Archives for the month of: August, 2020

The New York Times reports today on the shameful shortage of school nurses. Students are returning to schools even when there are no trained health professionals there. The previous post described the response to the pandemic a century ago. At least in the cities, every school had a nurse and some had doctors. That was the Progressive Era. This is the Regressive Era, where schools are expected to reopen without any of the resources recommended by the CDC and other health organizations.

School nurses were already in short supply in the United States, with less than 40 percent of schools employing one full-time before the pandemic. Now those overburdened health care specialists are finding themselves on the front lines of a risky, high-stakes experiment in protecting public health as districts reopen their doors amid spiking caseloads in many parts of the country.

The American Association of Pediatrics recommends that every school have a nurse on site. But before the outbreak, according to the National Association of School Nurses, a quarter of American schools did not have one at all. And there has been no national effort to provide districts with new resources for hiring them, although some states have tapped federal relief funds.

Washington State is one of the places where nurses are a rarity in school hallways, with only 7 percent of schools employing one full-time, and nearly 30 percent of districts having one available for six hours or less per week. As the lone nurse for her school district in central Washington State, Janna Benzel will monitor 1,800 students for virus symptoms when classrooms open later this month, on top of her normal responsibilities like managing allergies, distributing medications and writing hundreds of immunization plans.

CNN published a very good article about what happened to the schools and their students during the so-called “Spanish Flu” pandemic of 1917-18. Many schools closed. Three large urban districts stayed open because officials believed that children were better off in schools than in their crowded tenements.

The striking point in the article is that the schools were well-supplied with nurses and doctors. The progressive reforms of the era had made schools a healthier place than many of the children’s homes. By contrast, about 25% of our schools today have no nurse, and even more have only a part-time nurse.

While the vast majority of cities closed their schools, three opted to keep them open — New York, Chicago and New Haven, according to historians.

The decisions of health officials in those cities was based largely on the hypothesis of public health officials that students were safer and better off at school. It was, after all, the height of the Progressive Era, with its emphasis on hygiene in schools and more nurses for each student than is thinkable now.

New York had almost 1 million school children in 1918 and about 75% of them lived in tenements, in crowded, often unsanitary conditions, according to a 2010 article in Public Health Reports, the official journal of the US Surgeon General and the US Public Health Service.

“For students from the tenement districts, school offered a clean, well-ventilated environment where teachers, nurses, and doctors already practiced — and documented — thorough, routine medical inspections,” according to the Public Health Reports article.

The city was one of the hardest and earliest hit by the flu, said Dr. Howard Markel, a medical historian and director of the Center for the History of Medicine at the University of Michigan. He was a co-author of the 2010 Public Health Reports article.

“(Children) leave their often unsanitary homes for large, clean, airy school buildings, where there is always a system of inspection and examination enforced,” New York’s health commissioner at the time, Dr. Royal S. Copeland, told the New York Times after the pandemic had peaked there.

The “Spanish flu” did not start in Spain. It very likely started in Kansas at Fort Riley. Spain was the first country not to censor news of the pandemic, so it was called the Spanish flu.

Gail Collins, regular columnist for the New York Times, former editor of its editorial page, conducted her annual contest for the worst member of Trump’s Cabinet. Previously, the contest was won by Betsy DeVos. This year there was a new winner.

She writes:


If you run into Attorney General William Barr over the weekend, be sure to congratulate him.

The readers have spoken! Barr was the runaway winner of our vote for Worst Trump Cabinet Member. He swept the field last fall, too. What we need now is a Worst Museum where we can put Barr’s portrait looming over the door.

The Worst of Trump is clearly a topic people are pondering. We got thousands of responses to the contest. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos came in second and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo third.

They were far, far behind the leader. But give DeVos credit — it’s not easy to build up so much rancor when you’re in a relatively low-profile cabinet post. “Betsy DeVos is one I particularly love to hate because of her smug arrogance, while being the very picture of ignorant incompetence,” wrote a voter.

“What can be better than a secretary of education who doesn’t believe in public schools and appears never to have attended any schools herself?” asked another.

Maybe it’s unfair for DeVos to have to compete against terrible cabinet members with so much more power. “Can we divide it into two categories?” asked Anne Gables, who proposed giving separate awards for “least qualified (most clueless) and most dangerous.”

Makes sense, and if those were the options DeVos would sweep the Clueless Contest while Barr would win the Keeps You Awake Nights competition.

One surprise in the pack was the strong showing by postmaster general Louis DeJoy. His job isn’t officially part of the cabinet, but DeJoy got a special exemption to join the competition since he’s been trying to undercut postal efficiency right ahead of the presidential election. “Rookie of the year has to be Louis DeJoy, for the sheer chutzpah of destroying one American institution (the mail) in the cause of destroying another American institution (democracy),” wrote Martin Benjamin.

Whenever we have a vote for Worst Trump Cabinet Member a sizable contingent protest that everybody should get a trophy. (“It is just too difficult to choose the Worst of the worst.”) A Georgia reader managed to trim the list down to three before throwing in the towel. (“Like eating a potato chip; can’t have just one.”)

Shira Revzen recalled a sign she saw at the women’s march in 2017: “I’ve seen better cabinets at Ikea!”

“Each cabinet member makes a unique contribution to the swamp,” argued a reader from Iowa. “Who can say the alligator is more or less important than the mosquito or the leech or the water moccasin?”

The swampy metaphors were popular. Linda Morgan of San Francisco voted for Barr as “concertmaster of all things wicked and slimy in Trump world,” but added an apology to “all green witches, snakes and worms.”

Mike Pence came in fifth — behind Barr, DeVos, Pompeo and DeJoy. Those who did vote for the vice president pointed out that having Pence as veep made it much less satisfactory to daydream about impeachment. (“He perpetually haunts the halls of power with a creepy presence and omnipresent inadequacy.”)

And then, of course, there was his prediction that we’d have put the pandemic behind us by Memorial Day. (“It’s gotta be Mike Pence, Corona Virus Czar. …”)

A reader from Spain expressed surprise that “I’ve seen no mention of the truly vile and incompetent Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin.” And indeed, Mnuchin came in way down the line. But he had champions who thought he deserved a prime spot. One of them noted that this is a man who left Goldman Sachs with about $46 million in stock, but now “thinks $600/week is overpaid.”

Dennis in Seattle was disturbed that Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao wasn’t “getting enough credit for the wholesale theft of hundreds of millions of dollars from Americans” who couldn’t get ticket refunds when airlines canceled their flights. To be fair, Chao did express her displeasure, but apparently some people don’t think hand-wringing is enough.

And remember Ben Carson? Almost nobody did when it came to the balloting. Frank from North Carolina, in fact, wrote to ask whether the secretary of housing and urban development had joined the Witness Protection Program.

“What has he done so far in his role as HUD secretary other than purchase a $30,000 table for his conference room?” asked a Pennsylvania reader. This is a complaint that goes back to early 2018. On the other hand, that was possibly the last thing many of us heard from Carson.

But after all was said and done, Barr swept the field. “Betsy DeVos can’t destroy our public education in the brief time she has left in office, and Mike Pompeo can’t cause an international crisis just by making the State Department a ghost of its former self,” wrote a voter from Woodstock, N.Y. “But when the country’s top law officer ignores the rule of law to protect Trump from prosecution and advance the president’s political interests, it is downright scary, not to mention a threat to our democracy.”

Just a couple more Barr comments:

“He has flushed down the toilet the rule of law.”

“Not since Tom Hanks won back-to-back Oscars has someone been so deserving of a repeat win.”

“Last year I really had to ponder this choice; this year it’s not even close — go Barr! (No, really, go!)”

I really really like Kamala Harris. I find her warm, intelligent, thoughtful. I love her smile and her laugh.

But Barack Obama blew me away. He was intense, coiled, quietly angry, and very powerful. His words were gripping.

The video of his speech is not yet online. The transcript is. But if you didn’t see it, you should. In the morning, I will post the video. You have to see him. You have to se his face and hear the occasional sigh.

He knows that the future of our democracy is on the line in November. Nothing less.

Trump is a danger to our nation and the world. He must be replaced by people of intelligence, experience, compassion, and heart. Those are qualities he lacks and will never have. Biden and Harris have them.

We must work hard and do whatever we can to oust the incompetents, white supremacists, authoritarians, and crooks now running the country, people who traffic in bizarre conspiracy theories, and who care only for their own self-aggrandizement. Enough.

Harold Meyerson, editor of The American Prospect and a prominent spokesman for the American left, explains here what he liked and did not like about the second day of the Democratic National (virtual) Convention.

I loved Bernie Sanders’ speech on the first night. I loved the roll call on the second night. In a usual convention, the roll call is a succession of politicians making political statements and announcing their state’s votes in a huge hall where people are milling around and no one is listening. This year, almost every state represented itself in an iconic setting, and the speakers were mostly regular people, not big-name politicians. The speaker in Kansas was a farmer in his fields, worried about the future. The speaker in Arizona was a teacher wearing a Red for Ed T-shirt, talking about the need to fund our schools. You really got a sense of the wonderful breadth and diversity of our country by watching the roll call. It was actually thrilling.

Meyerson wrote:

Unconventional: The Democrats, Day Two

If the first night of this year’s Democratic National Sort-Of Convention was all about Donald Trump’s disgraceful and aberrant presidency, night two was all about Joe Biden’s rooted normality.

Those roots were white working class—now a term almost interchangeable with Trump’s base, and tinged with assumptions of white tribalism and racism. Not so the Biden version of white working class-ness, however, and this more benign identity was a theme that was artfully woven through the night’s session.

The theme also expanded to include Biden’s embrace of the universal working class, with Joe talking with and sharing the concerns of a cross section of Americans fearful of losing their health insurance, which yet may prove his most potent point of contrast with Trump and the Republicans come November (as it was for Democrats in 2018). But looking at Hillary Clinton’s devastating and decisive failure to carry Bidenland in 2016—Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, home of a multiracial working class, of which the white section largely voted for Trump—Biden’s advisers made the obvious but still smart decision to plunk him down where he came from. On Tuesday night, he was the kid from Scranton who’s suffered more than his share of tragedy but always kept on punching (or as Jill Biden said, squaring his shoulders and going out to meet the world).

And it wasn’t just Biden. The roll call of the states, which was far better than its convention-hall predecessors, not only because of the visuals but because it wasn’t dominated by bloviating mid-level pols, featured more than a smattering of working-class Americans. There was the woman who worked in a Nebraska meatpacking plant who noted that she and her co-workers weren’t afforded paid sick leave, and asserted, “We’re human beings; we’re not robots; we’re not disposable.” There was the Missouri bricklayer and the Ohio worker wearing his IBEW union T-shirt who flatly declared, “Under Trump, working people end up getting screwed.”

The roll-call participants were anything but monochromatic; those from Maryland positioned themselves by an oversized bust of Frederick Douglass. But the contrast with Hillary Clinton’s 2016 convention couldn’t have been clearer. I remember noting it at the time but failed to realize how it portended her coming defeat, but that convention lacked any speakers who were working-class whites. Clinton’s convention showcased Democratic social liberalism; Biden’s, so far, has showcased a more class-based economic liberalism.

Yes, Monday’s session affirmed its support for Black Lives Matter, but both nights have highlighted the economic contrasts with contemporary Republicanism, of which Trump is merely the reductio ad absurdum. And it emphasized the access-to-health-care contrast, which runs along the race and class lines, and in a time of pandemic is the kind of contrast that can decide an election.

The foreign-policy section, with notables rightly pointing out that Trump’s policy, to the limited extent he has one, basically amounts to his expressions of admiration for leaders even more thuggish than he, was obligatory, but isn’t going to change many votes. What will change or solidify some votes is the image of Biden as a normal, decent, hard-working guy—three qualities no one has ever invoked to describe Donald Trump. What will change or solidify some votes is the knowledge that Biden respects and works within established democratic norms, as Trump does not. And these are all among the reasons that not only Republicans but also Bernie leftists are going to vote for Biden, because the left knows its vision depends on a functioning, and flourishing, democracy…

I’m fine with the airtime given to Republicans; I just wish there were more given to the left pole of the front. The millennials and Gen Zers who are transforming the Democratic Party into a more social democratic party have been underrepresented at this convention, and the 17 youngish keynoters who whizzed through the speed-dating version of a keynote address on Tuesday night lacked the time to establish their own generation’s politics, or, in fact, whether they actually identified with it. (As none of the keynoters had endorsed Bernie Sanders for president, there’s some question as to just how representative they are.) So the task of representing the new left fell to AOC and a dying Ady Barkan, but there are lots more where those two stalwarts come from, if the Biden folks just go looking. (The ever remarkable Barkan managed to endorse Medicare for All without actually saying the words.)

That said, the thematic emphasis the convention has put on matters of race and class is not only smart positioning but lays down markers that the young left and their elders should endeavor to hold Biden to, should he be elected. Biden’s long career has been marked by draconian crime legislation, solicitude to banks, and other normal political stances of the Reagan years, but Biden understands that those days are done, and the party’s ascendant left must ensure that they’re dead and buried. The Normal Joe persona is a valuable asset in this doctrinal transformation; it recasts the party’s newfound (or newly re-found) progressivism as Normal Joe’s concern for the average guy and gal.

I must close with my favorite moment of the night, a combination of convention hokum, the roll call’s remote locations, and, yes, average folks’ normality. It came when the roll call reached Rhode Island, and we were transported to a shot of two guys standing by the seashore, one of them holding a plate or dish of something tan with something red on top of it. The speaker, as is the custom, extolled the state and its Democratic governor and its favorite products, among which he mentioned calamari. At which point it became clear that what the other guy was holding was a platter of fried calamari topped with dip.

How better to symbolize a convention yearning for normality, marketing its nominee as Mr. Normal, than to promise us a bright future filled with fried calamari?

~ HAROLD MEYERSON

The American Prospect, Inc., 1225 I Street NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20005, United States

Fred Klonsky says there are many reasons to worry about postal service, including delivery of medicines.

Open the link and see the photograph of the discarded mailboxes.

Destroying federal property is a crime, isn’t it?

Control of the Los Angeles Unified School District is up for grabs in the 2020 election.

You can be sure that the LAUSD prioritizes public schools by voting for incumbent Scott Schmerelson and newcomer Patricia Castellanos.

The issue now is the same issue that has drawn a sharp divide on the school board for the past decade. Will the schools be controlled by a cabal of billionaires who favor privatization by charter schools or will it be controlled by people who are dedicated to the public schools of Los Angeles, which enroll 80 percent of the district’s children?

The charter lobby supports privatization and high-stakes testing for students and teachers.

California state law defines charter schools as “public schools” because the law was written by charter lobbyists. They have private management, private boards, and they are almost entirely free from scrutiny by public agencies; due to lack of oversight, several charter executives in California have been arrested and convicted of embezzlement from school funds. Lack of oversight explains why so many charters felt empowered to apply for and receive federal Paycheck Protection Program money as “small businesses.” They are charter schools when it is time to collect money available only to public schools, then they shape shift into “small businesses” or “non-profits” when it is time to collect money that is not available to public schools. That is called “double dipping.” It is wrong. It is unethical.

The charter industry is powerful in California due to the support of billionaires such as Eli Broad, Reed Hastings (Netflix), the Fischer Family (owners of The Gap and Old Navy), and Republican Bill Bloomfield. The candidates supported by California billionaires enjoy funding from out-of-state billionaires like Michael Bloomberg, former Mayor of New York City. The fact that these billionaires are supporting the privatization agenda of Betsy DeVos and Donald Trump doesn’t seem to bother them at all or make them think twice.

They want more privately managed charter schools, period, even though the vast majority of the district’s charter schools have empty seats (Schmerelson posted on his Facebook page that more than 80% of LA charter schools have vacancies). Once again, the billionaires are pouring money into a school board election. This one will be held on November 3, but early balloting will begin in a matter of weeks.

In the November election, there are two seats on the school board that will determine the near-term destiny of the district: Scott Schmerelson is up for re-election. He has served one term with great distinction. There is also an open seat, and one candidate stands out as a strong supporter of public schools, Patty Castellanos.

Scott is a career educator, who rose through the ranks in LAUSD as a teacher, assistant principal and principal. He has literally devoted his life to the students of LAUSD.

Patricia Castellanos is the parent of a child in the Los Angeles public schools and a community activist.

Both deserve a seat on the board of the second largest school district in the nation.

Jen Gibson, who lives in Charleston, writes about how school choice will drain resources from underfunded public schools while not providing access to better schools or better education:

Normally this time of year, my son and I are on the hunt for new shoes and the perfect pencil pouch. This year, we are struggling with masks and stocking up on hand sanitizer.

Like most parents, our family is wrestling with decisions about our work schedules, our vulnerable parents, and our child’s academic and social needs. All of our energy is focused on supporting students, teachers and our community during this unprecedented crisis.

That is why I was shocked and saddened when U.S. Sen. Tim Scott, Gov. Henry McMaster and S.C. Rep. Nancy Mace, R-Daniel Island, took advantage of this crisis to declare war on our public schools with their coordinated effort to move tax dollars allocated for public schools into private schools.

Under the guise of giving parents a choice, deceitful Republicans are trying to divert millions of our tax dollars to subsidize elite private schools. They argue that low-income students and parents deserve the choice to opt out of their poorly-performing public school. I have bad news for them. Research proves that vouchers for private schools will not improve educational outcomes for students.

Forget the fact that vouchers won’t even pay for the basic tuition at a local private school. Let’s talk about book fees, uniform costs, fieldtrip fees, transportation costs and the loss of income for the parent who no longer has access to before- and after-school childcare. Most students will stay in their neighborhood public school because a private school education is still out of reach.

Those who can scrape together the additional money to add to the government assistance will have to navigate the complicated world of evaluating private schools. These schools do not have to meet the same education standards as our public schools and are not legally required to provide accommodations to students with special needs.

In South Carolina, the money to pay for the tax credit comes directly from the budget of the public school the student would have attended. Tax money collected for public schools which are supposed to benefit the entire community will instead benefit individual students and private businesses. This weakens our public schools, and it does not guarantee individual students will have access to a better education.

Since 2008, South Carolina House members have not fully funded the Base Student Cost. They use a loophole in the law to avoid appropriating the actual cost of providing every student with even a minimally-adequate education. If the voucher/choice legislation that has been proposed passes, the state legislature will take even more money away from our cash-strapped public schools and jeopardize the education system responsible for over 90 percent of our students.

Do you know what would make education choices easier for parents? Public schools that deliver more than a minimally-adequate education for every student.

Let’s try that first

Peter Greene turns his attention to Rhode Island and finds that it has been subject to a corporate education reform takeover.
Not only is the governor a former venture capitalist who made her reputation by taking an axe to teachers’ pensions, but her husband Andy Moffitt is a TFA alum who moved on to McKinsey. Not only that, he co-authored a book with Michael Barber of Pearson about “Deliverology,” a philosophy that turns education into data analytics.

Governor Gina Raimondo hired a TFA alum to lead the State Education Department; the new Commissioner immediately joined Jen Bush’s far-rightwing Chiefs for Change and led a state takeover of Providence schools. There is no template for a successful state takeover, so we will see how that goes. Think Tennessee’s failed Achievement School District, funded with $100 million from Duncan’s Race to the Top. Think Michigan’s Education Achievement Authority, which closed after six of boasts but consistent failure.

Read Greene’s incisive review of the First Couple of Rhode Island and remember that Governor Gina Raimondo is a Democrat, though it’s hard to differentiate her views from those of Betsy DeVos.

I watched the Democratic virtual convention from start to finish. While all the commentary afterwards focused on Michelle Obama and her gracious remarks, the speech that wowed me was that of Bernie Sanders. He was focused, powerful, and passionate.

He spoke for less than 9 minutes. Please watch.

Trump tweeted yesterday afternoon about divisions between the Sanders and Biden camps. That’s not what you will hear from Bernie. Trump is lying and trying to sow division, which is what we have come to expect. Listen to Bernie.