time a student asks to go to the bathroom—which could be problematic. It is unclear when we are supposed to use the bathroom—there are apparently “designated times” for classes to go, and I don’t think this is our time. However, I allow the student to go because it looks like it will be a problem if I don’t. Before I allow the student to go, I remind the student to wear their mask and do not congregate in the hallway. And be sure to walk on the appropriate part of the hallway. And come straight back to class, again using the appropriate hallway (and stairs if applicable…it’s hard to keep track of which stairs and hallways are for which direction….I’m pretty sure the bathroom is in the middle of those one-way hallways…or it may be where there are lanes separating each side—but no one ever sticks to those lanes because….no one sees the tape and they are students and it is impossible to supervise).

10. When that student comes back, they will need to wash their hands. Again.

11. In the meantime, I am trying to open some of the windows for airflow, but many of the windows do not open properly. I am hesitant to go in the back of the room because of the proximity to students. I check the air conditioner to ensure that the airflow is on “fresh” air and not “circulate” since circulated air is supposed to spread the virus. At this point, my only thought is about protecting myself against the virus. After a week of this, I am sure I will be in a heightened state of anxiety since every minute of every day will require constant monitoring of my surroundings. Anyway, I’m not sure if the air conditioner is set correctly and I’ve lost too much time already.

12. Some students will arrive late because some of the hallways and staircases are directional–meaning they might need to circle the building to go in the proper direction. Some students may get lost going this way. Others may bump into friends, take off their masks and chat. Some students may find this system highly stressful which will make it even harder for them to follow the “get to class protocol.” Some students may drop their box of material while trying to balance their jacket, box and plexiglass (and any other items they may be carrying since lockers are not in use).

13. I wait until late students wash their hands and set up at their spot.

14. At best, it is now 9:28 (10 minutes into class). Likely, it is after 9:30. Best case scenario, there are 30 minutes left (not including packing up and cleaning and leaving in a socially distanced manner). 15. Now I need to set up livestreaming. The second half of my class have been waiting at home for class to start (at 9:18), however given all of the protocols we must follow in the building, it is impossible to start at 9:18. I’m concerned that students will get impatient and leave. As I try to livestream, there are complications. It’s Zoom and there are always complications. Also, we have webcams, but the only ones available to purchase are off-brand copies of major label webcams that have been sold out since March. While they look nice, they are glitchy. Plus, the computer that the webcam is attached to is an older computer with older hardware and limited RAM. It is difficult to stream to 10 or so students with older technology. While our bandwidth has improved, every class is attempting to stream at the same time. Plus, every cell phone, Chromebook and laptop in the building is tapping into WIFI. We always have slowdowns mid-day. It takes me about five minutes (if I’m lucky) to connect with the half of my class that is at home. While I’m doing this, the in-class students have nothing to do and start to become restless and talk to each other. Students often lower their masks to talk and I start to notice this out of the corner of my eye, but I’m trying to make the livestreaming work.

16. As I finally get the remote students on board, I turn around to ensure students are socially distanced, have their masks on and are sitting in their assigned square. I reprimand at least several students for having masks below their noses. While I address the issues in the classroom, the remote students have nothing to do—some of them turn off their camera. It is now 9:35 (if I’m lucky and there are minimal tech problems on the livestream side and few issues of social distancing on the classroom side).

17. A student asks for a scheduled mask break–he can’t breathe. Several other students complain too. I say, “not now, I need to get started.” Those students are upset at me. One is really embarrassed that I said their name because the students at home heard it and they know the class is being livestreamed. Some students have expressed concern that their friends will secretly record the class or take screenshots and put them on Instagram. Even worse, they worry about becoming a meme. I am a little worried about this too. The students at home are really bored.

18. Now I need to take attendance. It’s halfway through the period already. I must take attendance for two different sets of students. Technology problems will make this longer—there are always problems with our attendance program. It slows mid-day when many classes are using the network. The livestreaming has placed a huge strain on our bandwidth needs.

19. Finally, I explain the directions for the class. However, I need to find a place to stand where both groups can see me. I generally stand in the same spot all period due to social distancing rules.

20. I am not able to move around room due to social distancing concerns.

21. I will be teaching with a mask and a shield. Communication will be difficult. Students will ask me to repeat information—although this will be difficult to do from home, so they will tune out and pretend to be listening. Students will grow to hate these mandatory livestreams. They will tell their parents that it is a waste of time. It’s really difficult to understand anything (b/c the microphones on the off-brand webcams do not work well), plus they can’t do many of the activities that I insist should be doable at home. Although, it is difficult to determine this since there is no research about best-practices for a hybrid classroom where half the students are at home and the other half are in the classroom. To be honest, I am completely winging this. There is no time to prepare these lessons and I have no prior material to fall back on. Even though I am a veteran teacher, I have no idea how to teach in this model—no one does. I spend most of my day trying to stay safe.

22. Teaching is a bit awkward. I’m not sure who to look at. When I look at my in-class students, I’m staring at a group of evenly spaced students with masks (most are hanging slightly askew). I then turn around to see a Brady bunch group of students looking like they are being tortured. Somehow, I need to find inspiration. We are just about ready to do an activity. It’s now 9:42 (at best)

23. The “lesson” now begins—we have 16 minutes left. Some days it will be a PowerPoint that will somehow have to be presented to two different groups in two different locations—I never remember where to direct my voice. I try to get passionate about the subject but then remember that jumping around with a face shield and getting sweat and spittle on the inside of my mask is really disconcerting—so I tone it down. Plus, I look crazy jumping around in that get up. Also, moving around erratically causes my shield to shift and my mask to slide down my face. On other days, students will do an activity. Students will not be able to collaborate given the two different environments and the need to socially distance in the classroom. Activities will be severely limited to accommodate social distancing and a remote audience. I will not be able to distribute materials— especially for classroom work—because the group at home will not be able to participate. If a student needs one on one help to understand the handout, I will not be able to help due to social distancing. I’ll try to help from afar. It’s really difficult to address questions from two different sets of students so I focus more on the in-class students. The students at home become progressively more disengaged. Lessons in this environment will most certainly be rote and dry. There will be minimal engagement.

At 9:53, I start to wrap things up to get the class ready for the next group. I’m very anxious about these transition times. Students need to make sure they have all of their belongings in their box. They need to clean the plexiglass and take it with them. Supplies used in class (if they belong in class) must be cleaned. The remote group has already signed out b/c there is nothing for them to do. In fact, they only had about 10 minutes worth of “learning.”

The class ends at 9:58 and the next class begins at 10:01—and this happens all over again.

It turns out that my prep period is from 10:01 to 10:41. This is when I am supposed to prep for classes and/or grade material. This is especially important now because every lesson must be prepared anew to fit this hybrid environment. However, there is no place for me to go. The hallways are jammed. I cannot stay in the classroom due to social distancing protocols. Plus, it would be awkward if I end up on the livestream of another class. I try to strategically plan when I can use the bathroom safely. However, I do not want to remain in the building. There literally is no room for me to go to. The faculty lounge has limited occupancy—plus, the ventilation in there is terrible and I do not want to be in another room with many other people—some of whom may not be wearing their masks correctly. So, I decide to go to my car. To get there, I have to use a specified exit which is on the opposite side of the building of my car. By the time I navigate to the proper exit and wander over to my car, it’s 10:15. If I used the bathroom, then it is probably 10:25. I lie down in my car seat for 10 minutes max. Then I have to race back to the proper entrance (and go through an entrance exam?) to get to my next class on time. Obviously nothing is planned or graded during this time.

Multiply this by 6 classes. Add in lunch and specials. And there WILL be other challenges that I didn’t address. These are just the most obvious.

I question how much learning would occur in this environment. I’m worried about my health and the health of my students and the community as a whole.

Categories Health, Teachers and Teaching, Technology

Chalkbeat: Trump, DeVos Demand Reopening Despite Risks

By dianeravitch
August 13, 2020 //
17

Matt Barnum reports that Trump and DeVos renewed their pressure to reopen schools despite the fact that most large districts have ignored their previous threats to cut funding. They and their Senate allies have refused to provide the funding necessary to enable schools to open safely, in accordance with CDC guidelines. Please open the article and read it in full, both for the links and the content. The Trump administration apparently believes that safety measures—like masks and social distancing—are unnecessary except for “high risk” individuals. Trump’s politicization of reopening will not assuage any parent’s fears. No child should be compelled to return in a district where the risk is high to help Trump’s re-election campaign.

He writes:

The Trump administration mounted a pressure campaign last month aimed at getting America’s schools to reopen their doors. To a large extent, it didn’t work.

Now, officials are trying again, in a move that might signal that Republican leaders are unlikely to relent in their push to tie additional school funding to physical reopening.

At a White House event Wednesday, President Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos continued to make the case that schools must reopen because children benefit from in-person learning and the economy benefits from the de facto child care that schools provide. They cast opposition to reopening as driven by teachers unions, while pushing aside concerns about virus transmission.

“For students and their families, they can’t be held captive to other people’s fears or agendas,” said DeVos. “We have got to ensure that families and parents have options that are going to work for their child.”

“We cannot indefinitely stop 50 million American children from going to school and harming their mental, physical, emotional, and academic development and inflicting long-term, lasting damage,” Trump said at a Wednesday evening press conference.

The comments signal that President Trump continues to see school reopening as key to the country’s, and perhaps his electoral, fortunes. But it’s unclear whether he will find any more success. Most of the country’s largest districts are starting the year virtually, and most parents, teachers, and voters are skeptical of the push to reopen school buildings — even as many worry about child care and the ability of students with disabilities, among others, to get the support they need at home.

The administration’s messaging has contributed to a deep political polarization on the issue of reopening, a divide that may have affected which districts reopen buildings. A Brookings Institution analysis found that schools were more likely to open for in-person instruction in areas where Trump got more votes….

At Wednesday’s event, Trump reiterated his argument that schools that reopen shouldn’t get money from the federal government. “I would like the money to follow the student,” he said. “If the school is closed, why are we paying?”…

On Wednesday, White House officials argued the public is on its side. “Parents overwhelmingly are saying yes when they are asked do you feel it is safe for your son or daughter to return to school,” said counselor to the president Kellyanne Conway.

“Teachers want to be back in the classroom with their kids, even if they have an underlying condition,” said Florida education commissioner Richard Corcoran, who has pushed schools in the state to reopen and has been sued by the state teachers’ union.

Polls tell a different story, though. Most parents, especially parents of color, say they prefer that schools err on the side of safety rather than push to reopen quickly. A July poll, for instance, found that 60% of parents prefer that school reopen later to reduce risk…

The White House event will likely do little to assuage those concerns. Two of the participants — Paul Peterson, a Harvard education professor, and Scott Atlas, a medical doctor and fellow at a conservative think tank — recently co-authored an op-ed suggesting that schools forgo many widely recommended safety precautions.

“Even in states and districts where schools are allowed to re-open, unnecessary restrictions and requirements will seriously jeopardize our children’s education,” they wrote in The Hill. “Masked teachers can hardly be effective … Repetitive sanitation and temperature-taking activities subtract from the time on educational tasks that students need … Worst of all, social distancing rules will disrupt regular, full-schedule attendance.”

Paul Petersen is a professor of education policy at Harvard who relentlessly promotes charters and vouchers. He has no credentials in public health. He and Dr. Atlas are both fellows at the conservative Hoover Institution. Atlas is an advisor to Trump on COVID-19 and advised Trump’s presidential campaign.

Categories Accountability, Health, Safety, Trump

NYC: Principals, Teachers, Nurses Seek Delay in Opening

By dianeravitch
August 13, 2020 //
6

Spokespersons for principals, teachers, and nurses have called on Mayor De Blasio to delay reopening and provide more time to prepare schools, reports Gotham Gazette, a publication of the Citizens Union Foundation.

​The principals union, the teachers union, and the nurses union have come out against the ​city’s plan to reopen classrooms on September 10 with a mix of remote and in-person learning.

In a letter to Mayor Bill de Blasio and Schools Chancellor Richard Carranza, the Council of School Supervisors and Administrators urged the officials to move the start of in-person school to the end of September to give schools more time to prepare, while offering fully remote learning as they do.

​”​Given the lack of information and guidance available at this time, CSA believes that NYCDOE’s decision to open for in-person learning on September 10th is in disregard of the well-being of our school communities​,” wrote CSA President Mark Cannizzaro.

The union is seeking more clarity on essential questions around sufficient staffing, hiring of nurses, PPE supplies, and support for students with special needs, among others. With individual school plans due to city officials Friday, if approved administrators and teachers will have fewer than 15 “working days” to implement them before students arrive, Cannizzaro wrote.

Categories Bill de Blasio, Health, New York City, Principals, Safety, Teachers

Texas: Former CFO of IDEA Charter Chain Sues for $1 Million in Back Pay

By dianeravitch
August 12, 2020 //
12

Hey, Big Spender!

The Texas-based IDEA charter chain is best known for lavish spending—on the taxpayers’s dimes and dollars.

IDEA is the corporate charter chain that wanted to lease a private jet for its executives and their families, that bought a private box at pro basketball games, that lavished perks on its top employees.

And now it’s former Chief Financial Officer says IDEA owes him $1 million.

Betsy DeVos has lavished more than $200 million on IDEA, to support its expansion and the grand life style of its executives.

Categories Education Reform

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman: Doing the Right Thing Ended My Career in This Administration

By dianeravitch
August 12, 2020 //
18

You may recall that Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman testified in the impeachment hearings in the House of Representatives. He did so at risk of his career. He lost his career.

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman (Ret.), a career U.S. Army officer, served on the National Security Council as the director for Eastern European, Caucasus and Russian affairs, as the Russia political-military affairs officer for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and as a military attaché in the U.S. Embassy in Moscow.

This article appeared in the Washington Post:

After 21 years, six months and 10 days of active military service, I am now a civilian. I made the difficult decision to retire because a campaign of bullying, intimidation and retaliation by President Trump and his allies forever limited the progression of my military career.
This experience has been painful, but I am not alone in this ignominious fate. The circumstances of my departure might have been more public, yet they are little different from those of dozens of other lifelong public servants who have left this administration with their integrity intact but their careers irreparably harmed.

A year ago, having served the nation in uniform in positions of critical importance, I was on the cusp of a career-topping promotion to colonel. A year ago, unknown to me, my concerns over the president’s conduct and the president’s efforts to undermine the very foundations of our democracy were precipitating tremors that would ultimately shake loose the facade of good governance and publicly expose the corruption of the Trump administration.

At no point in my career or life have I felt our nation’s values under greater threat and in more peril than at this moment. Our national government during the past few years has been more reminiscent of the authoritarian regime my family fled more than 40 years ago than the country I have devoted my life to serving.
Our citizens are being subjected to the same kinds of attacks tyrants launch against their critics and political opponents. Those who choose loyalty to American values and allegiance to the Constitution over devotion to a mendacious president and his enablers are punished. The president recklessly downplayed the threat of the pandemic even as it swept through our country. The economic collapse that followed highlighted the growing income disparities in our society. Millions are grieving the loss of loved ones and many more have lost their livelihoods while the president publicly bemoans his approval ratings.

There is another way.

During my testimony in the House impeachment inquiry, I reassured my father, who experienced Soviet authoritarianism firsthand, saying, “Do not worry, I will be fine for telling the truth.” Despite Trump’s retaliation, I stand by that conviction. Even as I experience the low of ending my military career, I have also experienced the loving support of tens of thousands of Americans. Theirs is a chorus of hope that drowns out the spurious attacks of a disreputable man and his sycophants.

Since the struggle for our nation’s independence, America has been a union of purpose: a union born from the belief that although each individual is the pilot of their own destiny, when we come together, we change the world. We are stronger as a woven rope than as unbound threads.

America has thrived because citizens have been willing to contribute their voices and shed their blood to challenge injustice and protect the nation. It is in keeping with that history of service that, at this moment, I feel the burden to advocate for my values and an enormous urgency to act.

Despite some personal turmoil, I remain hopeful for the future for both my family and for our nation. Impeachment exposed Trump’s corruption, but the confluence of a pandemic, a financial crisis and the stoking of societal divisions has roused the soul of the American people. A groundswell is building that will issue a mandate to reject hate and bigotry and a return to the ideals that set the United States apart from the rest of the world. I look forward to contributing to that effort.

In retirement from the Army, I will continue to defend my nation. I will demand accountability of our leadership and call for leaders of moral courage and public servants of integrity. I will speak about the attacks on our national security. I will advocate for policies and strategies that will keep our nation safe and strong against internal and external threats. I will promote public service and exalt the contribution that service brings to all areas of society.

The 23-year-old me who was commissioned in December 1998 could never have imagined the opportunities and experiences I have had. I joined the military to serve the country that sheltered my family’s escape from authoritarianism, and yet the privilege has been all mine.

When I was asked why I had the confidence to tell my father not to worry about my testimony, my response was, “Congressman, because this is America. This is the country I have served and defended, that all my brothers have served, and here, right matters.”

To this day, despite everything that has happened, I continue to believe in the American Dream. I believe that in America, right matters. I want to help ensure that right matters for all Americans.

Lt. Col. Vindman made one mistake: In Donald Trump’s America, right does not matter. Loyalty to Trump is the only thing that matters, and God help those who make the mistake of thinking differently and putting country above loyalty to the Leader.

Categories Courage, Trump

Thomas Ultican: “School Choice” Was Created by White Supremacists

By dianeravitch
August 12, 2020 //
7

In this post, Thomas Ultican reviews Steve Suitts’ devastating new book about the origins of school choice.

Advocates of school choice like to claim economist Milton Friedman as their godfather but Suitts, who has spent his career working in civil rights activism, shows that the true originators of “freedom of choice” were Southern governors and legislatures who were determined to thwart the Brown decision of 1954. Suitts doesn’t ignore Friedman. He points out that his 1955 essay proposing freedom of choice proposed that in a choice system, there would be all-white schools, all-black schools, and mixed-race schools.

The segregationists loved Friedman’s ideas because it mirrored their own. They knew that in a free-choice regime, the status quo would be preserved by racism and intimidation.

So when you hear libertarians and right wingers talking about the glories of choice, think George Wallace. Think Bull Connor. Think James Eastland. Think White Citizens Councils. Read Steve Suitts’ book and be informed. Don’t be fooled by those who claim falsely that choice advances civil rights. It does not. It never has.

Categories History, Racism, School Choice, Segregation, Segregation , Racial Isolation and Integration

Kamala Harris at Ease

By dianeravitch
August 12, 2020 //
74

A friend sharedthis article about Kamala Harris that shows her at ease. The first video is hilarious. She is at the 92nd Street Y, an institution of Jewish culture in Manhattan, which has a great lecture series. She tells a story about her first meeting with her Jewish mother-in-law that is priceless.

Another video in the article shows her cooking at home with her husband. She has a great laugh. She is interesting. She will bring dynamism to the campaign and fresh ideas.

And here is Kamala cooking Indian food. Watch her deftly cut an onion.

I’m struck by how comfortable she is in front of a camera, how heartily she laughs. She is charismatic. Trump has already attacked her as “radical left,” which is funny since he twice donated to her campaigns. Overnight he attacked the Biden-Harris ticket as racist. I wish I could have seen her laugh when she heard that.

I’m thrilled that Joe Biden picked Senator Harris as his running mate. She is a great addition to the ticket.

Can’t wait to see her debate Mike Pence, that is, if Mother (Pence’s wife) allows him to share the stage with a woman. Harris was a member of the debate team when she was a student at Howard University.

Categories Humor, Politics

Michael Hiltzik: Trump Wants to Kill Social Security

By dianeravitch
August 12, 2020 //
21

Trump vowed, if re-elected, to kill the payroll tax, which funds Social Security and Medicare. Do most Americans understand what that means to them?

Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times explains the dangers of Trump’s executive orders.

With his four executive orders purportedly aimed at relieving Americans of the burdens of the coronavirus, President Trump spun the theme of his administration — the Art of the Con — up to a higher level.

The orders he signed Saturday include a supposed moratorium on evictions and foreclosures, a deferral of student loan payments and an extension of federal unemployment benefits.

The moratorium is unlikely to stop a single eviction or foreclosure, however. The deferral of student loan payments is short-term and narrower than what Congress put in place in May, and that has expired.

The extension of unemployment benefits reduces the federal share to $300 a week from $600, will last only four to six weeks and imposes insurmountable barriers on states to achieve even that much.

But the most potentially far-reaching order concerns the payroll tax, which funds Social Security and part of Medicare. This order, along with comments Trump made at the signing ceremony, pose a mortal threat to the 64 million Americans who currently receive Social Security benefits and the hundreds of millions more who will receive benefits in coming decades.

If he’s reelected, Trump said, he will “terminate” the payroll tax. Make no mistake: He’s talking about bankrupting Social Security.
It’s rare that a president has made such a compelling case for his own electoral defeat. Yet his campaign was so proud of this threat that it tweeted out Trump’s words within minutes.

Social Security advocates weren’t nearly so sanguine.

“This is all a very well thought-out campaign to undermine Social Security and Medicare,” Wiliam F. Arnone, chief executive of the National Academy of Social Insurance, told me. The order threatens to “erode the economic security of millions of Americans, without bringing meaningful relief for unemployed workers or employers.”

Rep. John B. Larson (D-Conn.) the sponsor of a proposal to expand Social Security, called the order “the single worst way to get relief to beleaguered Americans … stealing from their retirement to make up for the administration’s failure to contain the virus.”

He’s right. We’ve written before that cutting or deferring the payroll tax does almost nothing for the vast majority of working Americans, not to mention those out of work, would overwhelmingly benefit the rich, and would knock the key source of financing out from under Social Security while opening the door to massive benefit cuts.

Trump’s executive order boasts of its being a “modest, targeted action.” It’s anything but. The order says it will “put money directly in the pockets of American workers … right when the money is needed most.” It won’t do that.
Trump nevertheless has been obsessed with the idea of a payroll tax cut, for reasons that are impossible to apprehend. One might not have thought this possible, but his executive order makes things even worse.

The most incisive line about the order belongs to Nobel economist Paul Krugman, who tweeted that “payroll tax cuts are the hydroxychloroquine of economic policy. They won’t do anything to solve the employment crisis, but will have dangerous side effects.”

Trump has been obsessed with cutting the payroll tax since the dawn of his presidency. But in his latest attack he may be working from a strategy crafted by Stephen Moore, a right-wing economic advisor whose hostility to Social Security is manifest.

Moore laid out the payroll tax plan in an Aug. 2 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. Moore said the Treasury should “instruct the Treasury to stop withholding payroll taxes,” though it’s not the Treasury but employers who do the withholding. (More on that below.) But then again, being right isn’t necessarily part of Moore’s credentials.

To better understand the dire implications of Trump’s order, let’s take a closer look.

As a foundation, keep in mind that the payroll tax comes to 12.4% of wage income up to an inflation-adjusted cap — this year, $137,700. The tax is evenly split between employees and employers, who must pay their 6.2% share and also withhold the employee share from their paychecks and pay it over to the Treasury.
Another 2.9% of payroll, uncapped, is also shared between employer and worker to fund part of Medicare.

The centerpiece of the executive order is an interest- and penalty-free deferral of payroll taxes for four months, from Sept. 1 through Dec. 31. This is tantamount to an interest-free loan to workers of up to four months. After that period, the deferred tax will have to be paid.

Social Security experts say deferring the tax payments falls within Trump’s authority. But if he remains president and moves to eliminate the accrued debt, that can’t be done without the assent of Congress.

The terms of the deferral place a huge administrative burden on employers, whether big or small. The order applies only to workers earning less than $104,000 a year, or $4,000 per biweekly pay period. Employers will have to determine which workers fall within that zone, possibly recalculating every two weeks.

How the deferral is supposed to work in practice is murky. Under federal law, employers are required to withhold the payroll tax from paychecks. Nothing in the executive order changes that, despite Moore’s proposal. So several outcomes are possible.

One is that employers will continue to withhold the tax from workers — placing the amount equal to the deferral in escrow or paying it over to the Treasury and claiming a refund to be passed back to employees after Dec. 31.

As Seth Hanlon, a former economist for the Obama administration, observes, in that case the order provides employers with an interest-free loan of up to four months. Meanwhile, workers won’t see a penny more in their paychecks.

Another is that they will cease withholding the tax for those four months. That places a burden, however, on workers, since the tax isn’t eliminated, just deferred. They’d likely have to repay the tax with their annual tax filings next April 15. The risk here is that many workers won’t adjust their spending to cover the obligation.

For a worker earning $60,000 a year, the deferral comes to less than $100 a week. That may help a truly strapped family (though it would be better for that household to receive assistance in a lump sum). But at the end of the year, the family will owe $1,530. That may come as quite the shock.

Then there’s the cutoff of deferrals for anyone earning $104,000 or more. Those whose employers have ceased withholding face a sheer cliff in take-home pay: Earn $103,999, you get the deferral — in effect, a temporary, repayable 7.65% bump in the paycheck. Earn a dollar more, you don’t.

Trump plainly sees this stunt as a way to blame Democrats for that tax bill, not to mention the apparent tax increase when the deferral ends and payroll taxes revert to their full level. Democrats “will have the option of raising everybody’s taxes and taking this away,” he said at the signing ceremony.

In other words, he’s offering voters a bribe — in effect, “elect them and you’ll have to pay what you owe; elect me and you’ll get a pass.” This raises cynicism to an electoral principle, but it’s fair to wonder if the American voter is dumb enough to fall for it.

The most frightening aspect of the payroll tax order is its impact on Social Security itself. The payroll tax is the program’s single largest revenue source. It’s been tampered with before, notably when congressional Republicans forced Obama to accept a temporary cut of two percentage points in the payroll tax as a stimulus measure. As we’ve reported, that wasn’t a great idea, but the administration was backed into a wall by a GOP majority.

But even then, the cut was accompanied by an explicit arrangement to make up the revenue loss to Social Security from the general fund. The Treasury made good on that promise, paying more than $225 billion into Social Security from 2010 through 2015.

But there’s no such backstop in Trump’s executive order. By my calculations, based on the system’s 2019 revenue and income for 2020 as projected by the Social Security trustees, the four-month deferral will deprive the system of nearly $333 billion in real-time income. Even if the money is ultimately repaid, Social Security will have lost an estimated $9 billion in interest on that revenue, permanently.
More permanent would be the impact on the system if Trump is reelected and eliminates the payroll tax. In that case, says Nancy Altman, president of the advocacy group Social Security Works, the Social Security trust fund, which currently holds $2.9 trillion in assets, would be completely depleted within four years.

“There would be no contributions coming in and no interest on the trust fund because it would have been drawn down. There would be no money to pay benefits. The whole program would just shut down.”

No one need guess what would happen to Social Security if it’s transformed from a program with its own independent revenue sources into one dependent on appropriations by Congress.

The evidence from other such programs — food stamps, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and, indeed, unemployment benefits — is in front of our eyes: Benefits can be slashed by congressional whim and the programs disemboweled.

This is all the consequence of having “a completely lawless, corrupt president in the White House, and Republicans not checking him,” Altman said. Indeed, in a statement about the executive orders, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said he was “glad that President Trump is proving that while Democrats use laid-off workers as political pawns, Republicans will actually look out for them.”
Has he even read the executive orders? And if so, how could he make such an absurd statement? Or is he just falling for the con?

Categories Education Reform

What Trump’s Executive Orders Really Do

By dianeravitch
August 11, 2020 //
10

David Dayen writes the blog “Unsanitized” for the American Prospect. In this post, he explains what Trump’s executive orders really do. Please open the links to see the many embedded links.

After weeks of unproductive talks with Democrats bending but the White House unyielding, over the weekend Donald Trump issued three memoranda and an executive order that, at this moment, reflect the only additional relief to the American people at a time when fiscal policy was the only thing preventing the economy from ruin.

We’ll get to what’s in these in a minute, but it’s worth noting what’s not there. The Heroes Act, House Democrats’ kitchen sink policy, added up to $3.4 trillion. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, who get the vapors at the sight of a deficit so they ought to know, the Trump orders would provide at best $225 billion in near-term funds, and on net, just $13 billion, tops, in new budgetary outlays. Everything in the orders either shuffles existing money around or kicks payments down the road; the new spending just assumes some missed collections.

I’ve read all four documents (here, here, here, and here) and I’d say CRFB is being amazingly generous assuming that anything close to even the meager funding it outlines will actually materialize. Let’s dive in.

Unemployment: the Trump action, if it actually worked, would give unemployed Americans an $400 extra per week retroactive to August 1, down from the $600 that expired in July. Of that sum, $300 would come from a FEMA disaster relief fund, and another $100 would have to be supplied by the states, using relief funds appropriated in the CARES Act. However most of that CARES Act money is already spoken for, and cash-strapped states don’t have a lot of extra money available to contribute. So I’d say it’s unlikely the state share will be included in a majority of states. Unemployed workers themselves will get half of what they previously got.

In addition, there’s only $44 billion available from the FEMA fund for the federal share. About $50 billion was spent on the $600 enhancement in the first two weeks of July, with nearly 30 million people receiving benefits. This is half that and maybe fewer recipients as hiring increases. But at most, this gets you another 5 weeks of support; by the end of August it’ll be done, even though it’s supposed to last until December.

When recipients will actually get anything is unclear; states would have to create an entirely new program through their antiquated unemployment insurance systems. It’s first-come first-served, so early states might get a little more for their residents while states that take months to figure things out could be shut out at the window entirely. And while the unemployed endure the wait, rent and other bills are still due.

Besides all that, it’s plainly unconstitutional, as David Super explains. The Disaster Relief Program being used isn’t intended for this purpose and its ability to deliver unemployment benefits is severely limited. Violating the Anti-Deficiency Act, which this does, carries criminal penalties. But while many will grumble, who exactly will sue to block the unemployed from getting even meager benefits? Treasury Secretary Mnuchin taunted Democrats with exactly this rationale on Sunday.

Payroll taxes: Set aside that people working need far less support than those who don’t. The president cannot change tax law to cancel taxes; he can defer payments. That’s what’s being done here. Any worker making less than $104,000 per year would have payroll taxes deferred from September 1 to the end of the year. They’ll still owe the taxes; they just won’t have to pay them until January.

This is a bureaucratic nightmare for employers, many of whom will likely opt to either keep paying them, or put them in an escrow account. Otherwise, they’d have to garnish a worker’s entire paycheck in January to cover back payroll taxes. My expectation is that this has next to no stimulative effect at all.

Trump says he wants to “terminate” these taxes if re-elected; he would need Congress to agree. It’s a political ploy to bribe the electorate, but if businesses just hang onto the money to avoid future fallout it won’t even work as a bribe. And Democrats are screaming that these taxes fund Social Security and Medicare and cancelling them would hasten a crisis (of course Congress could just, you know, fund Social Security and Medicare, and crisis solved.)

Evictions: This is just vaporware, the order just says that health officials should consider an eviction ban and that the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Treasury Department should see what they can do about helping renters and mortgage borrowers with funds to stay in their homes. That’s it. The federal moratorium only covered a handful of cases anyway; this is more useless than that.

Student loans: Of the four orders this is the most useful, as it extends an existing forbearance for federal student loans. Again, borrowers would still owe the money eventually, but it’s somewhat useful to be relieved of the burden now. What this shows is that the Education Department has a lot of discretion to let these loans go uncollected indefinitely, if they choose, to say nothing of the authority to cancel student loans. Trump is proving the concept.

It was a grave error to hold off on critical priorities until “the next bill,” after all the leverage was squandered. These Pelosi hagiographies are embarrassing in the context of her blowing the chance to secure ongoing relief throughout the pandemic. Whoever replaces Pelosi when she leaves doesn’t have to repeat these mistakes, as long as they learn from them.

I was on Democracy Now today talking about these orders as well as the war on the postal service, and you can watch that at their website.

Categories Funding, Hoax, Trump

Leonie Haimson: The Risks and Benefits of Opening New York City Schools

By dianeravitch
August 11, 2020 //
10

Leonie Haimson summarizes the pluses and minuses of reopening schools in New York City.

She points out:

Many public health experts and epidemiologists agree that NYC schools seem to be in the best position of any large district in the country to offer face-to-face learning, with an COVID positivity rate of only about one percent.

Our positivity rate is very low and the lowest we are likely to see until there is an effective vaccine, which could take a year or more to be developed and widely adopted. By borough, according to the state, the current positivity rates ranges from 1.3% in the Bronx, .9% in Staten Island and Brooklyn, .8% in Queens and .6% in Manhattan.

However, and this is a big however, schools should be reopened only if they can adopt rigorous safety and health protocols.

One of the biggest risks to safety right now is the poor ventilation in many NYC schools. Ventilation is a critical issue, as closed and stuffy rooms will intensify the risks of infection and virus spread. Many schools have lousy or broken ventilation systems, and/or classrooms with windows that don’t open or no windows at all, as I pointed out in this article. According to a principal survey we did ten years ago, 40% reported they had classrooms with no windows – and I doubt the situation has improved…

While many parents and teachers have been pushing for outdoor learning for safety reasons, the DOE has not provided them with any support to achieve this important goal. In fact, I have heard that some schools have said the DOE is discouraging them from providing outdoor recess or learning…

Another critical issue is the lack of testing with results fast enough to ensure that students and staff who are ill know to stay home and quarantine rather than infect others. Right now, many testing sites across the city take 5-15 days to deliver results, which is nearly useless. More and more, states are realizing that to safely reopen schools, they should adopt rapid antigen testing, which gives results within minutes and cost only $1-$2 each. Six governors from Maryland, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Ohio and Virginia have teamed up to buy large quantities of these quick testing kits, but not Governor Cuomo, for some reason.

Rather than join this consortium and help schools reopen safely, Gov. Cuomo has lambasted schools over the weekend for not having their own testing procedures in place, something they do not have the funds, the staffing or the expertise to do. Though he rightfully stepped in to help hospitals by purchasing PPE and helping to quickly expand testing sites when the COVID crisis first hit, he now acts that he has no responsibility to do the same to help and support schools in this difficult time.

Understandably, many parents are confused and ambivalent. Despite the Mayor’s spin that more than 700,000 students chose to engage in some form of in-person learning in the fall, it appears that fewer than half NYC parents registered any preference on the online survey, with 264,000 parents opting into remote learning and 131,000 blended learning. Many families seem to be waiting to see what the plan is for their schools, after which they can choose full-time remote learning at any time.

Categories Accountability, Bill de Blasio, Cuomo, Andrew, Health, New York City, Safety
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »