Archives for category: Education Reform

In a recent special election, teacher Jacob Rosecrantz won election to the Oklahoma House of Representatives. They need him.

I asked him to write a short entry for the Blog.

This is what he wrote:

“My name is Jacob Rosecrants. I’m a father of two kiddos who go to public schools, and I’m a teacher at Roosevelt Middle School, located in the inner city part of Southwest Oklahoma City.

“I recently was elected as the next State Representative of House District 46, which covers West Norman and Noble, Oklahoma, running on a very pro-public schools platform.

“I became involved in politics almost immediately after I began my first year of teaching in 2012. Corporate reform featuring high-stakes tests was the newest fad for our schools.

“It is a joyless way to teach for educators and a horrible way for students to learn. After attending rallies at my state Capitol, I got the sense that our public schools were being viewed as a cash cow for testing companies and their lobbyists. I made it my mission to fight against all corporate school reform. This brings us to the question: What can I do to help our schools?

“Our public school system has dealt with the largest budget cuts in the nation. Our teachers are now officially the lowest paid in the nation. Anti-public school legislators rule the roost at the State House, supported by groups such as Oklahoma Federation for Children (backed by the voucher-happy Betsy DeVos) and “school and parent choice” advocates who believe that our schools should be run like businesses.

“I’m currently going to enter the Capitol as a member of the minority party; in fact the Republicans enjoy a super-majority in our Senate, House, and the Governor’s mansion. This super-majority will not even let bills that were generated by the Democrats be heard on the floor, even if that bill would be supported by the majority of people.

“What I can do in this environment is limited.

“But I will most definitely be an independent voice for our schools and our children. I will fight against all forms of school vouchers. I will educate my constituents about the meaning of “school and parent choice”, and how those terms are really just putting lipstick on a big corporate reform pig.

“During this past election, my voters were subjected to slanderous mail pieces featuring me paid for by Oklahoma Federation for Children. This was a full-on onslaught against me and my pro-public schools platform. There is a proverbial war under way here, with corporate school reform and charters (and their ALEC bought and paid for legislators) on one side, and an ever-rising wave of public school advocates, including parents, teachers, and other stakeholders, who are so concerned about our schools and the funding issues that they saw fit to elect an actual classroom teacher this past Tuesday.

“The battle may have been won, but this war continues every day, and I cannot wait to get in the trenches at the State Capitol in these upcoming months; a warrior for our public schools and core services.

“Jacob Rosecrants
“Representative-Elect of Oklahoma House District 46”

Editor:

The Oklahoma Federation for Children is part of Betsy DeVos’ American Federation for Children, as he notes. That means Jacob beat DeVos!

Categories Betsy DeVos, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Oklahoma, Privatization

This Is NOT a Photo of a “Populist”: Trump And Family and Staff

By dianeravitch

October 4, 2017 //

The previous post discussed the origins and goals of the Populist Party. Today, the media have forgotten what the true populists were. They spoke for the “little man,” the farmers and laborers who were being crushed by the wealthy and powerful. They allied with unions. Now that you know what a Populist was, back in the day when they existed and when people had some historical knowledge, this picture below shows what a Populist is not.

[intro]

t-caroline-taylor-mar-a-lago-donald-trump-florida-hotel

Categories Education Reform

What is Populism? Why Trump, Bannon, and Breitbart Are NOT Populists

By dianeravitch

October 4, 2017 //

Words matter.

Trump has been called a “populist.” The Brexit movement has been called “populist.” Marie LePen, who ran for president of France on an anti-immigration platform, was called a “populist.” Bannon and his anti-Establishment movement funded by the billionaire Mercers are called “populists.” No doubt, someone thinks the Koch brothers are “populists.”

None of these people are populists, not in the literal sense of representing ordinary folk, nor in the historical sense of connecting to a movement that surfaced in the late 1890s.

Populism as a movement means “for the people,” for the ordinary people, for working people. It should not be confused with appeals to nationalism, racism, and chauvinism. Demagogues appeal to base instincts, but they are not populists by doing so.

If you support a plan to take away health insurance from millions of people, you are not a populist. If you support tax reform that cuts the taxes of the richest people in society (for example, by eliminating the estate tax and by reducing the tax rates for those with the highest income), you are not a populist. If you support the privatizing of public services so that they can be transferred to private ownership, you are not a populist. If you support the privatization of public education, you are neither a populist nor a progressive, because both movements fought to expand government services, not to privatize them.

The Populist Party of the late nineteenth century emerged to fight against the rich and powerful interests of the day on behalf of working men, farmers, and the powerless. The Populist movement of a century ago–also known as the People’s Party–genuinely wanted leftwing reforms that favored the great mass of people, not the rich. It wanted the protection of government, not its destruction. It defended common folk and farmers against the bankers, the railroads, and powerful capitalists. It allied with the labor movement. It was a leftwing movement for the empowerment of the voiceless. The Populists were part of an agrarian revolt against the powerful interests that ruled their lives, especially the banks and the railroads.

Bannon and his billionaire buddies, including Trump and Mercer, are subversives who want to destroy the government and destroy programs that protect the neediest among us.

When Trump rails against the elites, it is a joke. He is a billionaire, not a farmer or a dispossessed laborer. He does not speak for the poor or for working people, though he sometimes pretends to. A populist does not live in mansions with a large staff of servants. A populist does not own golf clubs, hotels, and casinos. A populist does not play to ethnic and racial hatreds. A populist seeks to unite the common folk to advance an economic agenda that protects them from being preyed upon by people like Trump and Bannon and the Koch brothers and the Mercers.

Calling them “populists” not only distorts the actual and historical meaning of the word, but gives them the veneer of sympathy for the working poor that they cynically manipulate.

In Europe, those who are wrongly called “populist” are more accurately referred to as nationalists, or in extreme cases, as fascists who want to purify the ethnic stock of their country.

Disagree if you will, but read more about Populism before you do.

Here is the Populist Party Platform Of 1892.

Categories Education Reform, History

How U.S. Gun Culture Compares With the Rest of the World

By dianeravitch

October 3, 2017 //

This is an interesting story that compares our nation’s gun ownership with other nations.

We pay a huge price for our gun obsession.

“Americans own the most guns per person in the world, about four in 10 saying they either own a gun or live in a home with guns, according to a recent Pew Center study. Forty-eight percent of Americans said they grew up in a house with guns.

“According to the survey, a majority (66%) of US gun owners own multiple firearms, with nearly three-quarters of gun owners saying they couldn’t imagine not owning one.

“Yemen, home to the world’s second-largest gun-owning population per capita (and a country in the throes of a two-and-a-half-year civil conflict) trails significantly behind the US in terms of ownership.

“When it comes to gun massacres, the US is an anomaly.

“There are more public mass shootings in America than in any other country in the world….

“Globally, restrictive gun laws have proven to make a difference in curbing massacres.

“In Australia, for example, four mass shootings occurred between 1987 and 1996. After those incidents, public opinion turned against gun ownership and Parliament passed stricter gun laws. Australia hasn’t had a mass shooting since.”

Categories Education Reform

Steven Singer: Why Nothing Will Change After Las Vegas Massacre

By dianeravitch

October 3, 2017 //

Steven Singer says nothing will change after the slaughter in Las Vegas. The National Rifle Association owns enough Congressmen to loosen gun regulations, to tighten them. Trump loves the NRA. He was the first president to address them.

What if everyone in the crowd were carrying their own AK-47? How would that have stopped the slaughter?

Steven writes:

“Wake up, America.

“We are not the land of the brave or the home of the free.

“We are the land of the gun and the home of the free market.

“Stephen Paddock’s killing spree last night in Las Vegas will not change anything – except the bottom line for numerous gun manufacturers.

“Ca-ching, people!

“Scores of American companies are going to clean up over this!

“That’s what happens every time we get a high profile mass shooting.

“Not new gun regulation. Not additional services for the mentally ill. Not stricter guidelines against fake news on social media.

“Just tons of money pouring into gun manufacturers pockets as firearm aficionados rush to buy as many additional pieces as they can in the fear that tomorrow the government will come for their guns.

“You think this has anything to do with the Second Amendment or the right to bear arms?

“Wrong.

“It’s about putting business over humanity. It’s about our culture of death overtaking everything else.

“Look at the facts.

“A 64-year-old retiree used a cache of almost 20 guns to spray bullets on a crowd of concertgoers. He killed at least 58 people [59 at last count] and wounded more than 500 others.

“To do so, police say he had at least one fully-automatic rifle, an AR-15-style and AK-47-style rifle, more than a dozen additional firearms, and a ton of ammunition.

“Any sane society that values human life would do something to stop things like this from happening again.

“It is almost impossible to inflict this kind of death toll in such a short time without these types of firearms.

“It’s the guns, stupid!”

Categories Education Reform

Jimmy Kimmel on the Las Vegas Massacre

By dianeravitch

October 3, 2017 //

Jimmy Kimmel comes from Las Vegas.

Watch his commentary.

Strange when we get more intelligent response from a talk show host that from DC.

Categories Education Reform

Lloyd Lofthouse Explains the Historical Context of the Second Amendment

By dianeravitch

October 2, 2017 //

Lloyd Lofthouse, military veteran and teacher, explains:

Another reason for the 2nd Amendment was this:

In 1800, 94-percent of the people lived in rural areas and there were two reasons for owning a firearm. Rural in 1800 was not the rural of today. There were no roads and it could take an entire day to travel 15 – 20 miles on horseback or on foot. There were no phones so you could call 911. The closest neighbors were often miles away.

The two reasons back in 1800:

*to hunt for wild game to put meat on the table and to protect you and your family from wild animals that would eat you.

*to defend your family against the Indians defending the land they had lived on for 15,000 years against the citizens of the United STates invading that land. Also to defend you and your family from violent bullies like Trump and most of his cabinet who thought they could take anything they want even your wife and daughters.

Out in those rural areas where most of the people lived, there was no law or police or military most of the time. If you couldn’t defend yourself, you were soon to be dust.

That situation does not exist today where more than 75 percent of the people live in crowded urban areas without the fear of wild animals or Indians wanting to kill you.

Powerful firearms in a crowded urban area are dangerous because a bullet that you fire to defend yourself can pass through the bad guy if you hit them and go through several walls and kill more than one person even children in cribs.

The only firearm necessary for home defense is a shotgun and someone that hunts for sport can hunt with a bolt action rifle or a bow and arrow if they are really into sport hunting.

The population in 1800 was 6.3 million. Lots of room to shoot bullets and not hit anyone.

The population today is more than 320 million. Lots of people to easily hit with one bullet or even more with more bullets.

What goes up comes down. With all those people when someone fires off a round to celebrate the 4th of July or the New Year, that bullet that was shot into the sky could come down and kill an innocent person that lives nearby.

In 1800 when your closest neighbor usually lives miles away, you could walk outside and shoot as much as you want and the odds of hitting another person were almost non-existent.

Who will stand up to the NRA?

Who will hold them accountable for mass murders?

Categories Education Reform

The Perversion of the Second Amendment

By dianeravitch

October 2, 2017 //

The Founding Fathers did not anticipate the world as it is today. They laid out general principles for self-government. They surely did not imagine a people armed with semi-automatic weapons, bazookas, and machine guns.

Reader GregB offers this insight:

Today’s event prompted me to look through some old notes I made after reading Henry Adams’ “History of the United States During the Madison Administration” a few years ago:

Adam’s account is dominated by a history of the War of 1812 and provides a lesson of why the 2nd amendment was included in the Constitution.

It was an era of American sectional division, which Adams summed up poetically: “At the beginning of the year 1814, the attitude of New England pleased no one, and perhaps annoyed most the New England people themselves, who were conscious of showing neither dignity, power, courage, nor intelligence.” But a long-forgotten legacy of the war was that it was the first of many eras in which the Constitution was tested and “violated more frequently by its friends than by its enemies.” We find ourselves in just such quandary today when it comes to the willful misinterpretations of the 2nd amendment: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of the State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Today’s 2nd amendment fetishists prefer a selective reading, valuing willful fiction over actual history. If they care about the difference, they should give Adams a try. In its early history, the United States was a fragile country teetering on the precipice of failure as a nation. It had a weak standing army, no navy to speak of, and mostly relied on the formation of citizen militias in the event of war against foreign nation or Native Americans. For this to work citizens had to have the right to keep weapons; the government had no stockpiles on which to rely. The 2nd amendment was also never intended to provide citizen with the means to overthrow some mythical tyrannical American government; it was designed to give citizens the tools needed that were “necessary to the security of the State.” It was designed to protect government, not undermine it.

The War of 1812 was the first—and only—time the idea of “A well-regulated Militia” was ever put to the test. And it was mostly a failure. As Adams chronicles, Americans won the war largely in spite of themselves. Thanks to some strategic victories, British support lines that were unsustainably long and skillful diplomacy by John Quincy Adams, the United States was able to prevail. But it also led to the formation of a stronger standing Army, which saw its first major action a few decades later in the Mexican War. The idea of “well-regulated Militia[s]” became obsolete, as did, with time, a rational reading and understanding of the 2nd amendment.

As I watch the perversion of the 2nd amendment used as a basis to justify daily destruction and carnage in the United States, I often think of this account of the War of 1812. Henry Adams reminds us of why history is important to contemporary life. Agendas built on historical ignorance can be deadly.

Categories Education Reform

Gun Violence in the U.S.: Sickening.

By dianeravitch

October 2, 2017 //

139

With the empowerment of the National Rifle Association, gun violence will escalate.

The NRA has bloodstained hands.

My heart is broken for the victims of the massacre in Las Vegas.

How did that shooter get military machine guns?

Did he pass a background check?

Why are military weapons available to non military persons?

I understand that hunters love their rifles but I assume they don’t shoot deer with machine guns or assault rifles. Yet these weapons are freely available at gun shows and on the internet. Why?

If I lived in another country, I would not visit the U.S.

It is too dangerous.

Categories Education Reform