Come to hear Yohuru Williams dissect and eviscerate the Trump administration’s absurd attack on “diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

Such policies are meant to broaden opportunity. They take us closer to our professed goals of liberty and justice for all.

Yohuru Williams is a leading scholar and public intellectual who has often appeared on public television to expound on African American history. He is Distinguished University Chair and Professor of History and Founding Director of the Racial Justice Initiative at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota.

Join me on October 6 at Wellesley College.

The event will not be livestresmed but will be available later online.

Trump peremptorily declared that he was banning CNN, MSNOW, and Politico from attending press briefings at the White House.

This is an outrage. He is the President, not a corporate executive. He cannot pick and choose which outlets are allowed to attend press briefings. He indicated that he would probably ban other media, such as The New York Times and The Washington Times.

He doesn’t like their criticism. He calls them “fake news.” He wants only positive press.

Tough.

The Washington press corps should boycott his briefings. He cannot abide being ignored.

What if he held a press briefing and no one showed up?

The press must uphold the freedom of the press or no one else will.

The biggest political news of the past few days is that the nonpartisan, highly respected Siena College poll reported that Democrat Gina Hinojosa is leading rightwing Governor Greg Abbott in Texas by four points, and Democrat James Talarico is leading Republican extremist Ken Paxton by six points in the Senate race.

This is the first major poll that shows the momentum of the Democratic candidates in Texas. if the trend continues, and if Texas flips blue, it would be a political earthquake. It would be a major defeat for Trumpism and the hard-right extremists who have run the state for the past three decades.

Texas is the state to watch in the 2026 election. It is a very conservative state, where political spending is overwhelmingly dominated by oil and gas billionaires and evangelical Christians, a few of whom are oil and gas billionaires. Texas has not elected a Democrat to a statewide office since 1994.

The Governor’s race is exciting. Republican Governor Greg Abbott is running for his fourth term. He is in cahoots with the oil and gas billionaires and with evangelicals. He delivered for both, with tax cuts for the rich and vouchers for religious schools.

His opponent, Gina Hinojosa, is the real deal–a mom who got into politics when state budget cuts threatened to close her son’s public school. She is the only major candidate in the country who has made public schools the centerpiece of her campaign. She believes that public schools are essential for democracy, and she has built her campaign around that issue. She has received support from MAGA Moms who don’t understand why Governor Abbott is contemptuous of their local public schools. She is also drawing strong support from independents.

Abbott is sitting on a campaign fund of $60 million. Gina has raised $6 million.

In the 36 hours after the Siena poll was released, showing that she has caught up with Abbott, Gina raised over $1 million.

Abbott is running on culture war issues. He opposes transgender athletes in women’s sports. He fought to put the Ten Commandments in every classroom in the state. He fought to get vouchers for anyone who wanted one, regardless of family income. He relentlessly accused public schools of “indoctrinating” students, without a shred of evidence, while his voucher plan pays students to attend religious schools whose very purpose is indoctrination into their faith.

Gina Hinojosa is campaigning on two big issues: saving public schools and affordability for working Texans. She talks about issues that directly affect the quality of life of working families, like health care, rising prices for electricity, the cost of living, and data centers.

Gina wants to bring people together and improve their ability to afford a good life. Abbott wants to target someone they can hate, to distract them from the cost of gasoline, rent, and food.

Gina has opposed data centers, while Abbott first supported them, then said he would conduct a study of their impact on power and water when he saw the bipartisan opposition to them.

Latino men, who supported Trump in 2024, are rejecting the Republican Party and Abbott because of Trump’s anti-immigrant policies and rhetoric. They have seen friends snatched away and disappear. Gina was born and raised in the Rio Grande Valley, which is heavily Hispanic. She is, of course, bilingual and can count on Latino support and excitement about a Latino governor.

Gina’s campaign ads are as fearless as she is. In one, she says: “I’m Gina Hinojosa. My pronouns are Mom, Texan and, soon to be, governor.”

Many people think she can’t win, because Democrats haven’t won in Texas in so many years. Abbott will say she is a “Communist,” a “Socialist,” a “radical leftwinger,” etc. She is none of those things. Abbott will insult and attack because he doesn’t want to discuss the issues that affect people’s lives.

Gina does bring those issues front and center.

The fact that he has so much more money than she does might make you feel pessimistic.

But even though he is sitting on $60 million, even though he is outspending her 10-1, she just surged ahead of him in the polls.

Gina is taking it to the people and telling them the truth: They don’t have to accept corrupt politicians who gin up inane culture war battles and ignore people’s need for good jobs, a decent living wage, high-quality childcare, affordable housing and food, good access to medical care, and strong public schools.

I have contributed to Gina’s campaign (and to James Talarico as well). I will give as much as I can. The corrupt politicians like Governor Greg Abbott, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, and Attorney General Ken Paxton must go. It’s time to elect honest, hardworking people who care about every Texan, not just their billionaire donors.

It’s time for a change.

Here is Gina’s website. Contribute whatever you can.

Gina came to the Network for Public Education conference in Columbus, Ohio, in April 2025.

Joyce Vance is a former federal prosecutor who writes a terrific blog called Civil Discourse. In this post, she summarizes the major political events of the past week.

She writes:

What happened:

After a hearing Tuesday morning, Judge Christopher Cooper blocked the Kennedy Center’s Board of Trustees from returning Trump’s name to the building. “Simply put, Defendants cannot install memorials for President Trump or anyone or anything else at the Kennedy Center without Congress’s blessing.” That includes proposals to add “renovated and restored by Donald J. Trump” on the main building or renaming the campus the “President Donald J. Trump Plaza.”

You can read Judge Cooper’s full opinion here.

Why it matters:

The administration has acted in bad faith on this one, stretching the court’s patience thin. In today’s order, the Judge noted that “the drama at the Kennedy Center continues.” The administration flirted with defying a court order when it delayed the removal of Trump’s name after the first court order. It then draped the front of the building in an apparent childish move akin to Trump announcing that if his name couldn’t be there, no one else’s would be visible. But there was absolutely no justification for Trump’s more recent efforts to get the Board to return his name to the front of the Center after the Judge had already entered an injunction. Had the administration moved forward, it would have been flagrant defiance of a court order. 

It matters when a court tells this particular litigant that it meant what it said and that compliance isn’t optional. “To obtain relief enforcing a prior order, a plaintiff must demonstrate that ‘a defendant has not complied with a judgment entered against it,’” Judge Cooper wrote. Then he ordered the relief the plaintiff requested—enforcing the injunction that the President refuses to comply with and sending a message that he had no intention of letting Trump get away with the semantic gymnastics when he’d attempted to put his name back up with President Kennedy’s.

What comes next:

Of course there will be an appeal. But the oxygen has been sucked out of the room. Trump cannot put his name back on President Kennedy’s memorial. The distraction value of this case is over. 

This decision, like so many others, was a no-brainer legally. The case has so little merit that one wouldn’t even expect a neutral Supreme Court to touch it on certiorari; they’d just let the Court of Appeals decision stand. Unless the Supreme Court wants to wake up one morning to discover they have been rebranded as the “Donald J. Trump-Improved Supreme Court” they would do well to follow Judge Cooper’s lead. 

But there’s still a cautionary tale: the destruction of the East Wing. We know how Trump operates. The lawyers may need to go back to court to seek an injunction to prevent him from tearing the Kennedy Center down. Today he told the press, “For me to go and fix it and subsidize it, I think the Trump administration should have recognition. If we don’t do that, it’s going to close and get ripped down.” It doesn’t get much more clear than that.

Tuesday, after the Court’s decision, Trump posted on Truth Social, making it sound like the Kennedy Center is falling apart. It is an older building, and it always needs some work. Just because Trump happens to be in the White House when repairs are done doesn’t mean his name belongs on it. Adam Klasfeld nailed it when he wrote: “Congress appropriated $250M+ in taxpayer money last year for Trump’s wish-list renovations for the Kennedy Center, inserting no language about holding the whole thing hostage if it’s not a shrine to Trump.”

But you get the tenor of how irrational Trump is about this whole affair in a lengthy Tuesday Truth Social post:

Shockingly, a Judge appointed by Barack Hussein Obama, Christopher Cooper, ruled that The Kennedy Center, which was going to close in early July for largescale renovations and construction due to years of neglect, decay, and poor maintenance, and which was to be transformed by the Trump Administration into the Finest Facility of its kind, anywhere in the World, is not allowed to close for these renovations, which would not be possible to properly do without such a closure. Additionally, Judge Cooper ruled that the 36 Member Board of Trustees, which unanimously voted to add the name “TRUMP” onto the former Kennedy Center, making it The Trump Kennedy Center, did not have the right to do such an addition, and the name, “TRUMP,” must be removed.

Judge Cooper and the Radical Left would rather see it DIE than have President Trump transform it into something that everyone could be proud of, much as I have done, in many cases, throughout my life, and recently, with all of the construction, renovations, and ‘fix ups’ that we have completed.” He concludes in vintage Trump fashion: “There has never been a President of the United States who has been treated so unfairly by the Courts as I but, that’s OK, I will continue to do, what is considered to be, a great job for the wonderful people of our Country.

You may not have had a constitutional crisis over the naming of the Kennedy Center on your bingo card for this year, but here we are. Any of the actions Trump seems to be contemplating here would run afoul of the court’s order.

Also Worth Noting Today:

Oral argument took place yesterday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in a case involving whether Lindsey Halligan, a Trump attorney with no experience as a prosecutor, was properly put in place as his US Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia. (Halligan was appointed after the incumbent in that position was forced out in the debacle over the first—and now dismissed—indictment of Jim Comey.) The lower court’s ruling that Halligan was appointed illegally also led to the dismissal of federal charges against New York AG Letitia James. At least two of the judges on the panel seemed inclined to believe that the administration had broken the rules and the lower court’s decision should stand. 

In other news, Laura Weiss at Punchbowl reported on Kash Patel’s Tuesday outing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, noting that it became “incredibly tense – not just between Patel and Dems.” Senators Grassley and Booker tussled after Patel insulted Vermont Senator Peter Welch, calling him “a complete and total fraud” during questioning. Patel accused Democrats of “attacking him for campaign ads.” But it got worse for Patel, who all but begged Grassley to end the hearing during questioning from Senator Adam Schiff. That line of questioning recalled Schiff’s time as a federal prosecutor—he knows how to handle a difficult witness. Schiff grilled Patel about firing every agent who worked on the Mar-a-Lago investigation (reminder: agents don’t get a choice which matters they work on; they’re assigned). 

Schiff to Patel: “I will remind you, director, because you probably need reminding, that while this Congress is not going to investigate the wrongful termination of potentially hundreds of agents, the next Congress will. And you have an obligation as FBI director to ensure that none of the [documents] are destroyed.” Patel, who reportedly tried to pack up his things and leave, appealed to Grassley for help: “I would appreciate it if you concluded this hearing.”

Although Patel’s exchange with Louisiana Senator John Kennedy over bestiality and FBI hiring garnered the most media attention, the more important exchange was the one with Welch, who accused Patel of being “more than willing” to use the FBI to advance Trump’s personal grievances over election losses, saying, “My concern is that this means what you are willing to do for the president in this year’s midterm elections that the president is already saying are going to be rigged if he loses.” He asked Patel about sending agents to the polls and whether he would promise to “not in any way interfere in the will of the American people when they go to the polls in November.” Patel responded, “I have pledged unequivocally that I will not participate in your charade of lies.” That’s not exactly a no.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump seems to have found more crazy. Frantic for a new distraction, he is accusing the Biden administration of mishandling the investigation into one of the assassination attempts on him in Pennsylvania. You’ve just got to read this one to believe it.

This is what we can expect between now and the midterms, and likely beyond, especially if Trump is perceived as the cause of Democratic gains. It’s Steve Bannon’s “flood the zone with sh*t.” Remember that they want you to feel overloaded and incapable of coping. Take some time for yourself, and then remember we have work to do. There will be another “No Kings” event on October 17 to help us get out the vote, and we will be okay because we have each other.

I’m grateful you’re here with me at Civil Discourse. If you’re already a paid subscriber, thank you! If you’re not, today is a great day to become one and support a community that believes well-informed citizens can save a democracy.

We’re in this together,

Joyce

John Thompson, historian and retired teacher in Oklahoma, keeps us up to date about the political winds in his state.

He writes:

My Congresswoman, Stephanie Bice (R-OK), has been getting national attention since the Bulwark revealed an audio of Bice telling Republican students “that President Donald Trump’s unpopularity and freewheeling executive actions were hurting the party and even endangering seemingly safe seats like hers.”

Rep. Bice was quoted as saying:

“The challenge that we have is that we have to get over the narrative that ‘I don’t like this guy, so I’m going to vote for the Democrat,’” said Rep. Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.), according to audio obtained by The Bulwark. “Because I’m telling you right now, I’m hearing it already.”

She also said:

“And what happens is that’ll impact me because . . . two things will either happen,” Bice added. “They’re going to vote for the Democrat and they may split [the] ticket and vote for me and a few others, or—this is my bigger fear right now—people don’t go vote.”

The Bulwark reported that Bice provided a “rare glimpse into the gloom some elected Republicans feel about the impending midterms.” And, she explained, “I was at a board meeting yesterday with a group, and one of the execs said to me, ‘I’m a Republican, I’ve been a Republican for a long time, but I have Trump fatigue.'”  

Bice later argued that she was just “relaying a comment made by someone else and discussing the importance of Republicans turning out and voting for the entire ticket. Any suggestion otherwise takes her comments out of context.” 

In fact, after quoting the Republican who complained about “Trump fatigue,” Bice said, “It’s a fair statement, you know?” 

She also said, “We’re not helping ourselves when we decide to rename Lake Ontario Lake America. This does not help the case.” 

Most polls predict Bice will be reelected. But, the national news regarding Bice only reported a third of the story. There are a couple more narratives that make the case that Republicans will likely lose this seat, and many other seats.

First, the national news is also full of coverage of other conservative, Republican incumbents who are falling behind Democrat challengers. 

And perhaps the most positive part of the story is how and why a poll  found the charismatic Democrat, Jena Nelson, Oklahoma’s 2020 Teacher of the Year,  leading by 4 points

The 5th Congressional previously elected a Democrat congresswoman, Kendra Horn. Yes, Horn was defeated in 2020 by less than five points. Because Oklahoma City was growing more progressive, it’s hard to believe that Bice would have won in 2022 if the district had not been dramatically gerrymandered

And, as Nelson explained in 2026, “It’s been almost five years since her [Bice’s] last in-person town hall on August 25, 2021.” 

And, in a recent discussion, Bice didn’t seem to have taken a clear enough stand to win over the “61 percent of respondents who said that data centers are a threat to local resources or wanted a full ban on the facilities. An additional 20 percent said they wanted more regulations on the centers.” 

Similarly, if Bice listened to Oklahomans, why would she justify her opposition to raising the minimum wage above $7.25 per hour, by claiming it would provide “a broad range of benefits with no regard for the actual level of need of those on the receiving end of funding.” 

As the Oklahoma City part of the 5th District has continued to become more progressive, Jena Nelson, has also invested months of time, introducing herself, and listening to people in the conservative rural areas. 

At the same time, Bice has done herself no favors by giving muddled answers as to why, for instance, she voted for Trump’s issues like his cutting 1 billion dollars of hospital reinbursements in her district

Nelson’s polling reveals that in July 2026, 50% viewed Trump very unfavorably and 4% somewhat unfavorably, while 31% viewed Trump very favorably and 10% somewhat favorably. That means that, “His overall favorability is underwater by 13 points.” 

Moreover, “Voters respond positively to Nelson’s biography (61-12), while Bice’s profile produces a net-negative response (40-42). And, Bice “also gains 13 points among self-identified independents, reaching 65%. Among Moderate Republicans, she rises 13 points to 26%.” 

And, I would add that when watching Nelson interact with crowds, it is easy to understand why she was selected Teacher of the Year. Her ability to listen, her empathy, her enthusiasm are combined with her knowledge and intellect. Her audiences not only see the damage that Bice helped Trump impose, but they see and feel the principles and the solutions that Jena is committed to.

Epilogue: There seems to be no evidence that Bice attended Trump’s Midterm convention, or that she has made a statement about it.  

William Phillis has been leading the battle to protect public schools in Ohio for many years. Now retired, he was Deputy Superintendent of the Ohio Department of Education.

He forwarded the followings news about Tennessee:

Tennessee voucher school students registered lower scores and performed worse on state tests in 2026 than their public school peers. So, what is the Tennessee legislature’s solution? Drop the test requirement.

Four years into the Tennessee voucher program, voucher students performed worse on state tests in 2026 than their public school peers. The legislature perfected a solution. The testing requirement for voucher students was discontinued.

Years ago, it was generally believed that there was a private school advantage (i.e) private schools outperformed public schools. Research has shown that when demographics are inserted into the equation, public schools outperform private schools.

The Tennessee voucher project outcomes seem to support that conclusion.

Political officials throughout the nation have the mindset that private is better, even in view of the facts to the contrary.

TN voucher students lag in ELA, math proficiency

  • Knoxville News Sentinel
  • 20 Aug 2026
  • Vivian Jones covers state government and politics for The Tennessean. Reach her at vjones@tennessean.com.

When the Tennessee House approved the state’s Education Savings Accounts program by a single vote in 2019, some Republican lawmakers supported the program on the condition that students be required to take the state TCAP exam — so the state could exercise oversight.

The ESA program offers low-income students taxpayer-funded scholarships to attend private schools. Advocates said voucher students coming out of public schools might lag behind academically, but in time their achievement would take off.

Four years in, that hasn’t happened. Tennessee students who attended private schools through the state’s Education Savings Accounts voucher program performed worse on state tests in 2026 than their public school peers. Fewer voucher students were proficient in math and English this year than were last year, new state data shows.

Just 17% of ESA voucher students met or exceeded math proficiency expectations on the TCAP this year, while 24% met or exceeded expectations in English, according to new state TCAP data obtained by The Tennessean through a public records request.

In public schools, 40% of students — more than twice as many — met or exceeded proficiency expectations in math, while 42% achieved proficiency in English.

Tennessee sorts student achievement levels in four categories, measuring a student’s proficiency as “below,” “approaching,” “meets” or “exceeds” expectations. Under Tennessee’s third grade retention law, public school students are required to “meet” or “exceed” reading expectations by third grade, or face retention.

Over the past three school years, the achievement gap between state-funded students attending public schools and private schools gradually widened.

In Hamilton County, ESA students’ ELA proficiency has dropped seven percentage points in three years, from 32.2% proficiency to 25.2% proficiency. Public school students there grew slightly, from 39% to 40.3% proficiency this year.

In past years, Shelby has been the only county where ESA students have outperformed their public school peers. But this year, nearly 3% fewer Shelby County ESA participants met or exceeded English proficiency compared to last year.

In a statement to The Tennessean, Education Commissioner Lizzette Reynolds pointed to a 14.6-point reduction in the number of ESA students performing “below expectations” as a sign of the program’s efficacy.

“Students enrolled in the program continue to make meaningful gains on TCAP,” Reynolds said in a statement to The Tennessean. “For example, in 202223, 51.6% of ESA students were performing below expectations in math, compared to 37% performing below expectations in 2024-25.”

Education Savings Accounts participants get about $10,100 to attend private schools in Nashville, Memphis and Chattanooga. To qualify for a scholarship, students must be previously enrolled in public school or entering kindergarten, and their family must have an income of less than $83,590 for a family of four.

Another, statewide school voucher program, Education Freedom Scholarships, offers $7,300 state-funded scholarships for students to attend private schools. EFS recipients have never been required to take the TCAP, though some schools have done so voluntarily.

Test scores aren’t everything. While voucher students have consistently underperformed on the TCAP, parents have said the choice has offered lifechanging opportunities for their children to get out of bullying situations, or access academic opportunities that would otherwise not be financially possible.

This is the last year we’ll have this data.

Lawmakers voted to end required TCAP testing for voucher students this year after a scathing audit of the program.

Josh Cowen, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University, studies school voucher policies and accountability across the country. He said it’s common for school voucher participants to score lower on standardized tests than their counterparts in public schools.

But instead of working to improve achievement results, he said other states have opted to stop requiring state achievement tests for voucher students – just as Tennessee has.

“States have basically done what your state just did – which is stop testing,” Cowen said.

After this year, Tennessee voucher recipients will be able to take any national standard test to measure their academic achievement – but there will be no apples-to-apples comparison to track the voucher recipients’ academic growth.

“When they stop administering the state exam, then the lobby groups and the voucher supporters can just yell about how great it is for everyone and no one calls them out on it anymore,” Cowen said.

Reynolds said that the TCAP is not the only measure of the student’s academic success.

“TCAP provides valuable information about student academic performance, but it is one measure of student learning and program outcomes,” Reynolds said, noting that in the future, other testing options will be available for voucher students.

“The department will continue to evaluate student outcomes and other measures of program success to ensure Tennessee families have access to educational options that are meeting their students’ needs,” Reynolds said.

In her campaign for the Tennessee governor’s mansion, U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn has pledged to work to expand Tennessee’s school voucher programs “until no parent has to win the lottery to have a say in their child’s education.” Republican legislative leaders have echoed similar commitments.

But without a universal testing requirement, Cowen said, effective state oversight of the taxpayer-funded program will be virtually impossible.

“If these results showed good things, they’d be the first out there in the press conference yelling ‘scoreboard!’ ” Cowen said. “The reason they aren’t testing is because they don’t want to see the answer.”

As lawmakers debated ending TCAP requirement for voucher students this spring, Sen. Jack Johnson, R-Franklin, said requiring the TCAP for the original voucher program was “a mistake.” He said the TCAP is “not an accurate assessment for some private schools,” because they are not required to follow state standards.

Democrats who opposed the idea said Tennessee should not hold public and private students to different standards.

While nationally normed tests differ, Cowen said all are aimed at testing students’ mastery of the subject fundamentals.

“[If ] a private school takes a decent nationally normed exam that tests basic arithmetic, you’re not going to see a kid perform really poorly on that and then ace the TCAP – or vice versa,” Cowen said.

Choosing not to have a like comparison, he said, definitely stifles oversight, but wouldn’t necessarily test what students are learning more closely.

A better way to measure a student’s academic growth would be to compare students’ TCAP scores while in the ESA program to their TCAP scores from prior public school enrollment, Cowen said.

But when that’s been done in other states, the results have shown a gap. In 2023, just 14% of students in Louisiana’s voucher program met state achievement targets, compared with 24% of low-income students in public schools.

Voucher advocates frequently point to parent satisfaction as the “ultimate metric” of the program’s success. Reynolds said 99% of ESA families surveyed by the Department of Education this year reported being satisfied with the program.

Sen. Raumesh Akbari, D-Memphis, who opposed ending the TCAP requirement, pushed back.

“While I do agree parent satisfaction is important,” Akbari said, “parent satisfaction doesn’t get a child into college or help them get a job: achievement does.”

Article Name: TN voucher students lag in ELA, math proficiency

Author:Vivian Jones Vivian Jones covers state government and politics for The Tennessean. Reach her at vjones@tennessean.com.

The family of Tierra Walker, 37, is suing Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton because of her death. Walker died in December 2024 after she was denied an abortion that would have saved her life.

Paxton is running for the U.S. Senate against Democrat James Talarico.

The family’s lawsuit contends that the state’s near-total ban on abortion is unconstitutional.

Walker was 20 weeks pregnant. She had been diagnosed with pre-eclampsia. Her high blood pressure threatened her life.

Walker repeatedly suffered seizures and blood clots. She and her family asked for a life-saving abortion but were rejected by multiple doctors, who refused to treat her because of Texas’s harsh ban on abortions. Doctors who perform abortions will not only lose their license, they may be fined $100,000 and sentenced to life in prison.

The family is also suing the executive director of the Texas Medical Board, the University of Texas health system and individual doctors.

ProPublica reviewed Tierra Walker’s files in 2025, and at best, she was the victim of state-sanctioned malpractice. Under Texas law, the life of the fetus is protected; the life of the mother is not.

ProPublica condensed more than 6,500 pages of Walker’s medical records into a summary of her care with the guidance of two high-risk pregnancy specialists. More than a dozen OB-GYNs reviewed the case for ProPublica and said that since Walker had persistently high blood pressure, it would have been standard medical practice to advise her of the serious risks of her pregnancy early on, to revisit the conversation as new complications emerged and to offer termination at any point if she wanted it. Some described her condition as a “ticking time bomb.” Had Walker ended her pregnancy, every expert believed, she would not have died. 

Many said that her case illustrated why they think all patients need the freedom to choose how much risk they are willing to take during pregnancy. Walker expressed that she didn’t want to take that risk, her family says. She had a vibrant life, a husband and son whom she loved. 

Under Texas’ abortion law, though, that didn’t matter….

Dr. Elizabeth Langen, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist in Michigan who reviewed Walker’s case, said a physician comfortable with high-risk pregnancies should have counseled her on the dangers of continuing and offered her an abortion. “The safest thing for her was to terminate this pregnancy, that’s for sure.”

During Walker’s many hospital and prenatal visits, 21 OB-GYNs were among the more than 90 physicians involved in her care. None of them counseled her on the option — or the health benefits — of a termination, according to medical records. 

ProPublica points out that legislators in several states who have tried to introduce medical exemptions to their anti-abortion laws have been stopped by activists who claim that any exemption is unacceptable. They say that women will seek abortions under false pretenses and that doctors will prescribe abortion for women with nothing more than a headache.

They should talk to Tierra Walker’s family or at least read the ProPublica article.

In voucher debates around the country, parents of children with disabilities are often outspoken on behalf of vouchers. If they are dissatisfied with the services at the local public school, they feel sure they will find a private school that is better. What they don’t don’t know is that private schools do not have to follow federal laws. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act does not affect private schools. Stories like this one are a wake-up call. When they leave public schools, they abandon their federal rights.

Pepper Stelter of The HECHINGER Report wrote about a family in Ohio that decided to place their child in a religious school, using voucher money. When the school decided her care cost too much, they told her grandparents to withdraw her. Private schools are not required to comply with the federal disability law.

Stelter wrote:

CINCINNATI — The meeting with staff members of Cincinnati Christian Schools began with a prayer. Then they told Mike Grimmer and Linda Kelly that their granddaughter could no longer attend the private school.

Annabelle Kelly had enrolled there three months earlier, in August 2025, in a program specifically for students who struggle in mainstream classrooms. Annabelle, 15, has Rett syndrome, a genetic condition accompanied by significant cognitive and developmental delays. Her grandparents, who took legal custody of Annabelle when she was 5, believed that the small, faith-based setting of CCS would be a better fit than the local public school. She received a voucher from the state through a school choice program specifically for students with disabilities, which authorized paying CCS up to $29,750 for Annabelle to attend tuition-free. 

But at the meeting in November, Kelly said, the school’s director of academic support services told her and Grimmer that Annabelle’s physical and educational needs were too extensive for her to continue at CCS. If they wanted her to stay, Annabelle would need an aide to work with her one-on-one, and her grandparents would need to pay the additional cost, roughly $25,000 per year.

Disability advocates warn that as private school voucher programs spread, more parents will find themselves in similar straits. Federal protections for students with disabilities don’t apply to private schools, and neither the schools nor voucher programs like the one Annabelle qualified for are required to inform parents that they waive certain rights when they leave the public school system. When Congress passed legislation last year establishing the nation’s first federal voucher program, it did not include language that disability rights groups had lobbied for that would have required private schools receiving federal funds to follow the law known as the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act. 

“If there are public funds being spent, public protections need to be afforded,” said Chris Roe, director of state policy at the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, a policy advocacy organization that provides training and guidance in special education law. “At the very least, states that provide voucher programs should be required to inform parents of the rights they are giving up.”

Kelly said the decision from CCS came despite the family being transparent about Annabelle’s needs when they applied to the school: They shared medical information, copies of her academic evaluations and her learning plan from the public school she attended. The then-eighth grader attended three trial days at the school before enrolling, and several previous conferences with teachers had gone well, her grandmother said.

“We were blindsided by the school’s decision,” said Kelly. 

Raymond Kochis, superintendent of Cincinnati Christian Schools, declined an interview but said in response to written questions that the costs of educating Annabelle exceeded what had been determined initially. “When a student’s needs evolve,” Kochis wrote, “the school works with the family to determine the most appropriate level of support.” (According to Kelly, Annabelle’s needs had not changed, and school officials quickly dismissed any alternative solutions she proposed.) 

Private school voucher programs have proliferated in the United States in the last decade. The number of students with disabilities in these programs has grown too: In the 2025-26 school year, Annabelle was one of more than 200,000 students nationwide either using vouchers meant specifically for students with disabilities or enrolled in the country’s largest voucher programs, compared with more than 180,000 the year prior. 

The federal school voucher program goes into effect next year. After failing to persuade Congress to include language stating that voucher programs and participating private schools must comply with IDEA protections, COPAA and other disability rights groups are focused on pressing states that choose to participate in the program to enforce the IDEA even for private schools. 

Signed into law in 1975, the IDEA states that everyone ages three to 21 with a disability must be provided a free public education that meets their particular needs. In collaboration with parents, public school districts must develop an individualized education program, or IEP, establishing learning goals and plans appropriate for the student. The law also states that students with disabilities must be taught alongside children without disabilities “to the maximum extent appropriate.” Today, 8 million public school students are served by the IDEA.

While voucher programs like the one Annabelle received, Ohio’s Jon Peterson scholarship, are publicly funded, participating private schools like CCS control their own admissions and enrollment decisions. Students using a private school voucher are considered “parentally placed,” and private schools are not required to follow an IEP or uphold any IDEA protections. Families that use these vouchers sacrifice key civil rights afforded by the IDEA, including protection against discrimination and removal from the school based on a disability.

Kelly doesn’t remember, when filling out the scholarship application and enrolling Annabelle at CCS, being told that the rights and protections that apply to students with disabilities in public schools do not extend to private schools. Since students must have an IEP to qualify for the Jon Peterson scholarship, she assumed that the IDEA’s rules and policies would be followed. 

In a response to written questions, a spokesperson for Ohio’s Department of Education and Workforce said there are multiple safeguards for students with disabilities who attend private schools. The department’s website never explicitly states that private schools are not required to comply with the IDEA’s mandates and regulations. But it does mention on a page of regulations that if a student is enrolled in a school that is not public, it is “not obligated to provide the child” with a free appropriate public education. Ultimately, the private school is not required to follow the IDEA, and parents have little recourse if the school chooses not to. 

Please open the link to finish reading the story.

Stephen Dyer, a former legislator, keeps count. His blog is called 10th Period:

Ohio’s charter schools have underperformed for years, as compared to district public schools, but Republican legislators and state officials don’t care. Charter schools open, fail, close, and are replaced by more charter schools. Public money sustains them regardless of their poor performance.

Dyer wrote:

So if you’re paying $1.6 billion a year for an education sector whose graduates make 20% less upon graduation than public school graduates, can we really call that an option? Or is it just a waste of money. 30 years. $20 billion. And THIS is what we get in return? Outrageous.

I have now written this post in one form or another for 20 years.

Ohio Charter Schools get smoked on state report cards by Ohio School Districts.

I know, Charter School honks, you only want your performance to be compared with the Big 8 urban districts — Akron, Canton, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, Toledo and Youngstown. 

See, here’s the problem: 53% of the kids in Ohio charter schools come from those 8 districts. 

That means 47% do not.

You can’t take $1.5 billion in state aid from kids attending all but a handful of school districts and then demand your performance be compared with 8 of those 607 districts — the 8 that are typically among the state’s lowest performing¹.

Here’s what this piss-poor Charter School performance looks like in charts:

The second chart kind of says it all. 

Even though Charters received less than 1 in 4 of all the stars given, they received 2 out of every 3 1 Stars (F), all of the 1.5 Stars (D-) and about 2 out of every 3 2.5 Stars (C-).

Meanwhile, districts outperformed their overall grade share in every A, B and C category. Just a horrific performance by Charter Schools, considering they’ve had 30 years, $20 billion, just a fraction of the government oversight and incredible legislative and gubernatorial protection to achieve these gawd awful results.

In only 3 categories are more than 40% of Charter School grades C or higher: Overall (53%), Gap Closing (52.2%) and Progress (79%). 

On the District side, the only categories where less than 86% of their grades are C or higher are Early Literacy (66%) and Progress (58%). That’s right. In all categories, the vast majority of School District grades are C or higher. 

Take it easy, Charter Honk. 

Just because Charters do better on the Progress rating² does not mean they’re better schools. Why can I say that with confidence? 

Because Charters do so fantastically worse on the 6 other measures, including a stunning 58% 1 Star ratings on College, Career, Work and Military Readiness!

That CCWMR rating seems to be keeping in line with my post from this morning outlining how Charter School graduates make 20% less over their lifetimes than traditional public school graduates, which costs them hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Look, guys. All I can do is keep pointing all this out and hope that elected officials in Columbus stop drinking the Charter School Kool-Aid at some point.

To recap, here’s all we’ve found out over the last couple weeks about these things:

  • They receive 2 out of every 3 of failing grades on the most recent state report card
  • More than 1 in 3 are on the state’s lowest-performing building list.
  • More than 9 in 10 “Dropout Recovery” charters are on the list.
  • About 1 in 5 charters have been on the list since 2018.
  • More than 1 in 2 charter schools that have ever opened in Ohio are now closed.
  • They received more than 1/2 of all F grades ever given to schools on Ohio’s Report Card, despite representing about 10% of all Ohio school buildings.
  • They spend almost double the share of their funding on non-instructional administrators that Ohio’s traditional public schools spend.
  • They receive more than double the state funding that a traditional Ohio public school student receives.
  • They spend more, on average, per pupil than a traditional Ohio Public School District, even though charters can’t collect local revenue (except for a handful in Cleveland).
  • They produced the single largest taxpayer ripoff scam in Ohio history, largely enabled by Sen. Jon Husted, and are constantly being busted for fraud and other corrupt practices.
  • Charter School students are about 7 percent of the state’s school population, but receive 12 percent of the state’s funding for schools.
  • That funding (along with EdChoice vouchers) is preventing the state from fully funding its own formula to provide resources to the state’s 1.5 million traditional public school students.
  • More than 1 in 10 Ohio charter schools are on the state’s suspected test cheating list and 7 out of every 10 schools suspected of cheating on their state tests are charter schools.
  • More than 1 in 4 of the state’s “high performing” charter schools are on the state’s suspected test cheating list.
  • They have cost charter school graduates between $247 million and $321 million since 2018 and will cost them between $1.8 billion and $6.7 billion over their collective lifetimes.

Will any of this finally break through?

I guess we’ll find out in a couple months.

1.

I also don’t compare public school building performance with charters because the money for charters comes out of the same money pot meant for kids in districts. So the money comes out of the state aid to every building in a district — the lowest-performing and highest-performing ones. That’s why I’ve always only compared performance between districts and charters. Because if charters are going to be a worthwhile public policy endeavor, then they have to be worth taking state money away from kids in the state’s highest-performing buildings, not just the ones in the lowest-performing ones. I would argue that taking any state money from any public school kids, regardless of report card rating, to fund charters and unconstitutional private school tuition subsidies is public policy disaster. But that’s another argument for another day. 

2.

About 43% of school district grades that are C or higher are Cs. Nearly 1/2 of all charter grades that are C or higher in Progress are Cs.

It is time for the Trump-appointed members of the Board of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts to be fired by Congress or to resign.

They have failed in their most fundamental duty, the duty to protect the function and reputation of the institution they serve.

Being a board member is not a perk. It’s a responsibility.

Above all, board members are responsible to safeguard the institution.

Before Trump, the Center had a bipartisan board and a nonpartisan reputation. It was dedicated to celebrating the best of American art and culture.

One doesn’t become a board member to destroy the reputation of an institution.

One doesn’t become a board member to destroy the finances of an institution.

The Kennedy Center was built as a living memorial to President John F. Kennedy. He had a singular interest in the arts. He frequently invited artists and poets to speak and perform in the White House.

The board of the Kennedy Center appointed by Trump has been slavishly devoted to turning the memorial into a center honoring both Trump and Kennedy.

They violated their oath and their fiduciary duty from the beginning.

Their rank politicization of the Center drove artists and performers away. It drove away the Washington National Opera. It drove the National Symphony Orchestra to financial ruin.

It drove away the audiences who loved the Center and never thought of it as a partisan performance space. Ticket sales plummeted.

The board fought in the courts to keep Trump’s name on memorial, where it did not belong.

The Trump board repeatedly lost in court; a federal judge concluded that Congress named the Center and only Congress could change its name.

So the board has now decided to close the Center, and Trump has said he will block funding for the Center’s renovation unless his name is put on the facade. He wants to share the Kennedy memorial.

It is not his to share, anymore than the Lincoln Memorial or the Jefferson Memorial.

The board has joined Trump in desecrating the Kennedy Center.

The members of the board appointed by Trump are responsible for this mess.

They should resign or be fired by Congress.