Archives for category: Charter Schools
« Older Entries

Rhode Island: A Setback for Charter Schools

By dianeravitch
July 3, 2026 //
0

Rhode Island welcomed charters under former Governor Gina Raimondo. When she left to become President Biden’s Secretary of Commerce, lieutenant governor Dan McKee took her place. He was widely viewed as a strong supporter of charter schools. He was closely associated with the creation of Rhode Island’s mayoral academies, especially the Blackstone Valley Prep network. But this year, he signed legislation pausing the approval of new charter schools for three years. He said that declining enrollment and funding challenges warranted the pause.

This was awkward for the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools (sic), which had honored him in 2009 as a Charter School Champion. Taken aback, the Alliance did something unprecedented. It withdrew his award!

Today, the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools withdrew its recognition of Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee as a Charter School Champion, marking the first time in the organization’s 21-year history this award has been rescinded.

This happened after McKee signed a bill “that enacts a moratorium on public charter schools for three years, lowers the statewide cap from 35 to 28, and prohibits already approved schools from opening.”

Think about it: 9.9% of Rhode Island’s students are enrolled in charter schools. Some are in private and religious schools. Probably 80-85% attend public schools. Where should the Governor’s priorities lie?

Shawgi Tell wrote about Rhode Island and the Governor’s decision here.

He wrote, in part:

This is a rare and unusual move in the U.S. given how aggressively neoliberals have been imposing school privatization on the nation for the last few decades. It is also noteworthy that both chambers of the State’s legislature overwhelmingly approved the three-year moratorium on these privately-operated schools. Opposition to charter schools has been steadily growing across the country over the years.

Not surprisingly, many business groups, charter school advocates, and even some democrats tried to pressure the Governor and legislature not to approve such a moratorium. The fact that many democrats still support privately-operated charter schools goes against the mainstream narrative that it is mostly or only republicans who support school privatization.

Whether this moratorium decision by Governor McKee and the state legislature is based on principle or cynical maneuvering by certain factions of the rich against other competing factions, the moratorium is still a positive step forward for the public interest and public schools. More charter schools always means more problems.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Democracy, Education Industry, Rhode Island

Peter Greene: The District Turned Down a Charter School, the State Imposed It

By dianeravitch
July 3, 2026 //
1

The Fairbanks North Star Borough School Board has made some charter fans big mad, and now the courts will be involved.

FNSBSD last fall dealt with a request to open a charter school in the district, to be the Pearl Creek Steam Charter School. The board voted unanimously to deny the request. They had plenty of reasons– 52 pages worth, in fact. Those reason included a lack of a facility plan, lack of a clear enrollment projection, a mess of a contract, no transportation plan, an inadequate instructional plan that doesn’t fully address state standards, no student lunch plan, no professional development plan, an admission plan that is probably illegal, an error-filled and incomplete budget, and the fact that this would have a big financial impact on the district. FNSBSD has already been closing schools to deal with dropping enrollment and funding. “Hey, the district is financially strapped, so let’s open a new building,” said no responsible school board ever. The Pearl Creek proposal is to reopen one of the closed schools as a charter school.

Also, said the FNSBSD board, this school is probably going to fail. “The plans in the application do not demonstrate likelihood of success,” is how the board put it. Again, 52 pages of details covering the above.

The charter crew offers an estimate of $830,000 cost to the district. The district COO says it’s more like $2.8 million. Coverage of the “controversy” has been extensive, especially from reporters Patrick Gilchrist and Shyler Umphenour at KUAC and Corinne Smith at the Alaska Beacon.

But Governor Mike Dunleavy would really like to see more charters, and so would Education Commissioner Deena Bishop, and so would the Dunleavy-appointed members of the Alaska State Board of Education, which has the power to overrule local school boards.

So in April, the state board went ahead and approved the charter over the objections and explanations of the duly-elected local school board. The state board declared that, essentially, the charter board had filled out all the paperwork, and that was good enough. Took them a whole fifteen pages to say it.Bobby Burgess, the president of the FNSBSD Board of Education, had a comment for KUAC.

“Basically, my read of the state’s decision is that, if the application is filled out in full, the contents don’t really matter, even if the plan described is impossible to execute,” Burgess said. “It kind of seems like a lower standard than we hold students to on homework assignments.”

Cue the lawyers. The district appealed the state board decision. The charter board filed a civil lawsuit with request for a preliminary injunction in state Superior Court to force the district to sign the charter and get the building re-opened and ready. Last week Superior Court Judge Kirk Schwalm in Fairbanks denied the charter’s request for preliminary injunction.

Now, in the newest twist, Acting Attorney General Cori Mills has filed an emergency petition to force the district to get that school opened. Because nothing says “We do too have an adequate plan for this charter school” than insisting you can get it up and running in two months. (Mills is Acting AG because the legislature rejected Dunleavy’s first choice.)

Meanwhile, Pearl Creek STEAM Charter is still announcing that it will be open in the fall on both its website and Facebook page.

There are other issues at play here. Veteran reporter and columnist Dermot Cole points out that Pearl Creek will widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots, part of a larger charter trend in Fairbanks:

I believe that nearly all of the charter schools in the Fairbanks area have tended to attract enrollment from families with higher incomes or families where the parents have the time, energy and ability to be directly involved in their children’s education…

There are far fewer economically disadvantaged students in Alaska charter schools than neighborhood schools. There are also fewer students for whom English is a second language. Most charter schools do not have bus transportation for students, school lunch programs or other features that would make them more accessible to poor families.

I’m guessing, based on what I know about Fairbanks, that most charter school families have more flexibility built into their lives, whether it’s because of economic status, help from extended family members or the sense of mission that the best parents share.

Beyond all that, Fairbanks now has the bizarre situation of a district that has tried to cut costs by closing a school now being told by the state that they must reopen the building and pay for someone else to run a school there, reversing the decision of the elected local school board. 

It’s not the most extreme version of state governments usurping the power of local school boards (take Ohio, where school districts can get in legal trouble for failing to hand buildings over to charters). But it is one more literal example of how running multiple parallel school districts costs the taxpayers extra. If only choice fans were honest enough to say, “We want choice, so we are going to levy a new School Choice Tax to pay for it.” Good luck, Fairbanks.

Categories Alaska, Charter Schools, Democracy, Education Industry, Ethics, Funding, Politics, Support for public schools

Jan Resseger: Privatization Causes Catastrophic Damage to Public Schools

By dianeravitch
June 24, 2026 //
2

Jan Resseger, stalwart champion of public schools, is alarmed by the damage that privatization inflicts on public schools, attended by the vast majority of children. She describes the erosion of public schools as “a national wave of educational injustice that has reached crisis proportions.”

Resseger writes:

On Monday, the Network for Public Education (NPE) released an urgently important report, Public Schooling in America: Measuring Each State’s Commitment to Democratically Governed Schools. The report ranks the states on their protection of the institution of public schools that serve the mass of our children and adolescents and the degree to which school privatization is undermining that promise.

In what I found to be the report’s most shocking statistic, 19 states now provide Education Savings Account (ESA) vouchers and ten of those states give ESA vouchers to “virtually every family regardless of income or need.” An ESA is a virtual debit card that parents whose children do not attend public schools can use to pay for any kind of privatized education or for materials and services the parents claim to be using to homeschool their children. What this really means is that many of these states are basically just giving money away to parents to use as they please without appreciable regulations or oversight.

The Network for Public Education (NPE) confirms “a troubling and consistent pattern.  The states most aggressively redirecting public funds toward private alternatives—charter schools, voucher programs, and education savings accounts—are the same states most neglectful of their public schools, their teachers, and their students.  Our analysis found a strong, statistically negative relationship between the expansion of privatization and public school support…. Privatization and disinvestment, it turns out, go hand in hand.”

What is the scale of the problem? “Thirty-four states and the District of Columbia now fund one or more private school voucher programs, and nineteen states operate Education Savings Account (ESA) programs… The charter school sector presents parallel concerns. Forty-seven states have charter school laws, and in the majority of them, private unelected boards govern schools with no term limits and no formal accountability to the communities they serve… The consequences fall hardest on the children least able to seek alternatives: those in poverty, those with disabilities, those in rural communities, and those whose families lack the time or resources to navigate a fragmented marketplace of educational options. Public schools remain the only institutions in American life constitutionally obligated to welcome every child, regardless of circumstance. They are governed by elected boards, funded by public taxes and accountable to the communities they serve…”

The report examines four related threats.

Privatization     Vouchers are one form of school privatization.  The Network for Public Education reminds readers that vouchers trace back to the combination of racism and libertarian ideology. The first voucher schools supported segregation academies in the years immediately following Brown v. Board of Education, and NPE’s report explains that even today, “Study after study has found that school choice programs generally increase segregation,” with vouchers “enabling outright discrimination with public money.” Thirty-four states have at least one voucher program; in total states operate 73 voucher programs, “including some that allow families to double-dip, applying for funding from multiple programs.” Besides their traditional school voucher programs, some states have education savings accounts (“the most damaging and irresponsible of all voucher programs”). Some states have tuition tax credit ‘scholarship’ programs with tax credits for parents and others who contribute to scholarship granting organizations (SGOs) which are tapped by parents to pay for private schools and other educational expenses.  “(S)ome states also give individual tax credits (TTCs) for educational expenses at private schools or homeschools.” Thirty-one states have now also opted in to the federal tuition tax credit program created in the “One Big Beautiful” Bill.

What about the effects of the vast growth of private school vouchers? Because few states set income limits on the families who can qualify for the vouchers, they primarily benefit children from wealthy families. The vouchers “result in the defunding of public schools,” fail to protect the rights of disabled students, often fail to admit LGBTQ students, fail to provide any proof that students are thriving academically, fail require teachers to be certified, and fail to require background checks for teachers. Many states are spending on each voucher a large percentage of what they spend per-pupil on each public school student, and many vouchers are going to children who were always enrolled in the private school where the voucher will reimburse the families who have been paying tuition.

Publicly funded, privately operated charter schools are the second primary form of school privatization. Kentucky’s supreme court recently found that state’s charter school funding unconstitutional, and Nebraska, South Dakota, and Vermont have never had charters. Forty-seven states and the District of Columbia all have passed laws that enable the operation of charter schools.  Additionally, “a growing sector operates entirely online—and is largely run by for-profit corporations”—often displaying flagrant “financial opportunism” and “fraud.” And, “Like voucher schools, charter schools are subject to fewer regulations and less oversight than neighborhood public schools. As with voucher schools, this has resulted in significant concerns regarding accountability, accessibility, fiscal responsibility, and academic quality… In 39 states, for-profit companies are permitted to manage nonprofit charter schools. One common arrangement—known as a ‘sweeps’ contract—allows a for-profit management company to handle a school’s day-to-day operations while receiving the bulk of its public funding in return… This practice is especially prevalent in six states—Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, and West Virginia….”

Protections for Homeschooled Children     “Homeschooling… is now the fastest-growing education sector,” fed by Education Savings Account vouchers.  However, “even as homeschooling growth has accelerated, laws to protect the homeschooled child have not. Through the relentless pressure exerted by the Homeschool Legal Defense Associations… even the most modest legislation designed to protect homeschooled children from educational or physical neglect and abuse has been opposed with breathtaking ferocity.”  The report details how states fail to require that parents let states know they are homeschooling children; fail to protect students from sexual abuse or violence; and fail to demand some kind of evidence that students are progressing academically.

Conditions that Promote Teaching and Learning     Along with the massive growth of  privatization, “Right-wing political forces have mounted a coordinated campaign against public education—eroding trust in neighborhood schools, creating hostile working conditions for teachers, and withdrawing support from the students who depend on them….  (N)umerous states have enacted laws that make the lives of transgender students significantly more difficult, while not fully protecting… LGBTQ students from bullying and discrimination.  Nearly half of all states still permit corporal punishment in schools.”  Class size has been increased, collective bargaining to ensure adequate teachers’ salaries has been undermined, and other conditions to attract highly qualified teachers have been undermined.

School Funding     NPE declares: “Research has firmly established a positive correlation between per-pupil (public school) spending and student learning.”  “This report tells a clear and troubling story.  Across the country, statehouses are making deliberate choices—choices that defund neighborhood schools, strip teachers of dignity and professional standing, leave vulnerable children without protection, and redirect billions of public dollars to private alternatives that are too often beyond public control… They are the predictable results of an ideological campaign decades in the making, whose architects have been candid about their ultimate goal: the elimination of public education as Americans have known it… States that most aggressively expand vouchers and charter schools are the same states that underfund their public schools, underpay their teachers, and provide the weakest protections for students… States with the most expansive ESA programs have produced the most egregious fraud… States that strip teachers of collective bargaining rights are the same states with the lowest teacher attractiveness ratings…the overlap is not coincidental.  Privatization and disinvestment are two sides of the same coin.”

The report grades each of the states overall for their protection of the public schools.”Seventeen states earned an F for their lack of support of public schools, students and educators while embracing privatization.” A second privatization grade identifies the states where schooling has been most damaged by privatization.  In both categories, Florida earns the lowest “F” grade, while Arizona’s grade is almost as bad.

NPE’s new report traces the impact of today’s national wave of school privation and the overall impact on our nation’s largest institution—a fifty-state system of public education. It cannot trace the convoluted history of any one state’s legislative and sometimes legal battle around school finance. It cannot examine the specific politics in any particular state that have contributed to the spread of today’s wave of privatization—of the role of gerrymandering, of particular regional funders of  state legislators’ political campaigns or the lobbyists who surround the statehouse. And it cannot examine the role of disparities caused by racial and economic injustice any particular state’s school funding.

The fact that such a report cannot possibly explore state-by-state detail, however, does not reduce the report’s significance. The Network for Public Education accomplishes an urgently important goal: identifying a national wave of educational injustice that has reached crisis proportions.  NPE concludes:

“Public schools are not merely institutions that deliver academic instruction. They are the places where children of every background, ability, faith, language, and circumstance are welcomed—not as paying customers, but as members of a community with an equal right to learn. They are governed by publicly elected boards, funded by public taxes, and accountable to the public in ways that no charter management company, no ESA vendor, and no private religious school is required to be… When public schools are weakened—through funding cuts, through the diversion of students and dollars, through the erosion of the teaching profession—the consequences fall hardest on the children least able to seek alternatives…  For those left behind in underfunded, understaffed public schools… (there) is no choice at all.”

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Democracy, Disruption, Education Industry, Equity, Funding, Network for Public Education, Privatization, School Choice, Vouchers

If You Vote in NYC’s District 12, Vote for Alex Bores, Not for Micah Lasher

By dianeravitch
June 22, 2026 //
1

There is a heated Democratic primary for Congress in NYC’s District 12.

Micah Lasher vs. Alex Bores.

Vote for Bores.

He has led the way in opposing the use of artificial intelligence in the schools.

Micah Lasher was the NYC Department of Education’s chief lobbyist during the Bloomberg era. Lasher helped get the charter cap lifted repeatedly and making it legal to co-locate charters in public schools for free. 

None of this was good for public schools, which saw charter freeloaders wedged into their buildings and taking away prime space.

Lasher then went on to head the NYC chapter of StudentsFirst, the pro-charter organization founded by Michelle Rhee. 

He is no friend to public schools.

Now, Bloomberg is spending $10M to get him elected to Congress. That explains why there are so many Lasher ads air on local TV.

Meanwhile, Bores has been a leader in the battle to regulate AI, and in the Legislature co-sponsored the RAISE Act, the strongest state bill so far requiring large AI developers to have a safety plan to prevent widespread harm and destruction.  As a result, according to NPR, “super PACs tied to investors in ChatGPT maker OpenAI unleashed a torrent of spending aimed at torpedoing his campaign.”   

 

Categories Accountability, Bloomberg, Michael, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Elections, New York City, Technology

Non-Stop Criticism of Public Schools Contributes to Privatization

By dianeravitch
June 16, 2026 //
6

The National Center on Education Policy frequently publishes reports, studies, and articles about important issues in education. This one makes a point that I have long believed: the rhetoric of “failing public schools” is intended to advance the privatization of public school funding, specifically, charter schools, voucher schools, and home schooling.

All of these are worse alternatives than public schools, but the media has lapped up the negative message.

The reality is that academic performance (test scores) is highly correlated with socioeconomic status. There are schools that are in need of smaller class sizes, physical upgrades, and intense professional support. But most parents are highly satisfied with their children’s public school and its teachers. Public schools offer more options than charter schools or religious schools. And most public schools are successful.

This study is titled: “The Cycle of Disinvestment in Public Schools: How Public-School Criticism Drives Policy and Disinvestment.” The study was written by Huriya Jabbar and Daniel Espinoza. The link is at the bottom of this post.

They say in the abstract:

Critiques of public education have intensified, and while some reflect real needs for improvement, many are manufactured crises that portray schools as broadly failing. Centered on claims of underachievement, inefficiency, inequality, lack of choice, and indoctrination, these narratives often ignore counterevidence on poverty’s impact, the benefits of increased funding, and the harms of large-scale voucher programs. Though targeted reforms are warranted, sweeping failure claims erode public support and fuel a cycle of disinvestment—reduced funding and enrollment that weaken schools and invite further criticism—advancing privatization and deepening inequality at a moment of heightened political and fiscal threats to public education.

Suggested Citation: Jabbar, H. & Espinoza, D. (2026). The cycle of disinvestment in public schools: How public school criticism drives policy and disinvestment. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center. Retrieved [date] from 
http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/disinvestmen

Categories Budget Cuts, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization, Propaganda, Separation of church and state, Vouchers

Tennessee: Lawsuit Opposes Ban on Religious Charter Schools

By dianeravitch
June 16, 2026 //
0

Melissa Brown of Chalkbeat wrote about a lawsuit in Tennessee that challenges the state’s ban on religious charter schools. Since the state is currently paying tuition at religious schools with vouchers, the lawsuit seeks to overturn the ban. The state is not defending the ban, inasmuch as its Republican leadership wants to pay tuition at religious schools.

Brown writes:

A Tennessee lawsuit challenging the Knox County Board of Education over the state’s religious charter school ban is heading to trial after a federal judge denied the board’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit. 

The Wilberforce Academy of Knoxville sued the school board last year after the local district asked it to affirm it planned to open a non-religious school, per state law. 

In federal court filings, the school board argued Wilberforce never actually submitted a charter school application, nor has it targeted state officials in its lawsuit, despite the school board following state law enforced by the Tennessee Department of Education. The board had asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit entirely.

We’re here to help.

Every day, Chalkbeat Tennessee is working to answer your questions, follow the money, and dig into what’s happening in local schools. Keep up with our free newsletter, delivered every Wednesday and Friday morning.Email (required)SIGN ME UP

By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Notice and European users agree to the data transfer policy. You may also receive occasional messages from sponsors.

But U.S. District Judge Charles E. Atchley, Jr. in late May ruled Wilberforce didn’t have to submit an actual application to challenge an “allegedly unconstitutional barrier” to applying. 

Neither party has commented on the lawsuit. 

Tennessee officials have left the Knox County board on its own to defend the state law, which Atchley noted in his May opinion. 

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti declined to intervene in the lawsuit earlier this year, months after he published a legal opinion that argued there was “no compelling interest” in excluding religious charter schools from participating in a “public benefit.”

Skrmetti’s office is also currently paying Wilberforce’s main attorney $400 per hour in a separate case to help Tennessee defend its criminal abortion ban against ongoing legal challenges.

The legal fight over religious charter schools in Tennessee – and the lack thereof from state officials – signal major changes may be on the horizon for the state’s charter landscape. 

null

This spring, lawmakers signed off on a new state law that now allows religious colleges and universities to operate public charter schools. Though the new law currently blocks those institutions from providing religious curriculum in their charter schools, it opens the door to a new class of charter operators in the state that could quickly stand up religious charters if the state’s religious charter ban law were to fall. 

And now public dollars are flowing to private religious schools through Tennessee’s voucher program, which is paying millions in private school tuition. 

In its lawsuit, Wilberforce focuses in part on this program, arguing the public education funds now funding private religious tuition support the case that religious charters should be included in public funding.

“This enshrined hostility to religious charter schools stands in marked contrast to Tennessee’s recent support of religious schools through its Education Freedom Scholarship Program,” a Wilberforce attorney argued in court documents last year.

A full trial on the lawsuit is scheduled for January 2027, and a group of Tennessee parents and non-religious charter school officials have also intervened in the lawsuit to oppose Wilberforce’s claims. 

They have argued opening the door to religious charter schools will result in charter schools being “classified and treated as private schools,” which could effect on things like Tennessee’s public school funding formula and disability protections. 

Categories Charter Schools, Religion, Republicans, Separation of church and state, Tennessee

NPE Rates States for Support of Their Public Schools: 17 States Get an F! How Did Your State Rank?

By dianeravitch
June 15, 2026 //
7

The Network for Public Education, which I co-founded with science teacher Anthony Cody in 2012-2013, supports the improvement of public schools and opposes privatization of public funding for schooling. Nearly 90% of children in the U.S. are enrolled in public schools. Their schools should be staffed by qualified teachers and fully funded. NPE works with state organizations that share our commitment to the principle: Public funds for public schools.

The following report was produced by NPE Executive Director Carol Burris and staff. Burris retired as a career teacher and award-winning high school principal.

NEW REPORT GIVES 17 STATES FAILING GRADES FOR ABANDONING PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Network for Public Education’s Most Comprehensive Report Card Finds Privatization and Disinvestment Go Hand in Hand

New York, New York

The Network for Public Education (NPE) released Public Schooling in America: Measuring Each State’s Commitment to Public Schools (2026), an expansive state-by-state assessment of support for public education. The report evaluates all 50 states and the District of Columbia across four categories: Privatization, Protections for Homeschooled Students, School Funding, and Conditions for Teaching and Learning. It documents a troubling national pattern: the statehouses most aggressively redirecting public money toward private alternatives are the most neglectful of their public schools, teachers, and students. NPE’s analysis found a strong, statistically significant negative relationship between privatization and policies that support public schools (p < 0.0001).

Only two states — Nebraska and Vermont — earned an A. Seventeen states received an F, failing to meet even 40% of the points allocated across NPE’s 39 standards. Florida ranked last, scoring 14 out of 102 possible points, with Arizona close behind. “The data confirm what we have long suspected: privatization and disinvestment go hand in hand,” said Carol Burris, Executive Director of NPE and the report’s author. “These are not states struggling with limited resources. They have made deliberate choices to abandon their public schools while directing billions in public dollars to private alternatives.”

The report draws on original research in addition to research from other organizations — including the Education Law Center, the Learning Policy Institute, and EdChoice — to deliver a comprehensive assessment of public education and privatization across 39 distinct factors. These include teacher-to-student ratios, teacher satisfaction, school funding levels, and the degree to which laws governing vouchers, charter schools, and homeschools protect both taxpayers and students.

Public Schooling in America also provides a roadmap for reform, showing policymakers and advocates exactly where laws and policies must change to better serve students and rein in the serious, well-documented problems created by privatized alternatives.

“Public schools are the only institutions in American life obligated to welcome every child, regardless of circumstance,” NPE President Diane Ravitch added. “They build community and democracy. They are as American as apple pie.”

The full report is available here. 

About the Network for Public Education

The Network for Public Education is a nonprofit advocacy organization dedicated to protecting, preserving, and strengthening public schools for every child in America.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Democracy, Education Industry, Education Reform, Funding, Privatization, School Choice, Supporting public schools

Colorado: Will Billionaires Buy the Governor’s Race?

By dianeravitch
June 4, 2026 //
2

Mike DeGuire, retired Denver educator, warned Coloradans that the usual billionaires are lining up behind Mike Bennett for the Democratic nomination for Governor. Bennett is currently a Senator but previously was Superintendent of Schools in Denver, where he promoted the NCLB agenda of test-and-punish, charters schools, and corporate reform. He never was an educator so he swallowed corporate reform hook, line, and sinker.

DeGuire wrote:

Colorado’s Democratic primary for governor between Attorney General Phil Weiser and U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet is heating up. TV ads are everywhere, and social media is abuzz with supporters extolling their favorite candidate’s strengths or the opponent’s weaknesses. Colorado has elected only one Republican governor in 50 years, so many pundits believe whoever wins the Democratic primary will likely win the November election. 

Money is becoming a big factor in this campaign. Bennet has a distinct advantage thus far, primarily due to one group of funders: billionaires. More than half of Bennet’s super PAC donations are from billionaires, individuals and groups affiliated with organizations run by billionaires, and from a “dark money” group. Research shows that billionaires “are swaying elections all across America.”

As of the May 18 filing deadline, Bennet had over $11.5 million in total donations compared to Weiser’s $7 million. Over $7 million of Bennet’s money is from his super PAC, Rocky Mountain Way, which includes over $1 million from an independent expenditure dark money organization called Brighter Future for Colorado. Weiser has $1.1 million from his super PAC, Fighting for Colorado, and just over $6 million from individual donations.

Michael Bloomberg is the 18th richest man in the world with a net worth of over $109 billion, and he is the largest individual donor to Bennet’s super PAC, giving $2.5 million thus far. But he is not the only billionaire donor in Bennet’s camp. These billionaires also contributed to Bennet’s super PAC: Steve Mandel and his wife ($175,000,); Tench Coxe and his wife ($100,000); Edythe Broad ($3,000); Marc Heising ($75,000); Eric Mindich ($25,000); Deborah Simon ($25,000); and Robert Fanch ($25,938).

In addition to the billionaires’ money, over a dozen hedge fund managers and venture capitalists contributed between $10,000 and $100,000 each to Bennet’s super PAC. The ultra-wealthy use their donations to gain loyalty from candidates who will enact policies that align with their values and protect their wealth through tax breaks, financial incentives and limited regulations on their corporations. They also use nonprofit foundations to fund organizations they support philosophically. 

Tax filings published by ProPublica for the years 2022-24 show that billionaires Reed Hastings and John Arnold used their nonprofit, City Fund, to give money to Denver Families for Public Schools, which contributed $45,000 to Bennet. The former CEO of City Fund, Neerav Kingsland, donated $2,000. The Bloomberg Family Foundation donated millions to the Charter School Growth Fund. That nonprofit also funds the Colorado League of Charter Schools which, along with 50Can and Stand for Children, gave $470,000 to Bennet’s super PAC. Bloomberg’s dark money group, the American Opportunity Action, gave $45,000. The total investment from Bloomberg and other billionaire-funded nonprofits surpasses $3 million. 

Bloomberg’s support for Bennet’s candidacy reflects a relationship and shared philosophy on education reform that stretches back nearly two decades. Before Bennet entered the U.S. Senate, he served as Denver’ school superintendent from 2005 to 2009, the same time that Bloomberg was serving as New York mayor, where he had control of the city’s schools. Like Bennet, Bloomberg promoted corporate education reforms, oversaw the expansion of charter schools, test-based accountability systems, and market-oriented policies. 

Both Bennet and Bloomberg ran for president in 2020. Bloomberg spent over $37 million of his own money on his unsuccessful campaign. Bennet received money for his candidacy from over 32 billionaires who were hedging their bets on who would eventually win the party’s nomination. Several billionaires supporting Bennet for president included some of the richest people in Colorado: the Ergen family, Pat Stryker and Ken Tuchman.

While Bloomberg often wins when he donates money to candidates, there are exceptions. Last year, Bloomberg joined with 26 other billionaires to support former Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the New York mayoral race, donating $13 million to his campaign. New Yorkers resoundingly said no to the billionaire money and elected Zohran Mamdani. 

The money involved so far in this year’s gubernatorial Democratic primary pales in comparison to the $34 million spent in the last contested Colorado Democratic primary, in 2018.Many observers believe that Gov. Jared Polis basically bought the governor’s seat by contributingmore than $22 million of his own money to defeat three other candidates. Bloomberg was also involved in the 2018 gubernatorial race, donating $2 million to Mike Johnston who came in third to Polis. Five years later, Bloomberg helped Johnston win his 2023 race for Denver mayor when he and another billionaire, Reid Hoffman, donated nearly $2 million to Johnston’s election. 

Ballots drop June 8 for the June 30 Democratic primary. Will the independent and Democratic voters buck the trend of billionaires swaying elections and elect Weiser, or will this billionaire investment pay off for Bennet? 

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Bloomberg, Michael, Charter Schools, Colorado, Corporate Reform, Education Industry, Elections, School Choice, Standardized Testing

How States Can Stop Religious Charter Schools

By dianeravitch
May 28, 2026 //
2

The U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to approve religious charter schools. Given their disregard for the principle of separation of church and state, the majority might approve the idea. This would be yet another raid on the funding of public schools.

We hope this information is helpful to your state.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 26, 2026

Network for Public Education Applauds New Research Brief Warning States of Religious Charter School Threat

Researchers Offer Clear Legislative Path to Ensure Charter Schools Cannot Engage in Discrimination

[New York, New York] — The Network for Public Education (NPE) today praised the release of a critical new policy brief examining the looming threat posed by anticipated U.S. Supreme Court decisions on religious charter schools. Avoiding the Supreme Court’s Religious Charter-School Trap: Governance Change for the New Legal Era, authored by Kevin G. Welner (University of Colorado Boulder), Carol Burris (NPE Executive Director), and Preston C. Green III (University of Connecticut), offers states a concrete legislative roadmap to safeguard public education before it is too late.

Forty-two states and the District of Columbia face sweeping changes to their charter school systems as the Supreme Court appears poised to deliver what the brief calls a “one-two punch.” In the coming terms, the Court is expected first to establish a free-exercise right for taxpayer-funded religious schools to engage in faith-based discrimination, and then to prohibit states from excluding religious organizations from running independent charter schools — effectively exempting religious charter schools from the anti-discrimination and accountability laws that apply to all public schools.  

The brief makes clear, however, that states are not helpless to act.  States that structure charter governance through public entities — rather than private, independent organizations — are shielded from the Court’s free-exercise reasoning. Four states, Alaska, Kansas, Maryland, and Virginia, already place all charter schools under publicly elected school boards and are therefore already protected. Nine additional states allow district-governed charters as well as independent charters, thus shielding some of their charter sector.  

“State legislators can head off the Court’s radical change by strengthening the fundamental publicness of their charter schools,” said Welner. “Legislators can protect the charter-school sectors against the imposed transformation by changing how they are governed.”

NPE President Diane Ravitch applauds this research for providing exactly the kind of actionable guidance that policymakers urgently need. “District-governed charter schools not only preserve civil rights protections and constitutional safeguards — they also provide stronger financial oversight, reduce the risk of mismanagement and fraud, and give voice through their elected school boards.”

The full brief is available at: https://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/religious-charter

###

The Network for Public Education is a nonprofit advocacy organization committed to protecting, preserving, and strengthening public schools.

Categories Accountability, Budget Cuts, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Funding, Religion, Separation of church and state

Peter Greene: A New Definition of “School Choice” in Ohio

By dianeravitch
May 19, 2026 //
5

Peter Greene describes the hypocrisy at the center of school choice. Its partisans talk about giving parents the power to choose the school they want. The truth is that the school they want doesn’t have to admit them. Schools choose the students they want. “School choice” literally means schools choose. That may explain why every state that offers universal vouchers is paying the tuition of kids who were already enrolled in private schools.

Greene writes:

Around 200 school districts in Ohio sued the state over its voucher program, a program that funnels a billion dollars (give or take a few million) to private schools (most of them religious). Last summer, the Franklin County Judge Jaiza Page, ruled that EdChoice is mostly unconstituttional. That, of course, triggered an appeal (and some special legislator crankiness) and that appeal seems to have triggered a whole new definition of school choice.

The Institute for Justice, one more education privatization law shop, has been working on the state’s case, and after the Franklin County decision they were pointing at Simmons-Harris v. Goff, an old case that supported a different version of choice. They also mentioned the argument that the parental right to direct a child’s education requires a school choice system. And the state has also been claiming that having two separately operated but equally swell school systems is totally okay. Because “separate but equal” has always been a winning argument in education.

The Ohio 10th District Appellate Court panel of judges heard arguments from the parties (the school district count is now up to 330) and seemed to notice a problem with that whole “parental rights” argument. 

Parents don’t actually get to choose.

Judge David Leland posited hypothetical gay parents of a student living in a rural area with just one private school. The school could reject that student, and then parental choice available would be… what?

As reported by Laura Hancock at Cleveland.com:

“All the parents do is apply to private schools,” Leland said. “The schools are the ones who make the choice. They’re the ones who decide. Unlike a public school … the public schools have to take everybody. That’s the requirement in public education so that everybody in society would have an equal opportunity to get a good education and grow to the extent of their ability.”

That’s when the state floated its new definition of school choice:

Stephen Carney, an appellate lawyer with the Ohio Attorney General’s office, argued that parents nonetheless have a choice in applying. That’s why it’s considered school choice, he said.

Got it? Parents have a choice of where to apply, and that’s school choice. 

First, that’s silly. I have a choice to apply for a mortgage for a multi-million dollar house. That’s not the same as being able to choose that house. 

Second, if that’s what school choice means, then everyone in the state already had school choice before any voucher program was ever started! Every parent in the state always had the ability to apply for their child’s admission to any private school. 

This is not what anyone ever thought school choice promised, though it is an accurate definition of what it delivers. 

It’s one more reminder that the voucher crowd is not actually interested in school choice, because they consistently avoid addressing the actual obstacles to parents who want to choose a private school– tuition cost and discriminatory policies. EdChoice is not about providing actual school choice; it’s just about finding ways to funnel public tax dollars to private mostly-religious schools. 

If the 10th District panel upholds the ruling against, that will simply grease the wheels carrying the case up to the state (mostly-GOP) supreme court. Can’t wait to see what arguments the state uses there, but I’m betting they’ll keep the wheels on those goalposts.

Categories Accountability, Bigotry, Charter Schools, Disruption, Education Industry, Fake, Ohio, Privatization, School Choice, Vouchers
« Older Entries