Archives for the month of: October, 2025

Heather Cox Richardson draws together the seams of a story that is unfolding piece by piece. Trump’s popularity is plummeting; he is obsessed with his poll numbers. At the same time, he is assembling military forces to control Democratic-run cities where there are no riots, no disorders that can’t be handled by local police. Does he really believe that the nation’s cities are engulfed by a massive crime wave?

The only terrifying development that she did not include in her summary is Trump’s declaration that he intends to resume nuclear testing, a practice abandoned in 1992.

As I read her piece below, I was reminded that Trump said at a rally, “Vote for me now, and you will never have to vote again.” He often says the quiet part out loud.

She writes:

House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) continues to try to pin the upcoming catastrophic lapse in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funding on the Democrats. But with the U.S. Department of Agriculture sitting on $6 billion in funds Congress appropriated for just such an event, the Treasury finding $20 billion to prop up Trump ally Javier Milei in Argentina, Johnson refusing to bring the House into regular session to negotiate an end to the government shutdown, and President Donald J. Trump demanding $230 million in damages from the American taxpayer, bulldozing the East Wing of the White House to build a gold-plated ballroom that will dwarf the existing White House, and traveling to Asia, where South Korean leadership courted him by giving him a gold crown and serving him brownies topped with edible gold, blaming any funding shortfall on Democrats is a hard sell.

According to a Washington Post–ABC survey, more Americans blame Trump and congressional Republicans for the shutdown than blame Democrats by a margin of 45 to 33, and Trump’s approval rating continues to move downward, with the presidential approval average reported by Fifty Plus One at 41.3% approval and 55.1% disapproval, a –14 split. G. Elliott Morris of Strength in Numbers noted on October 24 that polls show Americans now trust Democrats more than Republicans to handle the economy well.

Trump ran in 2024 with a promise to bring down inflation, which was then close to the Federal Reserve’s target of 2.0%; now core inflation is at 3%, having gone up every month since April. Halloween candy—on people’s minds today—is at 9.8% inflation and costs 44% more than it did in 2019. Federal Reserve Board chair Jerome Powell sure sounded like he was describing stagflation—a condition when the economy stagnates despite inflation—when he said yesterday: “In the near term, risks to inflation are tilted to the upside, and risks to employment to the downside, a challenging situation.”

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said today that while the stock market has done well this year, a better economy is going to “start flowing through to working Americans next year.”

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, in a rambling and disjointed speech in Japan, Trump told U.S. military personnel that he is federalizing National Guard troops and sending them into Democratic-led cities “because we’re going to have safe cities.” In the same speech, Trump repeatedly attacked former president Joe Biden and insisted yet again that the 2020 presidential election was rigged. (It was not.)

When asked by a reporter later to clarify his remarks, Trump referred back to the Insurrection Act, saying that if he invoked it, “I’d be allowed to do whatever I want. But we haven’t chosen to do that because we’re…doing very well without it. But I’d be allowed to do that, you understand that. And the courts wouldn’t get involved. Nobody would get involved. And I could send the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines. I can send anybody I wanted.”

In fact, a president can invoke the accurately named Insurrection Act only in times of insurrection or rebellion. Neither of those conditions exists.

But the administration is working hard to create the impression that they do. Drew Harwell and Joyce Sohyun Lee of the Washington Post reported yesterday that the videos the Department of Homeland Security has been publishing to demonstrate the administration’s triumph over crime in U.S. cities as its agents work “day and night to arrest, detain and deport vicious criminals” have been doctored. They do not represent current actions, but rather are a hash of video from different states and different times.

When the reporters asked the White House about the misleading footage, spokesperson Abigail Jackson told them that “the Trump administration will continue to highlight the many successes of the president’s agenda through engaging content and banger memes on social media.”

There are signs the administration is not just trying to give the impression that Americans are rioting, but is trying to push them to do so.

Aaron Glantz of The Guardian reported yesterday that on October 8, Major General Ronald Burkett, who directs the Pentagon’s National Guard bureau, ordered the National Guard in all the states, U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia to form “quick reaction forces” trained in “riot control.” Most states are required to train 500 National Guard personnel, for a total nationwide of 23,500. The forces are supposed to be in place by January 1, 2026.

In his order, Burkett relied on an executive order Trump signed on August 25, calling on the secretary of defense to “immediately begin ensuring that each State’s Army National Guard and Air National Guard are resourced, trained, organized, and available to assist Federal, State, and local law enforcement in quelling civil disturbances and ensuring the public safety and order,” and “ensure the availability of a standing National Guard quick reaction force that shall be resourced, trained, and available for rapid nationwide deployment.”

In August the administration planned for two groups of 300 troops to be stationed in Alabama and Arizona as a “Domestic Civil Disturbance Quick Reaction Force.” Now that number is 23,500, and the troops will be in every state and territory.

The establishment of a domestic quick reaction force to quell civil disturbances at a time when there are no civil disturbances that can’t be handled easily by existing law enforcement suggests the administration is expecting those conditions to change.

That expectation might have something to do with Monday’s story from Anna Giaritelli of the Washington Examiner that the White House is reassigning ICE field officers and replacing them with officers from Customs and Border Patrol (CBP). Greg Wehner and Bill Melugin of Fox News reported that the shift will affect at least eight cities, including Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoenix, Denver, Portland, Philadelphia, El Paso, and New Orleans.

White House officials, presumably led by White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, who has said the administration intends to carry out “a minimum” of 3,000 arrests a day, are frustrated by the current pace of about 900 a day. So those officials, including Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, special government employee and Noem advisor Corey Lewandowski, and Greg Bovino, a Border Patrol sector chief who has been overseeing the agency’s operations in Los Angeles and Chicago, have decided to ramp up those deportations by replacing ICE officials with far more aggressive CBP leaders.

Tripling arrests will likely bring pushback.

Michael Scherer, Missy Ryan, and Ashley Parker of The Atlantic reported today that political appointees Stephen Miller, Kristi Noem, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have moved onto military bases.

The designs of the anti-immigrant leaders in the administration dovetail with Trump’s political designs. Trump has talked a lot about serving a third term in the presidency, most recently talking about it to reporters on Air Force One earlier this week. The Twenty-Second Amendment to the Constitution prohibits a third term, but Trump ally Stephen Bannon told The Economist last week that “Trump is going to be president in ‘28 and people just ought to get accommodated with that.” Bannon claimed, “There’s many different alternatives” to get around the Twenty-Second Amendment. Trump keeps “Trump 2028” campaign hats on bookshelves outside the Oval Office.

Janessa Goldbeck, the chief executive officer of the nonprofit Vet Voice Foundation, told Guardian reporter Glantz that Burkett’s recent order shows “an attempt by the president to normalize a national, militarized police force.” Such a force has not just military but also electoral power: it could be used in Democratic-led states to suppress voting. In a worst-case scenario, Goldbeck said, “the president could declare a state of emergency and say that elections are rigged and use allegations of voter fraud to seize the ballots of secure voting centers.”

Today, Buckingham Palace announced that King Charles has “initiated a formal process to remove the style, titles and honours of Prince Andrew” over his relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and participation in activities surrounding Epstein. Andrew will be stripped even of his title of “prince” and will be forced to leave the home he has shared for more than 20 years with his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, at Royal Lodge, a 30-room mansion located in Windsor Great Park. The palace said: “These censures are deemed necessary, notwithstanding the fact that he continues to deny the allegations against him.”

Today Jim Acosta reported that survivors of Epstein’s sex trafficking enterprise have written a letter to Speaker Johnson demanding that Representative-elect Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ) be sworn into office. Voters elected Grijalva on September 23, but Johnson has steadfastly refused to swear her in. Grijalva has said she will provide the last signature necessary on a discharge petition to force a vote on the public release of the Epstein files, an outcome that threatens to expose how and why Trump was named in those files.

The survivors write that Johnson’s “continued refusal to seat her is an unacceptable breach of democratic norms and a disservice to the American people. Even more concerning to us as survivors, this delay appears to be a deliberate attempt to block her participation in the discharge petition that would force a vote to unseal the Epstein/Maxwell files. The American public has a right to transparency and accountability, and we, as survivors, deserve justice. Any attempt to obstruct a vote on this matter—by manipulating House procedure or denying elected members their seats—is a direct affront to that right and adds insult to our trauma.”

The News & Observer reported on a shocking case. A father who claimed to be home-schooling his five children—ages 3, 6, 9, 10, and 18–called the police to report that he found the four older children dead. The youngest was alive. The father was arrested.

T. Keung Hui of the News & Observer reported:

The four Johnston County children allegedly killed by their father appear to have fallen through the cracks in the state’s education system, according to homeschool advocates.

Wellington Dickens III is charged with killing four of his five children, ages 6 to 18, over what authorities believe was a four-month period. Dickens appears to have run an unregistered homeschool at his home in Zebulon, which may have kept his children away from prying eyes.

“In a state like North Carolina, parents with ill intent can exploit those loopholes to essentially disappear their kids, which I think is the case that happened here,” Tess Ulrey, executive director of the Massachusetts-based Coalition For Responsible Home Education, said in an interview Thursday with The News & Observer.

Here’s a look at what The N&O found about state education and homeschool laws.

What is North Carolina’s compulsory school attendance law?

North Carolina law requires parents to make sure their children are regularly attending school between the ages of 7 and 16.

Parents are also required to make sure that younger children enrolled in a public school in kindergarten through second-grade are attending regularly.

Violation of the compulsory school attendance law is a Class 1 misdemeanor.

Operating an unregistered homeschool

None of the Dickens children attended public school in Johnston County, according to a school system spokesperson.

Johnston County Sheriff Steve Bizzell said the children were apparently home-schooled.

But the state Department of Administration’s Division of Non-Public Education says it does not have a record of a homeschool at Dickens’ address or registered under his name.

Dickens would not have been required to register the 6-year-old and the 18-year-old he’s accused of murdering. But he would have had to register the 9-year-old and 10-year-old he’s charged with killing.

“It appears that people who are not caring for their kids would want to remove them from school settings,” Matthew McDill, president of North Carolinians for Home Education, told ABC11, The N&O’s newsgathering partner. “And so you know, it’s interesting that these aren’t actually, you know, normal homeschool families. There are people who are trying to hide something.”

What are North Carolina’s homeschool requirements?

North Carolina has several requirements for people to begin and maintain a homeschool.

*Homeschool administrators must have at least a high school diploma.

*A notice of intent to start a homeschool must be sent to the Division of Non-Public Education.

*Maintain immunization and annual attendance records for each student.

*Administer a nationally standardized achievement test each school year.

The Division of Non-Public Education is also responsible for overseeing the states’ private schools. The division is so understaffed that it has historically asked home-school families to come to its office in Raleigh to help its staff with paperwork for other families.

Ulrey of the Coalition for Responsible Home Education said North Carolina has better home schooling laws than some states. But Ulrey said there other states, such as Pennsylvania, which do a better job of keeping track of where all their children are being educated.

“We depend on the larger social fabric and network to help us find these kids so they don’t disappear,” said Ulrey, who was a home-schooler. “A lot of those resources come from either a school system or they come from more robust oversight. That’s how we can make sure we’re keeping track of kids and that kids are safe.”

Nearly 200 homeschool deaths since 2000

The Coalition for Responsible Home Education argues that stronger oversight is needed to prevent child abuse and neglect in homeschooling. The group cites its Homeschooling’s Invisible Children national database, which found 423 cases of abuse and 191 child fatalities among home-schoolers since 2000.

“One of the reasons that we advocate for homeschool oversight is to ensure that children are coming into contact with mandated reporters, with a larger community so that they can have more opportunities to hopefully not fall through the cracks,” Ulrey said. “We want all of our children to have access to an open future, and that does mean coming into contact with more safe adults. It sounds like these children were unfortunately victims of that process.”

But the Oregon-based National Home Education Research Institute argues that students who are in public schools or private schools are more at risk of abuse or fatalities than those who are in a homeschool.

“There is no clear evidence of an increase in reported incidents of abuse or other harm in states that move toward laws recognizing and allowing fuller homeschooling freedom,” according to the National Home Education Research Institute.

How popular is homeschooling?

In the 2024-25 school year, there were 101,880 homeschools registered with the state. North Carolina’s estimated enrollment is 165,243 home-schoolers.

The majority of North Carolina homeschools (53%) are religious based.

In a 2017 court filing, Dickens claimed he shouldn’t be subject to federal statute 42 US Code section 666, which governs state child support procedures, because the number 666 violated his religious beliefs, The N&O previously reported.

The number 3.7 million is often cited as the nationwide total for home-schoolers. Enrollment numbers rose during the pandemic even as they shrank in traditional public schools

Read more at: https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article312710244.html#storylink=cpy

Trump just announced the lowest immigration target in U.S. history. Only 7,500 immigrants will be admitted, and most will be White South Africans.

Ronald Reagan did not share Trump’s hatred of immigrants. In 1986, he offered amnesty to immigrants who had been in this country for at least four years. Almost 3 million undocumented immigrants gained a path to citizenship.

The last speech that Ronald Reagan gave during his presidency was on January 19, 1989.

He used that farewell speech to praise immigrants and their contribution to the success of America.

Here is the speech in full, as well as President Reagan’s presentation of the Medal of Freedom to two distinguished public servants, one was was a Republican, another to a prominent Democrat. Trump gives that honor only to people known for their allegiance to him.

Here is a video, containing the core of Reagan’s speech.

Please note that President Reagan did not lash out at his critics, of whom there were many; did not belittle the Democrats who preceded him in the Presidency: Jimmy Carter, Lyndon B. Johnson, John F. Kennedy; did not engage in partisan insults; did not ever say that he “hates Democrats.” Even in his dotage, even after the onset of Alzheimer’s, he had more class, more dignity than the current occupant of that office.

The President. When we finish this luncheon, I hope you’ll stick around a little while. We’re having a tag sale upstairs, and everything must go. [Laughter] But, really, thank you all for coming to be with us here today.

Truly, one of the privileges of this office which I’ve found greatest joy in exercising has been the opportunity to present our nation’s highest civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom. To stand, as I have had the honor of doing, with the recipients of this award has been to stand with the flesh and blood and spirit that is the greatness of America, men and women who have so greatly served our nation and helped keep her free. The contribution of each recipient has been unique and noteworthy, and today is no exception, as we honor two remarkable Americans: Mike Mansfield and George Shultz.

Mike Mansfield has dedicated the entirety of a very long and productive lifetime to public service. He served in both Houses of Congress, spanning seven Presidents, and held the post of Senate majority leader longer than any other person. A former professor of Far Eastern history, he played an important part in shaping America’s Asian policy, serving on both the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and then as our Ambassador to Japan. For a sizable portion of America’s history as a nation, Mike Mansfield has been in service to his country.*

George Shultz — why did my voice crack just as I got to you — [laughter] — George Shultz has been a marine, an academic, and a businessman, and a public servant. He has held four Cabinet-level posts, distinguishing himself as a Secretary of Labor, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Treasury Secretary, and finally as one of America’s great Secretaries of State. Over the last 6\1/2\ years, in managing our foreign policy, he has served wisely and met great challenges and great opportunities. George Shultz has helped to make the world a freer and more peaceful place.

And there’s nothing so precious and irreplaceable as America’s freedom. In a speech I gave 25 years ago, I told a story that I think bears repeating. Two friends of mine were talking to a refugee from Communist Cuba. He had escaped from Castro, and as he told the story of his horrible experiences, one of my friends turned to the other and said, “We don’t know how lucky we are.” And the Cuban stopped and said, “How lucky you are? I had someplace to escape to.”

Well, no, America’s freedom does not belong to just one nation. We’re custodians of freedom for the world. In Philadelphia, two centuries ago, James Allen wrote in his diary that “If we fail, liberty no longer continues an inhabitant of this globe.” Well, we didn’t fail. And still, we must not fail. For freedom is not the property of one generation; it’s the obligation of this and every generation. It’s our duty to protect it and expand it and pass it undiminished to those still unborn.

Now, tomorrow is a special day for me. I’m going to receive my gold watch. And since this is the last speech that I will give as President, I think it’s fitting to leave one final thought, an observation about a country which I love. It was stated best in a letter I received not long ago. A man wrote me and said: “You can go to live in France, but you cannot become a Frenchman. You can go to live in Germany or Turkey or Japan, but you cannot become a German, a Turk, or a Japanese. But anyone, from any corner of the Earth, can come to live in America and become an American.” 

Yes, the torch of Lady Liberty symbolizes our freedom and represents our heritage, the compact with our parents, our grandparents, and our ancestors. It is that lady who gives us our great and special place in the world. For it’s the great life force of each generation of new Americans that guarantees that America’s triumph shall continue unsurpassed into the next century and beyond. Other countries may seek to compete with us; but in one vital area, as a beacon of freedom and opportunity that draws the people of the world, no country on Earth comes close. 

This, I believe, is one of the most important sources of America’s greatness. We lead the world because, unique among nations, we draw our people — our strength — from every country and every corner of the world. And by doing so we continuously renew and enrich our nation. While other countries cling to the stale past, here in America we breathe life into dreams. We create the future, and the world follows us into tomorrow. Thanks to each wave of new arrivals to this land of opportunity, we’re a nation forever young, forever bursting with energy and new ideas, and always on the cutting edge, always leading the world to the next frontier. This quality is vital to our future as a nation. If we ever closed the door to new Americans, our leadership in the world would soon be lost. 

A number of years ago, an American student traveling in Europe took an East German ship across the Baltic Sea. One of the ship’s crewmembers from East Germany, a man in his sixties, struck up a conversation with the American student. After a while the student asked the man how he had learned such good English. And the man explained that he had once lived in America. He said that for over a year he had worked as a farmer in Oklahoma and California, that he had planted tomatoes and picked ripe melons. It was, the man said, the happiest time of his life. Well, the student, who had seen the awful conditions behind the Iron Curtain, blurted out the question, “Well, why did you ever leave?” “I had to,” he said, “the war ended.” The man had been in America as a German prisoner of war. 

Now, I don’t tell this story to make the case for former POW’s. Instead, I tell this story just to remind you of the magical, intoxicating power of America. We may sometimes forget it, but others do not. Even a man from a country at war with the United States, while held here as a prisoner, could fall in love with us. Those who become American citizens love this country even more. And that’s why the Statue of Liberty lifts her lamp to welcome them to the golden door. 

It is bold men and women, yearning for freedom and opportunity, who leave their homelands and come to a new country to start their lives over. They believe in the American dream. And over and over, they make it come true for themselves, for their children, and for others. They give more than they receive. They labor and succeed. And often they are entrepreneurs. But their greatest contribution is more than economic, because they understand in a special way how glorious it is to be an American. They renew our pride and gratitude in the United States of America, the greatest, freest nation in the world — the last, best hope of man on Earth.

The Medal of Freedom represents the reverence the American people have for liberty, and it honors the men and women who through their lives do greatest honor to that freedom. The lives of the two men we honor here today tell a story about freedom and all its possibilities and responsibilities, and, well, both those that inhere in each free man and woman and those that fall upon a great and free nation. Our honorees have dedicated their lives to preserving and protecting America’s freedom. They have engaged themselves in the larger cause, that of humanity and of the world, to help extend freedom to people of other lands. There is no task more fitting for Americans than that. 

So, I will now read the citations for our two very distinguished award recipients and present to them their medals. Perhaps I should mention that our first recipient today — the one who calls me kid — [laughter] — is the son of immigrants, from a country called Ireland. 

And now, if Michael Mansfield and George Shultz would please come forward. George, you’re due here. 

“During World War I, Mike Mansfield, not yet 15, enlisted in the United States Navy, crossing the Atlantic seven times before he was discharged. His service to country would span seven decades and would help shape America’s destiny as a Pacific power. Through 34 years in Congress — including 16 as Senate majority leader — and with more than a decade as U.S. Ambassador to Japan, Mike Mansfield has set his indelible mark upon American foreign policy and distinguished himself as a dedicated public servant and loyal American.” 

Ambassador Mansfield. Mr. President, First Lady, Mr. Secretary of State and Mrs. Shultz, Ambassador Matsunaga and Mrs. Matsunaga, my former colleagues from both the House and the Senate, our distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, I can’t begin to express in words, Mr. President, my deep appreciation for what you’ve said about me and the encouragement which you’ve given me in my post as your Ambassador, your personal representative, our country’s Ambassador to Japan. 

However, I think that much of the credit should go to Maureen, my wife, who down through the years has been such a wonderful helpmate; whose advice, counsel, and understanding I appreciated; who worked harder at any job I’ve had and received little credit in the process. So, I want to say how much I owe to her, how much I’m indebted to her; how much I appreciate what the President has said — who has laid out a sound policy for our future in the Pacific and East Asia. I appreciate the advice and counsel that George Shultz has given to me from time to time. And I appreciate the fact that, for the first time in memory, that we have both a President of the United States and a Secretary of State who are actively interested in the Pacific, in Japan, and in East Asia. I anticipate that the policies these men have laid down will be continued. 

In conclusion, we may recall that Robert Sandburg [Frost], one of our poets, said on a certain occasion, there are things to do, miles to go, and promises to keep before we sleep. Well, Maureen and I have traveled many miles. We have had and still have things to do. And we still have the promises we made over half a century ago when we were joined together. So, to her I want to give special thanks for all that she has been able to do with me. And to the President and Nancy, my thanks, my appreciation for their thoughtfulness and consideration. Thank you very much. 

The President. “Unyieldingly dedicated to the protection of the American national interest, the advancement of freedom and human rights, the battle against tyranny, and reductions in nuclear arms, George P. Shultz has presided over the Department of State during one of the most critical periods in the history of this nation’s foreign policy. For years of public service and his vital part in inaugurating a new era of hope in foreign policy, his countrymen honor him.” 

Secretary Shultz. Mr. President, you know, Obie [Helena Shultz] has been traveling a million miles around the world with me. So, it’s been a great partnership. But, Mr. President, I feel very special about receiving this award from you, and let me explain why. There’s a phrase that’s catching on — “the Reagan years.” There’s a ring to it. And, Mr. President, it is the ring of freedom. You have advocated it, fought for it. You have known that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. You have known this is a matter of principle on which you don’t compromise. You have known that there are times when it requires action — sometimes, at least initially, not necessarily popular action — but you have to do it. 

You have also known — and I’ve heard you say many times — that the strength comes from “We the People,” that we get our legitimacy and you get your legitimacy as President from the people. And you’ve never been in any doubt, and none of us have, about who we came here to serve: the American people.

And I see you there with your arm around Nancy. I had the privilege of going with Nancy a couple of months ago to the United Nations where she spoke about drugs. And she had the courage to say that one of the root causes of this worldwide problem is use of drugs in the United States. And we have to say no. So Nancy, too, has been a fighter for freedom — freedom from drugs. And we love you for it and revere you for it, Nancy.

So, all of these things make me especially proud to have served with you, to have been your Secretary of State. And to receive a medal from you called the Medal of Freedom has a significance for my life and Obie’s life and my children that we will never forget.

Thank you, Mr. President.

The President. Thank you. Well, ladies and gentlemen, I have been privileged to participate in this recognition of the service of these two gentlemen to this great country of ours. I’m glad that all of you could be here. And now my clock tells me that — like the letter I got the first week I was here from the little 11-year-old girl who told me all the things that I had to do and then said, “Now, get over to the Oval Office and go to work.” I see I’ve still got a few more hours of work ahead of me, and we’re a little behind schedule. And so, we’ll bid you all farewell, and thank you again for all being here and participating.

Note: The President spoke at 1:22 p.m. in the State Dining Room at the White House.

*Mike Mansfield’s life was even more remarkable than President Reagan described.

Michael Joseph (Mike) Mansfield was born on March 16, 1903, in New York City the first of three children of Irish immigrants Patrick and Josephine O’Brien Mansfield. Mike’s mother died in 1910, the same year that his father was seriously injured on a construction job. Because Patrick had no way to care for his motherless children, they were sent to live with Patrick’s Uncle Richard, a Great Falls, Montana, grocer. Mike’s childhood was troubled. Shuttled between public, parochial and reform schools, Mike dropped out by grade seven. In 1917, at age 14, Mike enlisted in the United States Navy. He crossed the sea seven times before officials discovered that he lied about his age. He was summarily discharged.

From 1919 to 1920 he served as a private in the Army, stationed in San Francisco. From 1920 to 1922, Mike enlisted in the United States Marine Corps where as a private first class he served in China, the Philippines and Siberia. At the conclusion of his service, Mansfield returned to Montana and worked in the Butte mines from 1922 to 1930.In 1927 Mike met Maureen Hayes, a teacher, who encouraged him to return to school. In 1932 the two married and were parents of one daughter, Anne. Mansfield first attended the Montana School of Mines in 1927 and 1928. In 1933 he graduated from Montana State University in Missoula (now the University of Montana) and worked as a graduate assistant. In 1934 he earned his Masters and became an instructor. During the summers of 1936 and 1937, Mike attended the University of California in Los Angeles. He was full professor of history and political science until 1942, specializing in Latin America and the Far East.In the early 1940’s Mansfield developed an interest in politics. He was elected to the United States House of Representatives as a Democrat and served with distinction from 1943 to 1953. In 1952 Mansfield was elected to the Senate and served continuously until 1977. He believed, in retrospect, that his most significant achievements were initiating the Watergate Committee leading to Richard Nixon’s resignation; extending voting rights to eighteen year olds; and creating a committee to investigate the abuses of the CIA. He was an outspoken opponent of the Vietnam War.From 1977 to 1988 Mansfield served as Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Japan. He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom.Mike Mansfield died on October 5, 2001, in Washington, D.C. His wife, Maureen, preceded him in death in 2000. Anne Mansfield Marris and one granddaughter survive him.

President Ronald Reagan was a strong proponent of free trade and immigration. Not open borders, but a reasonable way to admit immigrants to the United States.

Trump hates to be reminded of President Reagan’s views, because they don’t agree. Trump wants to deport every immigrant who is not a U.S. citizen, and he has recklessly imposed tariffs on every other nation in the world.

Trump has disrupted the global economic order with his capricious imposition of tariffs, raising them, lowering them, on a whim. And increasing inflation for everything imported by the U.S.

The prince of Ontario in Canada posted an ad that showed President Reagan’s opposition to tariffs. Trump reacted with fury because he didn’t want the public to know that his tariffs were contrary to GOP policies, opposed specifically by Reagan, who was far more popular than Trump.

Trump insisted that the Reagan ad was phony. He raised the tariffs on Canada for daring to try to influence a pending Supreme Court decision about his power to impose tariffs without Congress.

It wasn’t a phony ad. President Reagan opposed tariffs.

Even the Wall Street Journal chastised Trump for lying about Reagan’s opposition to tariffs.

An excerpt:

The Ontario government had the temerity to buy ad time to run clips of Reagan’s 1987 remarks warning about the dangers of protectionism. Mr. Trump pitched a social-media fit in response late Thursday, claiming Ontario “fraudulently used an advertisement, which is FAKE, featuring Ronald Reagan speaking negatively about Tariffs.”

The President said the ad was intended to interfere with the Supreme Court as it considers the legality of his claim that he can levy tariffs on anything he wants, for any amount he wants, whenever he wants. He immediately declared an end to trade talks with Canada….

Mr. Trump is wrong about the Reagan speech, and he was wrong when he said on social media that “Ronald Reagan LOVED tariffs for purposes of National Security and the Economy.” The Gipper was a free trader. In the 1987 speech, Reagan was trying to explain why he was making an exception to his free-trade policies on semiconductor imports from Japan…

It’s a shame to see the Reagan Foundation, of all places, indulging Mr. Trump’s pique with its statement saying the speech was taken out of context. Anyone who reads the whole speech can see the Gipper favored free trade, with rare exceptions for political pragmatism and national security. Reagan also backed, long before Nafta, a North American free-trade area….

Reagan knew that tariffs are taxes, while Mr. Trump pretends they are paid by foreigners. Reagan knew protectionist barriers over time breed complacency and lack of innovation. Mr. Trump thinks he’s making American manufacturing great again, when he is really hurting U.S. manufacturers by burdening them with higher costs. See American companies that use aluminum or steel.

Elon Musk’s SpaceX, which owns a worldwide telecommunications system and builds space rockets, has significant investments by Chinese nationals. ProPublica says there are likely concerns about national security, or should be.

Justin Elliott and Joshua Kaplan of ProPublica reported:

Elon Musk’s SpaceX has taken money directly from Chinese investors, according to previously sealed testimony, raising new questions about foreign ownership interests in one of the United States’ most important military contractors.

The recent testimony, coming from a SpaceX insider during a court case, marks the first time direct Chinese investment in the privately held company has been disclosed. While there is no prohibition on Chinese ownership in U.S. military contractors, such investment is heavily regulated and the issue is treated by the U.S. government as a significant national security concern.

“They obviously have Chinese investors to be honest,” Iqbaljit Kahlon, a major SpaceX investor, said in a deposition last year, adding that some are “directly on the cap table.” “Cap table” refers to the company’s capitalization table, which lists its shareholders.

Kahlon’s testimony does not reveal the scope of Chinese investment in SpaceX or the identities of the investors. Kahlon has long been close with the company’s leadership and runs his own firm that acts as a middleman for wealthy investors looking to buy shares of SpaceX.

SpaceX keeps its full ownership structure secret. It was previously reported that some Chinese investors had bought indirect stakes in SpaceX, investing in middleman funds that in turn owned shares in the rocket company. The new testimony describes direct investments that suggest a closer relationship with SpaceX.

SpaceX has thrived as it snaps up sensitive U.S. government contracts, from building spy satellites for the Pentagon to launching spacecraft for NASA. U.S. embassies and the White House have connected to the company’s Starlink internet service too. Musk’s roughly 42% stake in the company is worth an estimated $168 billion. If he owned nothing else, he’d be one of the 10 richest people in the world.

National security law experts said federal officials would likely be deeply interested in understanding the direct Chinese investment in SpaceX. Whether there was cause for concern would depend on the details, they said, but the U.S. government has asserted that China has a systematic strategy of using investments in sensitive industries to conduct espionage.

If the investors got access to nonpublic information about the company — say, details on its contracts or supply chain — it could be useful to Chinese intelligence, said Sarah Bauerle Danzman, an Indiana University professor who has worked for the State Department scrutinizing foreign investments. That “would create huge risks that, if realized, would have huge consequences for national security,” she said.

SpaceX did not respond to questions for this story. Kahlon declined to comment.

Don’t lose hope! Don’t give up, no matter how bad it looks today.

That’s the advice of Ian Bassin, the co-founder and executive director of Protect Democracy. In this essay, he explains that the enemies of democracy cultivate despair. They flood the zone with cruel policies. They want us to believe that resistance is futile.

It is not. Don’t help them achieve their goals!

He writes:

Let’s not mince words. It’s a dark time.

If you’re reading this, you feel it. You see federal troops on American streets as a political tool. You see a multi-front assault on our elections. You see the machinery of government — from a supercharged ICE to a weaponized Department of Justice — being wielded against those the regime dislikes. You see courts wavering, Congress cowering, and other institutions choosing accommodation over confrontation. The danger is real, and the exhaustion is profound.

But it’s not just the individual threats that weigh on us. It’s the sheer volume. The autocrat’s playbook isn’t just about single acts of repression; it’s about creating a dozen crises at once. This is not incompetence; it is a strategy. As strategists from Sun Tzu onward have counseled, stretch an opponent’s defenses, exhaust them, and strike where they are then unprepared. By flooding the zone with outrages, they keep us perpetually reactive, divided, and off-balance. Our attention is their battleground, and they are winning by forcing us to fight on a thousand fronts at once.

The goal of this chaos is twofold. First, to spread us thinly so our responses are less effective. Second, to exhaust us and make the defense of democracy feel so futile that its defenders simply give up. Despair is a political weapon.

I’m not writing to tell you that you’re wrong to feel this way. I’m writing to tell you that this feeling is a designed part of the assault we’re facing. And I’m writing to tell you that we are not the first to stand in this spot, staring into what looks like an abyss. In the history of those who came before us, we can find a map not for a specific strategy but for a resilient mindset.

The long defeat as enduring hope

The phrase “the long defeat” comes from J.R.R. Tolkien, who has Galadriel speak of “fighting the long defeat” in The Lord of the Rings. That evil may never be fully vanquished and therefore that even victories against it are temporary. For Tolkien, a devout Catholic, it carried a tragic but defiant realism: History is a process of entropy, yet the fight for beauty, justice, and truth is still worth waging.

Over time, the idea that even in a period of decline doing the right thing remains a strategic and moral imperative has migrated from literature into political and theological commentary. Dissidents under Soviet rule, activists resisting authoritarianism, and modern democratic leaders have invoked versions of this concept to capture the paradox of resistance.

Victory may lie invisibly over some horizon, or may never be final. Setbacks are inevitable, and yet the very act of persevering is itself a form of hope.

To “fight the long defeat” is not to surrender to futility but to locate dignity and meaning in the struggle itself — and to recognize that what feels like defeat in one moment may seed the victories of another. Indeed history is replete with examples.

Lessons from a Polish winter

Consider Poland in the winter of 1981. The vibrant Solidarity movement was met with martial law. (If you don’t know the history of Solidarity, we’re planning to write about it later this week — stay tuned.) Its leaders were jailed; its organization shattered.

The pro-democracy cause appeared utterly defeated by the full weight of a Soviet-backed state.

What did they do when open confrontation became impossible? They didn’t stop. They began a patient, underground campaign — sustained organizing, covert communications, and cultural work that kept civic life alive. They understood that when you cannot win on the state’s terms, you must refuse to let the state define the terms of reality. They focused on keeping the idea of a free Poland alive. Through underground publishing and clandestine lectures — continuing traditions like the “Flying University” — they maintained a shared understanding of truth in the face of a regime dedicated to lies.

For roughly eight years they persisted. They were not just an opposition; they were the custodians of a democratic ideal. When a crack in the regime appeared in 1989 — with the Round Table Talks and semi-free elections — they were ready because they had never surrendered the moral and intellectual foundations of a free society.

Their lesson for us is this: When the machinery of the state is captured, the most critical ground to defend is our shared commitment to truth and democratic values. Doing so is necessary to be ready to seize the opening when it inevitably comes.

Clarity in our own history

We can find a similar lesson in our own history. Think of the lawyers and activists of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s and ’60s. They faced a legal and political system built to exclude them. The courts, the police, and the law itself were instruments of a brutal racial hierarchy.

Every institution that was supposed to deliver justice was instead architected to deny it.
Their response was not to meet every injustice with a scattered, reactive defense

It was to maintain an unwavering focus on the core principle at stake: the moral and constitutional bankruptcy of segregation. They possessed profound strategic patience, persistence, and powerful moral clarity. Their fight reminds us that in an environment of institutional failure and constant attack, the most potent weapon is a disciplined focus on the fundamental principles being violated.

But history also shows that change can come with surprising speed. Consider the movement for marriage equality in the immediate aftermath of the 2004 election. Voters approved bans in 11 states that year, amending constitutions to prohibit same-sex marriage, and President George W. Bush — who supported a federal marriage amendment — was reelected. The political consensus was so strong that even in 2008, the Democratic nominee for president recanted his previous support for marriage equality. Yet within just a few years, everything shifted: in 2011 the Obama administration stopped defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court; in 2012 the president endorsed marriage equality; and public opinion moved rapidly until marriage equality was recognized in the Constitution. While we know that victory is now facing its own backlash, that moment is a powerful reminder that political winds can shift with breathtaking speed.

A moment of seeming hopelessness can be the prelude to a breakthrough.

A mindset for a hard moment

The history of these movements does not offer us an easy comfort or a simple to-do list. It offers us a way to think, a framework for how to situate ourselves and endure.

  1. Find the signal in the noise — We must resist the autocrat’s strategy of distraction. We cannot respond en masse to every fire. Instead, we must anchor our work in the foundational principles at stake: the rule of law, the integrity of elections, and the ultimate sovereignty of a free people. By focusing on the core pillars of democracy, we refuse to have our attention fragmented and our energy dissipated.
  2. Cultivate strategic readiness — This isn’t just about passively enduring a long winter. It is about actively preparing for a change in the weather and doing what we can to bring it about. We cannot ultimately control when the political winds will shift or when an unexpected event will create an opportunity. But we can control our readiness. The work of a hard moment is to get the sails ready. It is the time to lay the legal groundwork, build the coalitions, refine the strategies, and organize the resources. Our task is to be so prepared that when a crack of daylight appears, we are ready to sail through it with maximum force and not be caught scrambling.
  3. Uphold a common truth — In an era of rampant disinformation, the simple act of insisting on objective reality is a profound form of resistance. The authoritarian project depends on breaking our collective understanding of facts. By committing ourselves to defending the institutions and norms that discern truth — in journalism, in science, in law — we are defending the very possibility of a self-governing society.
  4. Bolster each other — In moments that feel like we’re spiraling backwards, when the forces of unfreedom are on the march, a common tendency is for the forces of freedom to fall into infighting. Rather than gaining strength from each other, our fears and anxieties and anger lead us to turn on each other. But in that reaction are the seeds of ultimate defeat; whereas movements that come together in times of adversity water the seeds of renewal.

There is no question we are being tested — as a country, as a movement, and as individuals.
But we are not the first to have faced such tests and we will not be the last. Many who preceded us faced tests like this and even harder ones, and we have their example to remind us that whatever happens, no matter how dark the night, the world keeps turning and eventually comes the dawn.

Personally, I’m more optimistic than Tolkien. I don’t think human history bends towards decay. I’m partial to Martin Luther King’s vision that it bends towards justice. But what’s powerful about the idea of the long defeat is that it is agnostic about one’s optimism or pessimism — it simply reminds us that the task of being human (or elf) is to do right and to do good and to embrace beauty where we can find it.

And if I can play my small role in lifting you up in this difficult moment, it’s to remind us all to remember that. And to act on it.

After the launch of No Child left Behind in 2002, the curriculum in America’s schools changed. The tested skills–math and reading–were tested. Federal law required a rise in test scores in grades 3-8 every year. The law required that every student would be proficient in these two subjects by 2014–or the schools would face dire consequences, including closure.

There is no nation in the world where 100% of students are “proficient.” That term on our National Assessment of Educational Progress is equivalent to an A. In what world are all children scoring an A in reading and math? La-la land maybe.

The pressure to raise test scores crept into the earlier grades, to second grade, to first grade, even to kindergarten. Children of 5 were learning their letters and numbers instead of playing.

Note that John Dewey recommended that children begin to read at age 7. Note that children in Finland begin reading at age 7.

Some educators complained about the disappearance of play, but members of Congress didn’t listen. There probably is no subject in which legislators are actively engaged than education. Most know nothing about it other than to mosn that test scores are not high enough.

But after nearly a quarter century after NCLB and Race to the Top, the message has begun to get through.

In 2019, Pasi Sahlberg and William Doyle wrote a book titled Let the Children Play, showing the positive benefits of play.

And now a few states have begun to recognize the value of play and to reintroduce it.

Elizabeth Heubeck of Education Week reported:

In recent years, some educators have begun to push back against the “academization” of kindergarten. These voices have gotten the attention of state policymakers; in turn, a few states have begun to push for a return to play in kindergarten, including Connecticut, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, and Oregon.

New Hampshire in 2018 amended its education legislation specific to kindergarten, noting that this grade level is “structured upon a play-based model.” Language for the state’s official kindergarten tool kits says: “Educators shall create a learning environment that facilitates high quality, child-directed experiences based upon early childhood best teaching practices and play-based learning that comprise movement, creative expression, exploration, socialization, and music.”

Connecticut in 2023 passed legislation requiring play-based learning in public preschool and kindergarten classrooms, and permitting it in 1st through 5th grades. Members of the Connecticut Education Association, led by CEA Vice President Joslyn Delancey, pushed for the return to play-based learning in early elementary classrooms. Delancey taught elementary school for 17 years before being elected to the association. 

“It was a commitment of mine to really understand where other educators were around play,” Delancey said. “It turns out that our members also were particularly excited about pushing play as a legislative agenda.” 

The legislation passed within a year of its introduction. Delancey credits its success to the CEA’s work to educate various stakeholders on the benefits of play-based learning, and its alignment with the state’s focus on creating and maintaining a positive school culture. 

“I think that you can’t talk about improving school climate without talking about bringing play back into our classroom,” Delancey said. 

In Massachusetts, the education department and the state association for school administrations issued a joint statement in 2021 asserting play as an instructional strategy in the early grades.

The state education department’s Early Learning Team then launched a Playful Learning Institute pilot initiative for administrators and educators in pre-K through 3rd grade. During the 2022-23 school year, the pilot involved monthly coaching in classrooms. 

Is all play created equally?

Not all play designed for today’s kindergarten classrooms looks like it did in the 1970s and ‘80s, when kids played together without much direction or input from teachers. Still, free, or unstructured, play retains an important place in the kindergarten classroom, believe some education experts. It allows children to explore, imagine, and socialize independently. But it’s generally not tied to any specific academic goals.

“I love free play, and free play has its own rights. It’s great for social development. It’s great for helping kids build their confidence,” Nesbitt said. “But it’s not going to organically, on its own, teach kids how to read.”

Instead, schools are starting to adopt play-based or playful learning, in which teachers guide students in playful activities designed to grow specific skills. For example, when students are building with blocks, the teacher could ask facilitating questions like, “What do you think will happen if you add this heavier block on top?” 

Play-based learning can boost students’ academic skills, research shows. A 2022 review of 39 studies that compared guided play to direct instruction(when a teacher delivers clearly defined, planned lessons in a prescribed manner) in children up to 8 years old found that guided play has a more significant positive impact than direct instruction on early math skills, shape knowledge, and being able to switch from one task to another.

But kindergarten isn’t just about acquiring academic skills, note education experts. Play-based learning also has the potential to help teach young learners lifelong skills.

“A lot of people are leaning heavily into the importance of play-based learning for the kinds of soft skills they can teach. I call them unconstrained skills,” Nesbitt said. “These are the skills that are not based on content-specific knowledge but rather, things like: How do we teach kids to collaborate with each other? How do we teach kids to be good communicators? How do we help them be critical and creative thinkers? How do we give them the motivation to want to be a learner?”

Public Schools First NC in North Carolina keeps watch on the state’s General Assembly. Since the legislature was captured by the Tea Party, it has ignored public schools and shifted state funds to charters. And after passing a voucher bill, hundreds of millions of public money have gone to vouchers. There is no state oversight or accountability over voucher schools. N.C. Has universal vouchers, no income limits. The state is subsidizing wealthy families while abandoning public schools.

In the most recent session, the legislature redistricted to produce another Republican seat. The state is almost evenly split between Republicans and Democrats. The Congressional delegation consist of 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats. Soon it is likely to be 11 Republicans and 3 Democrats. A Democrat has won the Governor’s race in the past three elections. But NC is so outrageously gerrymandered that Republicans hold a veto-proof majority in both houses of the legislature.

Public Schools First NC released this summary:

NCGA Adjourns With No Budget, Educators Left with Stagnant Salaries & Higher Costs

Once again, the state budget took a back seat when the NC General Assembly was in town this week as legislative leaders prioritized moving quickly to pass a new U.S. Congressional District map (See last week’s newsletter.). 

Debate in the House and Senate reflected the high stakes attached to redrawing Districts 1 and 3 to more heavily favor Republicans in District 1, currently represented by Don Davis, a Democrat. Floor speeches in the Senate and House highlighted the dangers of redrawing a map (upon request by the president) that would disenfranchise voters in a state with virtually identical numbers of Democrats and Republicans.

Bill sponsors asserted the importance of delivering another Republican U.S. House member to the president so he can fulfill his agenda. Critics of the new map pointed out that state lawmakers’ sole duty is to serve North Carolinians and that drawing a map simply to serve the will of the president was an abdication of their oath to the state constitution. 

Floor speeches as well as in-person public comments urged lawmakers to abandon the new map and focus on passing a budget that addresses the many needs of the state. More than 12,000 public comments, overwhelmingly against new maps, had been sent by Wednesday via the online comment portal. 

Both the House and Senate leaders ended floor debate through a procedure that allows a member to call a vote on a bill to end debate. In both chambers, the vote to end debate passed along party lines, and by Wednesday afternoon the bill had passed through both chambers. 

Redistricting bills are not subject to a governor’s veto, so SB 249 “Realign Congressional Districts” is now law. Legal challenges have already been announced….

Funds to schools are disbursed each semester, so simply doubling the October totals and on X assuming some increases in November, North Carolina is projected to spend more than $600 million on taxpayer-funded private school tuition vouchers this school year alone while our public schools and our health care system suffer.

Even without State Budget, Voucher Spending Continues 

October data from the NCSEAA reveals that North Carolina has spent $296,056,119 MILLION dollarson the state voucher program so far this year ($279,889,102 on Opportunity Scholarship tuition vouchers for 98,917 students and $16,167,017 for 5,473 ESA+ students). Because voucher appropriations from the state have exceeded demand, the application period has been extended and first-semester expenditures are likely to increase.

Although hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars has been flowing to private schools over the past few years, very little is known about many of them due to the lack of state oversight of how voucher funds are spent. 

For example, private schools are not required to publicly share tuition cost, curriculum content, staff credentials, or financial information. Some schools don’t even have a website or Facebook where the public can find out their basic philosophy or school address.

In contrast, public schools are required to share details about every aspect of their work and finances to the public. And new legislation even requires public school teachers to publicly list all of the titles of books/media in their classroom libraries.

Perhaps legislators who are concerned about what’s happening in public school classrooms will also attend to what is happening in private school classrooms where hundreds of millions in state funds are flowing each year.

Leandro Still Missing!

The latest release of North Carolina Supreme Court rulings came and went on October 17 with no ruling on Leandro.

Oral arguments in the most recent iteration of the case were held more than 600 days ago, on February 22, 2024. Legislative leaders had sued to block the 2022 North Carolina Supreme Court ruling that required lawmakers to fund public schools according to the Leandro Comprehensive Remedial Plan

The funding at stake in the decades-old lawsuit against the state for equitable education funding is critical for addressing budget gaps between high-wealth (mostly urban) districts and low-wealth (mostly rural) districts. It is essential for providing fair, equitable education that all students deserve and are guaranteed by our state constitution. (Learn more about Leandro.)

The Leandro Comprehensive Remedial Plan (published in 2021) called for $5.5 billion in funding over 8 years.

Instead of meeting their constitutional requirement to fund public schools, lawmakers have already appropriated nearly $5.3 billion for vouchers through 2029-30.

Making NC’s Schools the Best in the Nation – Pillar 8

Pillar 8 of Achieving Educational Excellence: 2025-30 Strategic Plan for North Carolina Public Schools is Galvanize Champions to Fully Invest in and Support Public Education. 

North Carolina’s journey toward educational excellence requires more than vision and strategy — it demands the engagement, advocacy and investment of champions across our state who recognize public education as the cornerstone of our shared prosperity and collective future. This pillar builds upon efforts to transform the narrative around public schools by converting positive perception into concrete action by aligning partners behind a unified commitment to educational excellence. We envision a powerful network of non-education partners who bring fresh perspectives, resources and influence to advocacy efforts. 

Pillar 8 includes two measures of success. 

  • Increase state and local investments in public schools so that per pupil funding increases by 10% (over 2023 levels) by 2030. 
  • Increase the percentage of school-aged children enrolled in public schools to 89% by 2030. 

To achieve these goals, the plan identities actions grouped into three focus areas. Each focus area includes multiple actions and target completion dates. One example action is shown for each focus area:

  • Build community voices: Encourage and support aligned initiatives and outreach via social media, media and events. (September 2026)
  • Promote engagement initiatives: Develop and launch a statewide reading campaign where students will collectively read 10 million books annually, in collaboration with state and local partners. (January 2026) 
  • Move champions to action: Engage local and state policymakers to attend events, visit schools and participate in public education initiatives. (August 2026)

Superintendent Green is traveling around the state to share the plan and engage stakeholders. Find locations and times at the NCDPI website (scroll down the page to Regional Tour). Upcoming events are shown below: 

  • Oct. 27, 6 p.m. – Sandhills Region – Lumberton High School (Lumberton, Public Schools of Robeson County)
  • Oct. 29, 6 p.m. – North Central Region – Chapel Hill High School (Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools)

In Case You Missed It

‘It’s really unfair’: Triad parents blindsided by High Point charter school’s immediate closure

NC approaches 100,000 private school voucher students. What it means for the state.

Forsyth schools get another $500,000 gift from Winston-Salem Foundation

Hundreds of Union County teachers call out sick amid delayed pay increases

Nearly all state funding for Missouri school vouchers used for religious schools

According to three advocates for cursive writing, it is a powerful tool for learning. While many predicted its demise after the widespread adoption of typing and computers, it is indeed making a comeback; some states have mandated it in the elementary years.

Please note that this author learned cursive, with extreme difficulty. I am left-handed, and my pen curled around my hand, smudging my hand with ink. Though we were taught via the Palmer Method, my handwriting today is almost indecipherable. Though I spent hours trying to draw circles, my handwriting is a scrawl. But I think I did get benefits from learning to write “by hand,” including being able to read other people’s handwriting.

The authors–Elizabeth DeWitt, Cheryl Lundy Swift, and Christina Brett–wrote:

In a world where digital devices are everywhere, it’s easy to wonder if handwriting still matters. We’ve all heard the argument that keyboards and screens have made this foundational skill obsolete. But research keeps confirming what many teachers have known for years: Handwriting is more than just penmanship — it’s an important part of a child’s thinking and literacy development, particularly during the formative years of pre-K through fifth grade.

A recent study, “Writing by Hand Helps Children Learn Letters Better,” reinforces this, showing that the physical act of forming letters strengthens memory and accelerates learning. Far from being a relic of the past, handwriting is a powerful tool that prepares young students for reading, improves their cognitive abilities and builds the groundwork for becoming confident, capable writers. Watch: Gen Z Can’t Sign Their Names, Making Mail-In Ballots Invalid.

The power of handwriting comes from the way it engages multiple senses at once. Unlike typing, which relies on a single, repetitive motion, handwriting activates multiple areas of the brain by combining visual, auditory and kinesthetic input. When children form a letter, they’re engaging in a dynamic process that solidifies its identity in their mind. This graphomotor movement — the coordination of hand and eye to produce letters — is key to remembering them. Explicitly teaching children to form letters by hand, even through simple methods like having them copy words from a correctly written letter, word or sentence, helps them learn and better retain letter and word structures.

This practice has a powerful ripple effect. Once letter formation becomes automatic, a child’s brain is freed to focus on higher-level thinking. Instead of struggling to recall how to write a letter, a child can concentrate on building sentences, expressing thoughts and ideas, and crafting coherent narratives. This is how fluent writing develops. And the benefits extend well beyond childhood: One study found college students who took notes by hand remembered more than those who typed, likely because writing by hand forces the brain to process and summarize information, not just copy it.

The mainstream media never tires of printing stories about the “miracle” of charter schools. A few days ago, the Washington Post published an article by Eva Moskowitz, leader of the Success Academy charter chain, titled “These schools are the answer to unlocking every child’s potential: Children born into poverty should not be consigned to failing schools.” The article was shameless self-promotion, announcing that she was expanding her brand into Florida.

But much to my surprise, readers were not buying any of her pitch. The comments following the article overwhelmingly criticized charter schools, saying they chose their students, they kicked out those with low scores, they excluded kids with disabilities, they were no better than public schools.

If all those readers get it, why don’t the editors at the mainstream media?

They still cling to the myth of charter success in New Orleans. NOLA has not been great for the students and their parents. But it has been a public relations coup.

Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education, pulls back the curtain in The Progressive.

Her article: “The ‘Miracle’ of New Orleans School Reform Is Not What It Seems: The city’s all-charter school experiment is a cautionary tale about what happens when democracy is stripped from public education.”

After the hurricane, parents wanted well-resourced community-based public schools. Instead they got charters focused on testing and no/excuses discipline.

The entire “reform” project is based on the practice of “charter churn.” Of 125 charters that have opened since Hurricane Katrina, half have closed and been replaced.

Burris writes:

The truth is that the all-charter experiment in New Orleans was built on the displacement of Black educators, the silencing of parents, and the infusion of foundation dollars with strings attached. As a result, students and families have faced disruption, instability, and hardship as charter schools open and close. Two decades later, the “miracle” is not what it seems. It is instead a cautionary tale about what happens when democracy is stripped from public education and governance is handed over to markets and philanthropies.