New Hampshire: Voucher Bills Split Along Partisan Lines

By dianeravitch
January 22, 2024 //
3

Garry Rayno writes a consistently informative report on legislative activity in New Hampshire.

In his latest report, he describes the partisan split concerning ghe state’s voucher program, euphemistically called “Education Freedom Accounts,” which means that taxpayer money will follow if you leave public schools.

The voucher program has already exceeded the costs projected by the state Department of Education. The state commissioner, appointed by Governor Chris Sununu, is Frank Edelblut, who home-schooled his 10 children. He is no fan of public schools.

Republicans, who are in the majority in both houses, have proposed expanding the voucher program and raising the income limits. Their ultimate goal appears to be a universal voucher program where everyone is eligible for a voucher.

Democrats have proposed laws to limit the number of students who get vouchers, to require that income limits are enforced beyond the first year of use, to ban vouchers in religious schools, and to impose accountability on voucher schools.

Rayno writes:

Few programs in state government have an open-ended budget limit, instead most have to stay within the budget lawmakers set.

Some federal programs where the state shares the costs such as Medicaid do not have set limits, but have to serve all who qualify under federal guidelines.

But the fairly new Education Freedom Account program approved three years ago in the state’s two-year budget package has no limit on what is spent from the state’s Education Trust Fund. Sort of like Santa Clause this time of year.

Although the program is fairly new, many attempts have been made to change it during the past two years and this the third session since its passage is no different.

Supporters want to expand the eligibility for students, while opponents and skeptics seek to put restraints and accountability measures on the program that has grown 158 percent since its inception, while the cost has increased 174 percent in figures released earlier this year by the Department of Education.

The future of vouchers depends on which party wins control of the legislature in November.

Categories Accountability, Education Industry, Funding, New Hampshire, Privatization, School Choice, Vouchers

Texas: When Billionaires Fund the News….

By dianeravitch
January 22, 2024 //
6

This story by Michael Hardy was published by the Texas Monthly. It goes to the heart of serious problems in today’s journalism: is the Internet destroying the audience for daily newspapers? Can daily newspapers survive? The Baltimore Sun was just purchased by the rightwing Sinclair Network, which already owns a large number of local radio stations. Can newspapers be independent when they are owned by billionaires with a political agenda?

Billionaire Jeff Bezos bought The Washington Post but he doesn’t seem to have imposed his political views on the newspaper. Billionaire Rupert Murdoch famously bought The New York Post, the Wall Street Journal, and Fox News. He has pushed his properties to match his politics.

The Los Angeles Times was purchased by a billionaire doctor, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, in 2018. He has not imposed his politics, but he has ordered drastic layoffs in newsroom personnel, which led to a one-day walkout last Friday by the newsroom guild, the first such work stoppage in the newspaper’s 142-year history. The pending layoffs would be the third round of cuts since June.

This is not a good sign for the health of our democracy.

The death of major newspapers over the past few decades has created “news deserts,” regions where there are no newspapers. It is more important than ever to support local journalism, which provide the sole source of information about local events, school board elections and meetings, elections, and local government.

Into the gap comes a new form of journalism, the nonprofit newspaper. Most such enterprises are supported by subscribers, advertisers, and foundation gifts. I support the Mississippi Free Press, which does an amazing job of covering news in the state. I also support the Texas Observer, which is a low-budget newspaper whose scrappy staff is known for investigative journalism. (I also subscribe to The Texas Tribune and The Texas Monthly).

In some cases, even the nonprofits depend on billionaires to keep them afloat. As this story shows, relying on billionaires can be hazardous. In some cases, their gifts come with long strings attached.

In a recent issue of The Texas Monthly, Michael Hardy reported what happened to a new nonprofit journal called the Houston Landung.

In its mission statement, the nonprofit Houston Landing describes itself as an “independent, nonpartisan news organization devoted to public service journalism,” one that “offer[s] solutions to pressing problems” and “holds the powerful accountable.” Its stories are free to read, and its website runs no ads or clickbait. Its vision of an independent, well-funded outlet built on rigorous investigative reporting attracted some of the city’s brightest journalism stars after its soft launch two years ago with financial backing from the philanthropic American Journalism Project and Houston billionaires John Arnold and Richard Kinder.

Among its first hires were Houston Chronicle investigations editor Mizanur Rahman, who became the Landing’s editor in chief (and helped write the mission statement), and the Chronicle’s Pulitzer Prize–winning reporter Alex Stuckey, who became the Landing’s top investigative journalist. Rahman and Stuckey helped build a newsroom of about thirty editors, reporters, photographers, and web designers that routinely punched above its weight, producing major stories about an epidemic of deaths in Harris County jails and a plague of stopped trains in Houston’s East End. Since the website’s official debut in June, it has regularly scooped the competition—including Texas Monthly—on stories ranging from the state takeover of Houston ISD to predatory lending at the Colony Ridge development north of Houston.

The Landing’s success made it all the more shocking when, on Monday morning, Rahman and Stuckey were summarily fired by CEO Peter Bhatia, a fifty-year newspaper veteran and former Detroit Free Press editor in chief who had been in the job for less than a year. Bhatia is longtime friends with Landing board member Jeff Cohen, a senior advisor at Houston philanthropy organization Arnold Ventures—a major funder of the Landing—and a former Chronicle editor in chief. The six-member board of directors appears to have brought Bhatia in to shake things up at the website. (None of the Landing’s six board members agreed to interview requests for this story; the author of this story worked briefly under Cohen at the Chronicle in 2017 and did sporadic freelance copy writing for the Arnold Ventures website from 2019 to 2020.)

“Over recent months I’ve become concerned about whether or not we were fully engaged in the process of being effective in the digital spaces,” Bhatia told Texas Monthly this week. “We’ve been putting out a newspaper on a website. There’s been some really good journalism and some high-impact stuff, for sure. But after a lot of conversations with Mizanur, I reached the conclusion that we had to make a change if we’re going to be as effective as we can in the digital space.” A document prepared for the November meeting of the Landing’s board and obtained by Texas Monthly showed that the site exceeded its 2023 goal for annual page views (1.5 million) and was within striking distance of its goal for unique visitors (1 million). For comparison, the nonprofit San Antonio Report, founded in 2012, claims 500,000 monthly page views.

Stuckey told Texas Monthly that she was blindsided by her firing. Just two weeks earlier, she had received a glowing performance review and a 3 percent pay raise. In a recording of Monday’s termination meeting provided by Stuckey, Bhatia can be heard saying he has “enormous respect for you as a journalist . . . you are an investigative reporter of the highest level.” But, he explains, there is no place for her in the “comprehensive reset” he believes is necessary at the Landing.

“If you had ever come to me and said, ‘I want you to revamp how you do stories,’ I would have done that in a heartbeat,” Stuckey tells him.

“It’s not my job to do that,” Bhatia replies. “It’s the editor’s job.”

“So I’m getting cut off at the knees because you felt that Mizanur didn’t do that?”

“Well, you can jump to that conclusion.”

At the end of the meeting, human resources director Susie Hermsen offered Stuckey three months of severance pay if she signed a nondisparagement agreement. Stuckey refused. “I believe in transparency,” she can be heard saying in the recording. “This is insanity, and I am absolutely not signing anything.”

The Landing’s newsroom was similarly dumbfounded by the firings. Much of the staff converged upon the organization’s sixth-floor office, in Houston’s Montrose neighborhood, on Monday to show solidarity with Rahman and Stuckey. Later, the staff wrote a collective letter to the Landing’s board of directors warning of “significant damage to employee retention and recruitment” and predicting that “the optics of such a massive restructuring during a moment of forward momentum will hurt our fundraising and financial efforts.”

Bhatia acknowledged that the newsroom was in open revolt against his leadership. “I have no illusion that some people are going to leave over this, and I respect that,” he told Texas Monthly. The Landing’s managing editor, John Tedesco, will temporarily take over for Rahman while Bhatia leads a search for a new editor in chief. Tedesco told me that he disagrees with the decision to fire Rahman and Stuckey and fears that “this turmoil will cause our best and brightest journalists to look for the nearest exit ramp.”

The Landing is one of dozens of local nonprofit newsrooms that have sprung up around the country in the past couple of decades. Often funded by a combination of wealthy donors, foundation grants, NPR-style membership drives, and paid events, these nonprofits have been touted as a supplement or even a replacement for declining local newspapers. But some observers worry that such publications are beholden to the whims of their billionaire patrons. (Texas Monthly is a for-profit magazine whose chairman is Houston billionaire Randa Duncan Williams.)

Where did the staff go wrong? Did they write anything critical of charter schools (billionaire John Arnold has poured many millions into promoting charters)? Or did they praise pensions for public service workers (another of Mr. Arnold’s pet peeves)? Or was it something that stepped on the toes of the other billionaire funder, Mr. Kinder? The publication was launched with $20 million, so it would not have been a financial issue.

This is what Thomas Jefferson said about the importance of a free press:

Jefferson believed that a free press was necessary to keep government in check. He wrote that if he had to choose between “a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter”:

The people are the only censors of their governors: and even their errors will tend to keep these to the true principles of their institution. To punish these errors too severely would be to suppress the only safeguard of the public liberty. The way to prevent these irregular interpositions of the people is to give them full information of their affairs thro’ the channel of the public papers, & to contrive that those papers should penetrate the whole mass of the people. The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers & be capable of reading them.

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Democracy, Ethics, Freedom of the Press, Funding, Houston, Texas

Leonie Haimson: The Myth of Accountability Under Mayoral Control

By dianeravitch
January 21, 2024 //
7

Leonie Haimson is a tireless advocate for better public schools and reduced class sizes. She leads a small but powerful organization called Class Size Matters. I am a member of her board (unpaid, of course, as she is).

CSM is powerful because Leonie is tireless. She attends meetings of the City Council, the Panel on Education Policy (I.e., the Board of Education); she testifies at City Council hearings and goes to Albany to testify when the education committees meet. She finds lawyers to work pro bono and files lawsuit to seek more funding for the schools. She works with parent groups to support or oppose the latest decision by the mayor. She meets with elected representatives. She writes op-Ed’s for the local press. She almost single-handedly collapsed Bill Gates’ inBloom, which hoped to collect personally identifiable information about every student in every state. She scrutizes the budget of the NYC public schools, even more intensely than those who are paid to do it. She once blocked a bad deal that saved the city $600 million, by exposing the sordid record of the contractor.

The elected officials in Albany are now considering whether to renew mayoral control of the public schools. Michael Bloomberg persuaded the Legislature to give him control soon after he was elected in 2001. He promised all sorts of miraculous improvements. He would be accountable, he said.

Leonie testified recently at a hearing on mayoral control and explained that mayoral control did not increase accountability. In fact, it decreased accountability. No one listened to parents. One of Bloomberg’s chancellors (his second, who lasted only 90 days) mocked parents who expressed their grievances at a public hearing.

The mayor hired a lawyer with no experience in education to be the schools’ chancellor. He did not trust educators and surrounded himself with people from the corporate sector.

The mayor had a majority of appointments on the city’s “Panel on Education Policy,” a toothless replacement for its Board of Education. When the members of the Panel threatened to reverse one of his decisions, he fired the disobedient appointees on the spot and replaced them with others who served his wishes.

The mayor could do whatever he wanted, regardless of the views of teachers, parents, students, communities. Beloved public schools that served the neediest of students were closed and replaced with small schools that did not accept the neediest of students. He opened scores of charter schools that were free to reject or exclude students they did not want, then crowed about their test scores. (Now a private citizen, Bloomberg continues to give hundreds of millions to charter schools; no big deal for him, as his assets exceed $60 billion).

Leonie stands on a solid foundation of knowledge, experience, and persistence. Sometimes I think she wins battles because the electeds don’t want her to pester them anymore.

She is the undisputed champion of reduced class sizes.

More power to her!

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Bloomberg, Michael, Charter Schools, Class size, Class Size Matters Org, Corporate Reform, Courage, Democracy, Education Industry, Elections, History, Klein, Joel, New York City

Beware Deep Fake Videos! Protect Our Democracy!

By dianeravitch
January 21, 2024 //
18

Regular readers of this blog may have noticed (or not) that I never mention artificial intelligence. I think it’s ominous. I don’t like simulations of real people. I don’t like technology that can write even better than most humans. I prefer to deal directly with humans, not fakes.

Artifial intelligence may be deployed as a deceptive weapon in the upcoming elections.

2024 is a crucial year in our politics. On the ballot in the primaries and in the general election will be candidates who are offering theocracy, dictatorship, or democracy. They will use AI to woo and confuse voters.

New Hampshire blogger and former state senator Jeanne Dietsch has posted a warning about deep fake videos. The video she posts is titled “This Is Not Morgan Freeman.” The face is Morgan Freeman, the voice is Morgan Freeman. But it is not Morgan Freeman.

She also offers a warning about the three factions that are competing in New Hampshire.

She writes:

Elected officials no longer act as individuals. They vote as teams. In NH we have three types of teams:

  • “LIBERTY” CANDIDATES who do not believe in majority rule or public services. They want to privatize education, public lands and government services. They believe the only behaviors that should be illegal are theft and bodily harm. People may make fentanyl, pollute the water supply, sell body parts, or do anything else on their private property. That includes corporations that want to buy up state forests to lumber or entire swaths of housing to rent.
  • FASCIST & THEOCRATIC CANDIDATES also want to replace democracy with minority rule. Unlike liberty candidates, they want stricter laws set by a dictator or by religious leaders. Their goal is to control society, as in Putin’s Russia or a Christian version of Iran.
  • PRO-DEMOCRACY CANDIDATES may disagree on how large government should be and many other issues. However, they will stand up against those who support lawlessness or dictatorship. They will ensure we regularly hold fair elections. They believe in the rule of law.

Political parties no longer define the teams in this state. Undeclared voters outnumber either party by a third. In 2020, the “liberty” team temporarily took over the NH House Republican Caucus. Even though they were a minority of the 400 House members, they controlled the agenda. Pro-democracy legislators in both parties were powerless.

The story in DC is similar. The functions of the American republic are being held hostage by a small minority.

Will we fall for the deep fakes? Will we be deceived by AI? Or will we protect our democracy?

Categories Accountability, Bigotry, Censorship, Citizenship, Civil Rights, Courage, Democracy, Elections, Ethics, Extremism, Fascism, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, Freedom to Read

Haaretz: A Surprising Effort to Build Bonds Between Arabs and Jews

By dianeravitch
January 21, 2024 //
6

Haaretz is an Israeli newspaper that is an invaluable source of news and opinion. It harshly criticizes the Netanyahu government and publishes articles critical of the war in Gaza. I began subscribing after the October 7 attacks by Hamas because I wanted to read the news firsthand from an Israeli source, especially one that did not parrot the government’s line. I have not been disappointed. The articles about Netanyahu are far more scathing than anything I read in the American media. And there are sometimes inspiring stories of Jews and Muslims who together seek understanding and peace. The following is one of those stories. This group—Standing Together— has participated in anti-war demonstrations. May they prosper.

It begins:

“You’re not alone,” said the Jewish woman to the Arab woman. Shedding tears, the two Israelis, who were meeting for the first time, embraced. The scene played out in the modest Lod apartment of the Arab woman, Isra Abou Laban Oudi. She’s a single mother, and her 3-year-old son, Tareq, scampered merrily among the 14 strangers, Jews and Arabs, who were guests in his home.

From the beginning of the school year, Oudi says, her son, who speaks only Arabic, had attended a municipal Hebrew-speaking preschool. After October 7, when the children returned to school, Tareq too was happy to reunite with his friends after what had been a two-week break. However, Oudi says, when she heard him speaking Arabic, his teacher hit him and demanded he not use “that language.”

Oudi filed a complaint with the police, which is still under examination, but since then, for some weeks, Tareq hasn’t been going to nursery school. The teacher, who denies hitting Tareq and claims that she only scolded him, also filed a complaint with the police, alleging that Oudi was accusing her falsely. She is still employed in the preschool.

The whole situation left Oudi feeling helpless and very much alone. That is, until the solidarity encounter that took place in her home, when members of Standing Together – an Arab-Jewish social movement that seeks to advance a beneficent, egalitarian society in Israel through joint grassroots activity – came to show their support.

Three days after that visit, Oudi and her toddler son attended an event organized by the movement in the nearby city of Ramle which, like Lod, has a mixed population. There, in a banquet hall that had no banquets to host, Arabs and Jews were working side by side to prepare food packages for Jewish, Muslim and Christian families whose source of livelihood had been truncated because of the war.

Oudi and her son did not join in the activity of Standing Together (“Omdim Beyahad” in Hebrew) by chance. It’s part of the “recovery plan” that the movement recommends for people who have been hurt by racism: to transform the affront into constructive activity. “It gives people the strength to translate the hurt into joint activity, restores a renewed sense of control and also brings us new and highly motivated members,” explains Omri Goren, 24, who oversees the movement’s activity in the Ramle-Lod area and also heads its student division.

After the volunteers finished packing all the food products, and just before the care packages were dispatched to addresses across the city, the 30 volunteers gathered in a dialogue circle. Goren asked them to introduce themselves and describe how they were feeling at this tense time.

One man, an Arab, related that his wife was frightened about the war’s implications for Israel’s Arab citizens and had gone abroad with one of their children, while another son, an electrical engineer, had been fired from his job because of “the situation.” A Jewish man sitting next to him said that for three decades he had been the proprietor of a store in Ramle where Jews, Christians and Muslims shopped, and that he had warm, close relations with all of them. “We are like brothers,” he said. “There is respect and genuine love. I am proud to be a Ramle resident who has friends in Ramle.”

A Jewish woman told the others that her niece was killed on October 7, and that she was worried about the shared future in Israel. “And that’s why I am here.”

Although many may be surprised – though the movement’s leaders are not among them – demand for Standing Together’s message of solidarity and vision of a shared future has been on a constant rise since the war started. Those who thought that the uptick in mutual suspicion between Arabs and Jews is causing the fragile fabric of Israeli society to unravel, is invited to take part in the movement’s activity and discover that they are wrong.

Standing Together, which was founded in 2015 and espouses values of equality, peace, social justice and socialism (and in normal times, is involved in environmental, educational and social issues, in a number of different campaigns), is currently gathering momentum. Its membership is growing daily. The purple color associated with the movement, and its newly minted slogan, “Together we will get through this,” can be seen in more and more places in both the real and online worlds. Most of the new joiners are young people, Arabs and Jews, the movement’s directors note. Since October 7, a dozen joint Arab-Jewish groups, dubbed “solidarity guards,” have been established across the country, joining the eight already active branches. Eleven student chapters have also been created, besides the nine that previously existed…

Tamar Asadi is someone who joined the movement in the wake of October 7. Asadi, 28, is from the village of Deir al-Asad, in the country’s north. She’s a homeroom teacher for 12th-graders at a Jewish high school in the area, where she’s worked for the past six years. She too says she has been “very worried” since the start of the war. “I also knew some people at the [Nova] party and in the Gaza border communities, and in general I was concerned about what would happen,” she says.

“In the social media,” she continues, “all the posts were dark and frightening, and suddenly I saw a purple-colored post, which said something about partnership, in both Hebrew and Arabic. I felt like someone had thrown me a lifebelt of grace. I wrote to the people behind the post, who were from Standing Together, to ask whether the movement had a branch in Deir al-Asad.

“They said they didn’t, so I decided to take the initiative and set up a solidarity guard of Arab and Jewish communities in the Galilee. Within hours, we had 350 new members. We held our first meeting via Zoom, and the feeling was so good that we decided to continue with a face-to-face meeting.”

Asadi continues: “We invited everyone to us, to the community center in Deir al-Asad. One of the people who came, from Kibbutz Tuval [nearby], apologized for having to leave early, because he had guard duty at the kibbutz – ‘to protect us from you,’ he said – and everyone laughed. I haven’t stopped talking about that remark, and I understood how important what we are doing in Standing Together is.

“Since then, my activity has only picked up momentum. We visited joint medical teams of Arabs and Jews at health-care facilities; we paid a solidarity visit to Maayan Sigal-Koren, five of whose relatives were abducted from Kibbutz Nir Yitzhak, two of whom are still being held in Gaza; I invited friends for an encounter at my place, which left me very emotional; and much more.

“Standing Together gives me a place to be who I am,” she explains, “along with the hope I have been searching for for a long time. My activity in the movement is also a message to my students. They see an Israeli homeroom teacher, an Arab woman, a Muslim, a Palestinian, who on the one hand identifies with Israel, yet is not ashamed of her [Arab] identity. The change has to come from the public. Our generation is confused about its identity, and is sad and fearful, but Arab society is behaving with solidarity, dignity and empathy at this time – not only out of fear, but mainly because of a shared destiny.”

Sigal-Koren, a resident of Kibbutz Pelekh, in the Misgav region, describes the solidarity visit that movement members paid her as “the most powerful and most hopeful I have experienced since all this started. The encounter touched me in a way that no other meeting in this period has,” she tells Haaretz.

The Standing Together activists asked Sigal-Koren how they could help her and other families of the captives, and suddenly it occurred to her to that the campaign being conducted online and via posters and billboards calling for the captives’ release should be translated into Arabic too. That was in fact speedily done with the aid of members of the solidarity squad. Sigal-Koren was subsequently invited to tell her story at a meeting of Standing Together in the Arab town of Nahaf. Speaking before an audience of 300 Arabs and Jews, she called for the return from Gaza of her uncle, Fernando Marman, and Louis Har, her mother’s partner (her mother, Clara, was released on November 28).

Since that hellish Saturday, the movement has conducted more than a hundred activities, including joint conferences for Arabs and Jews in Hebrew and Arabic in Tamra, Nazareth, Abu Ghosh, Lod, Jerusalem, Be’er Sheva, Tel Aviv and other venues. They have visited hospitals to meet with wounded soldiers and speak to Jewish and Arab medical teams; cleaned out public shelters; sent food packages and other things to families whose source of income has dried up; monitored cases of racist violence in Israel; and made solidarity visits like the one in Oudi’s home.

One of their significant actions is the setting up of an emergency hotline, offering assistance to anyone who’s been harmed by racism or requires physical accompaniment in order to get to their place of work, the local clinic – or the police station in order to file a complaint about racism. The hotline, which operates seven days a week, has taken hundreds of calls from people whose cases are in various stages of treatment.

The hotline is currently being staffed by 90 volunteers, says Oded Rotem, their coordinator. Many more wanted to join, he notes, but the movement has declared a hiatus on accepting new volunteers, as it’s unable to meet the pace of training.

* * * 

Some 700 people showed up for Standing Together’s Haifa conference, held on November 4. Not unusually in these parts, the event took place only after an alternative was found to the original location, which they were forced to abandon following pressure by right-wingers. At the event, Sally Abed, who directs the movement’s resource development team, spoke about her mother, who works for the northern district of the National Insurance Institute (social security administration), which deals with the social-welfare needs of bereaved families and the families of the Gaza hostages. She related how, after a hard day of emotionally draining work, her mother comes home, turns on an Arabic news channel and sees what is being perpetrated against members of her family in the Gaza Strip.

“We’re told that we have to take a side,” Abed said. “But that choice inevitably denies the humanity of the other side. I refuse to have my humanity robbed. I refuse to be deprived of my Israeliness,” she declared, to the applause of the audience. After the meeting, Abed was approached by an elderly Jewish man wearing a kippa, who had tears in his eyes. Embracing her, he said, “Thank you, this is the first time I’ve breathed since October 7. You made it possible for me to feel pain for the other side and to feel like a human being again.”

The story continues. I hope you are able to open the link and finish reading. Standing Together is a candle in the darkness, an effort to bridge differences and build an awareness of common humanity. It has 5,000 members at present, with another 2,000 who join their activities. May their candle create light and hope.

Categories International

“Democracy” Weighs In on Controversy in Atlanta About Fani Willis and Prosecutor

By dianeravitch
January 20, 2024 //
59

There has been a heated debate on the blog about charges that District Attorney Fani Willis was romantically involved with prosecutor Nathan Wade. Defendants’s lawyers suggest the case should be thrown out or the entire prosecution team be replaced. Clearly, the public needs to know more about what happened before reaching judgment. As Nikki Haley has said repeatedly about Trump, “wherever he goes, chaos follows.” That may be why he’s been so successful in the courts in more than 3,500 cases—evasion, delay, chaos.

Our reader “Democracy” added this insight:

Here’s more on the Fanni Willis “scandal” from today’s NY Times, and other media, along with some comments from me:

“the bombshell accusations have rocked the criminal case — one of four Trump faces this year as he also seeks a second term in the White House. Trump blasted Willis and Wade over the allegations again on Friday, calling the prosecutors ‘the lovebirds’ and accusing them of targeting him ‘to ENRICH themselves, and to live the Lifestyle of the Rich and Famous!’ In posts on his social media platform, Trump called for the prosecutors to ‘face appropriate consequences’ and for charges against him to be dismissed.”

•• It’s rather rich for Trump to be ridiculing ANYONE about trying to enrich himself, and it’s the height of hypocrisy for Trump to be demanding “appropriate consequences” for Fanni Willis when he is doing everything he can to try and evade accountability for himself.

“Roman’s motion argues that Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade violated the state bar’s rules of professional conduct, the county code regarding conflicts of interest and, possibly, federal law. It calls for the case against Mr. Roman to be dismissed, and for Mr. Wade, Ms. Willis and Ms. Willis’s entire office to be disqualified from the case.”

•• Whether or not Fanni Willis violated any code of professional conduct remains to be seen, and it seems that a pretty good case can be made that she did not. But, yeah, optics matter. Still, there is a STRONG legal case AGAINST Mr. Roman that is completely UNRELATED to WIllis taking a private trip or two with Mr. Wade.

“On Saturday morning, Norman Eisen, special counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during the first Trump impeachment, who has been vocal in supporting the Georgia prosecution, called on Mr. Wade to step down, saying that the recent allegation of an affair ‘had become a distraction.’ ”

•• That’s the WHOLE point of this sordid nonsense, is it not? To cause a distraction from the fact that Trump AND his accomplices tried to steal the electoral votes in Georgia away from Mr. Trump by throwing out the verified, certified election results. Also, if in fact Wade were to resign, wouldn’t THAT be a legitimate end to the issue?

“For years, Mr. Wade was a regular at county Republican breakfast meetings, and he served for a time as a delegate to the county convention, said Jason Shepherd, who chaired the Cobb County Republican Party at the time…In 2016, during one of his unsuccessful attempts to run for Cobb County superior court judge, he was supported by Ashleigh Merchant — the lawyer who filed the motion this month on Mr. Roman’s behalf that seeks to have him removed from the Trump case. The motion questions Mr. Wade’s qualifications. But in a Facebook post in the midst of his judge’s race, she praised him for his extensive résumé…’Nathan has practiced in every area of the law that appears before the Superior Court bench,’ she wrote.”

•• Ahem…

Let’s rehash here. As PBS News Hour reported two short days ago,

“Trump and Roman were indicted by a Fulton County grand jury in August along with 17 others. They’re accused of participating in a wide-ranging scheme to try to illegally overturn the 2020 presidential election in Georgia. Four of those charged have already pleaded guilty after reaching deals with prosecutors. Trump, Roman and the others who remain have pleaded not guilty…Roman was the director of Election Day operations for the Trump campaign and also had worked in the White House…Prosecutors say he helped coordinate an effort to contact state lawmakers on Trump’s behalf to encourage them to ‘unlawfully appoint presidential electors.’…He is also alleged to have been involved in efforts to have Republicans in swing states that Trump lost, including Georgia, meet on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign certificates falsely saying Trump had won their states and that they were the electors for their states. He was in touch with local Republican officials in several states to set up those meetings.”

And yet Roman (and Trump, and a whole cast of other weirdos), think that private “dating” or a few private trips somehow create an act of immense impropriety that should THROW OUT legally obtained indictments for subverting the 2020 presidential election returns in the state of Georgia, thereby disenfranchising every single voter who cast a ballot for Mr. Biden.

This is beyond stupid, is it not?

Michael Roman’s attorney, Ashleigh Merchant has asked not only that Fanni Willis and Nathan Wade BE REMOVED from this case but also that ALL CHARGES against Roman BE DROPPED.

Here are some other cases where Ashleigh Merchant demanded that charges be dropped. Take a peek.

2017: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ga-supreme-court/1862249.html

2021: “In addition to Matthews’s admission that he stabbed Young, his cell phone records and his knowledge of information about the crime scene that the police had deliberately withheld from the public supported a finding that he was present when the crime occurred. Evidence found in his home and in the adjacent dumpster, including the set of steak knives that matched the knife blade found on Young’s body, Young’s debit and credit cards, and the cap that one of the men using Young’s debit card was wearing just after the murder, also connected him to the crimes. The evidence was legally sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Matthews was guilty of malice murder and possession of a knife during the commission of a crime.”

“Count 6 of the indictment charged Matthews with knowingly taking without consent a Bank of America Visa debit card, which was “issued to Adrianne Young as cardholder and from whose possession the said card was taken.” A rational trier of fact could find beyond a reasonable doubt that Matthews was guilty of financial transaction card theft from the evidence presented, including evidence that debit cards and a credit card belonging to Young were found in the dumpster adjacent to Matthews’s residence, that Young’s purse was missing from the crime scene, and that Matthews attempted to use Young’s debit card within an hour of her murder.”

https://casetext.com/case/matthews-v-state-2093

2022: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ga-supreme-court/2162540.html

2023:  https://casetext.com/case/kim-v-state-60

Kind of makes one wonder.

Categories Accountability, Corruption, Elections, Georgia, Justice, Trump

Trump Rants and Blames Nikki Haley for January 6 Insurrection

By dianeravitch
January 20, 2024 //
24

At a campaign event, Trump went into a manic rant about his enemies. He blamed Nikki Haley for the January 6 insurrection!

On the blog Meidas Touch:

Here’s an excerpt of Trump’s bizarre statements:

Trump: You know, by the way, they never report the crowd on January 6th. You know, Nikki Haley, Nikki Haley Nikki Haley, you know, they did you know, they destroyed all of the information, all of the evidence, everything deleted it, destroyed all of it. All of it because of lots of things, like Nikki Haley is in charge of security. We offered her 10,000 people.

The crowd quieted in complete and utter confusion as Trump rambled on about Haley.

Trump was confusing Haley with then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi, repeating yet another debunked conspiracy theory.

This is the latest in a series of troubling mental lapses from the former president, adjudicated rapist, and current criminal defendant.

Donald Trump recently has repeatedly claimed he’s beating Barack Obama in the polls, insisted that you need voter IDto buy bread, said Jeb Bush sent American troops to the middle east, bragged that he calls corn ‘non-liquid gold,’ and said that Joe Biden started World War II, among other cognitive lapses.

And then there’s this tweet by Republicans Against Trump, showing the randy old guy signing the T-shirt of a pretty young woman, writing directly on her breasts. The caption is “Can you imagine how the media would react if Biden or any other candidate did this?” But Trump does it, no big deal.

Categories Elections, Trump

Jamelle Bouie: Trump Is a Loser

By dianeravitch
January 20, 2024 //
24

I am falling in love with Jamelle Bouie. I love his mind. I love his writing. I love his insights. I read his personal blog (to which I subscribe via The New York Times), and here is a recent article in a special opinion section that cheered me up.

We frequently hear that Donald Trump represents a large and significant number of Americans, each attracted to him for several different reasons, none of which are that mysterious.

There are supporters attracted to his doctrinaire commitment to social conservatism, even if he himself is a libertine. There are supporters attracted to his belligerent hostility toward a broad variety of perceived cultural enemies. There are supporters attracted to his open cruelty toward and contempt for various racial and religious others. And there are supporters who simply think he’ll get them a good deal in foreign and domestic affairs — whatever that actually means.

Again, it’s not that complicated.

What is less frequently heard on the lips of political commentators is the fact that, while large and significant, Trump’s following is not a majority. Not even close. In fact, by any measure, Trump has been a unique electoral loser for the Republican Party.

His ceiling in national elections — having been twice on the presidential ballot — seems to be somewhere between 46 percent and 47 percent of the voting public. In 2016 that was enough, thanks to the Electoral College, to put him in the White House. In 2020 it wasn’t.

Just as significant is the fate of the most explicitly Trump-aligned candidates — the so-called MAGA Republicans whom President Biden condemned in his 2022 address on the state of American democracy. They are also electoral losers. The Republican Party, thanks to Trump’s influence, has lost or severely underperformed in three consecutive national elections, as well as a large number of special and off-year elections.

None of this means that he and his closest allies are somehow doomed in November. But it does seem as if there is a national political majority that is, if nothing else, consistently hostile to Trump or Trump-like figures and will vote to keep them out of office.

There has been an endless parade of analysis of the Trump or MAGA voter. Perhaps it’s time to focus on the views of this actual silent majority, whose members don’t attend rallies or make a show of their political commitments but whose votes have powered the Democratic Party to an unusual six-year run of electoral victories.

In Jamelle Bouie’s newsletter today, he compares Trump to George Wallace, and concludes that he is the heir apparent to Wallace. He describes two biographies of Wallace that he read recently and ends: A final thought:

Wallace was a smart, clever and intellectually agile man. We are probably lucky that our demagogue, dangerous as he is, lacks those particular attributes. Even so, if Wallace has a legacy in national politics, it is very clearly Trump.

Categories Elections, Extremism, Politics, Trump

Michael Meltsner: After Section 3 Comes Section 2

By dianeravitch
January 20, 2024 //
30

In case you have not read the Amendments to the Constitution lately, you will learn something new in this post. Michael Meltsner wrote in The American Prospect that Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment is as important as the well-discussed Section 3 (which says that a person who has taken the oath of office and engaged in an insurrection may not run for federal office). As I hope you know, Amendments 13, 14, and 15 were written in the aftermath of the Civil War and were meant to abolish slavery, guarantee equal rights to all Americans, and establish the right to vote.

Here is Section 2:

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed.

Meltsner wrote:

Attention in recent days has been paid to the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling that Donald Trump can be barred from the presidential ballot for participating in an insurrection as ordered by Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Maine’s secretary of state has also ruled Trump out. But under the radar, a separate case involving that amendment has been working through the courts, which would be just as impactful for the outcome of the 2024 elections.

About a year ago, I reported in the Prospect on a pending lawsuit filed on behalf of a citizens group by former Department of Justice lawyer Jared Pettinato. The suit asks that the Census Bureau be required to enforce Section 2 of the 14th Amendment, enacted in 1868 to strip congressional representation from states that disfranchise voters. The text applies to general methods states adopt that keep people from voting and is not limited to racial discrimination. The proportional loss of congressional representation would also reduce the votes that states would get in the Electoral College.

The Section 2 case is now moving toward resolution. Briefs have been filed, and oral argument is expected shortly before the court of appeals in Washington, D.C.

Cases involving the two constitutional provisions of the 14th Amendment have major differences and striking similarities. Neither has been authoritatively interpreted.

On a structural level, enforcing Section 2 for the first time would conceivably sanction and thus potentially eliminate the web of restrictions and hurdles that keep substantial numbers of citizens from casting a vote. Some states would lose representatives, and electoral votes, to states that make it easier to vote. In contrast, the Section 3 insurrection issue is individualized, dealing only with a former president whose misdeeds are unique in American history.

But in both cases, the courts are being asked to render decisions that could change the political balance of power, outcomes that involve judicial intervention similar to the much-criticized Bush v. Gore decision that determined the presidency in 2000.

Finally, the odds are that the Colorado case will be reversed by the Supreme Court, while the future of the citizens group challenge under Section 2, while a long shot, is far from settled.

In the Section 2 case, a trial court decided that the plaintiffs lacked legal standing, in large part because they hadn’t sufficiently shown that specific states would certainly lose and gain seats. But Pettinato’s complaint alleges at least one concrete disfranchisement scenario (and others are obvious).

Wisconsin’s 2011 voter ID law prevented 300,000 registered voters who lacked identification from casting a ballot, according to U.S. District Court Judge Lynn Adelman. This finding was accepted as true on appeal, and should be accepted as true at this stage of the Section 2 litigation. As 300,000 registered voters is approximately 9 percent of Wisconsin’s total registrants, the complaint reasons that Wisconsin should lose 9 percent of its representatives, equal to one member of Congress and one electoral vote. Another state would gain that representative.

It may be significant that DOJ lawyers have now injected a new defense in their brief in the court of appeals, a move that often signals a belief that the theory relied on in the lower court is ultimately unpersuasive.

It’s amazing that, given the central role courts construing constitutional texts play in our public life, the terms of operationalizing the 135 words of Section 2 have never been settled in over 150 years. The few lawsuits brought under its terms have almost all found ways to avoid enforcement. Only one case, which I filed in the 1960s when I was first assistant counsel at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, had a different and unusual outcome. In that case brought by a group led by feminist and civil rights leader Daisy Lampkin, the judges unanimously took remedying disfranchisement by enforcing Section 2 seriously, but stayed their hand because they supposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 might make enforcing it unnecessary.

Regardless of the outcome in the court of appeals, the Supreme Court will be asked to decide whether the Constitution’s explicit remedy for disfranchisement has life or should be ignored. The Court has many tools that can be used to continue the tradition of nonenforcement. Standing to sue doctrine allows avoiding decisions on the merits; but with respect to Section 2, continued use of it in case after case amounts to saying that what the Constitution says doesn’t matter. For a judiciary that roams across the scope of American life in its decisions, such an outcome can only be seen as random, and thus really political, decision-making. And deciding the Section 3 case to allow Trump back onto the ballot while avoiding a decision in the Section 2 case would have clear political overtones.

Plus, failing to recognize the vitality of Section 2 will surely raise the specter of hypocrisy, as conservative justices have often looked to the original understanding of constitutional texts to justify decisions, an approach that would bring the 1868 disfranchisement remedy to the present day.

Here is another view of Section 2: https://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment14/annotation12.html#

Categories Accountability, Civil Rights, Elections, History, Justice

John Thompson: Oklahoma’s State Chief Clings to Failed Reforms

By dianeravitch
January 20, 2024 //
8

John Thompson, a historian and retired teacher in Oklahoma, reviews the stalemate in education in the Sooner State. The cause: a state superintendent who will not abandon failed reforms.

He writes:

As School Superintendent Ryan Walters ramps up his attacks on public education, resisting his false, rightwing agenda has become Oklahoma educators’ top priority. While we need to unite and put the school reform wars of the last two decades behind us, the lessons of corporate reforms must be remembered. As Walters puts the doomed-to-fail, test-to-punish No Child Left Behind Act of 2002 (NCLB) “accountability” mandates on steroids, I’ve tried to be as diplomatic as possible in reminding educators how and why data-driven, competition-driven “reforms” did so much damage. Reading the Tulsa World editorial, “Current Public Accountability Systems Always Leaving Kids Behind” by Bixby Superintendent Rob Miller, brought me back to a time when I was one of many educators trying to reason with corporate school reformers. Then I read Peter Greene’s “VAM: Why Is This Zombie Policy Still Around?, and I was reminded of the history of so many Oklahoma administrators failing to push back against the Billionaires Boys Club.

My favorite memories of Rob Miller was when he pulled no punches in telling legislators the hard truths about NCLB. Miller is still candid about it, illustrating education’s “gap between those who make policy and those who suffer the consequences.” Research made it clear that “standardized tests are unreliable indicators of school quality,” and “nothing more than an elaborate sorting and labeling system.” Non-educators dismissed the experience of teachers, concluding they were “just falling back on excuses about student poverty, adverse childhood experiences, teacher shortages and unstable families.”

Miller recounts the loss of “recess, music and arts, field trips, class discussions and reading books for pleasure when we need to get these kids proficient at bubbling correct answers on multiple-choice tests.” He then writes:

Who cares if a 10-year-old learns to hate school because he’s been retained in third grade and his days are now filled with worksheets, practice tests and repetitive drill-and-kill curriculum in place of projects, puzzles and hands-on activities which nurture his natural curiosity and develop thinking skills? Suck it up, kid!

In my experience, the overwhelming majority of education leaders knew that test-driven accountability would inevitably lead to “tedious, time-wasting, high-pressure, spirit-killing, highly scripted instructional programs.” But few would go on the record about the harm done by focusing on test scores, as opposed to improving learning. And few of them were as eloquent as Miller when standing up for students.

Then, I read Peter Greene’s summary of what I believe was the worst of the worst corporate reform mandate, Value Added Models (VAMS). When the Billionaires Boys Club” saw the way that NCLB wasn’t working, they blamed Baby Boomers for accepting “Excuses!” and targeted individual educators, using invalid and unreliable algorithms to punish and replace veteran teachers with 23-year-olds they could train. I will always love President Obama, but his Race to the Top was even more destructive than NCLB. Virtually every educator and student above 2ndgrade were held accountable for increased “outputs.”

Greene first explained the inherent flaws in VAMS, doing an intensive analysis of the model’s flaws for teacher evaluation, and surveys documenting teachers rejecting them. He also wrote:

We used to talk about this a lot. A. Lot. But VAM … has departed the general education discussion even though it has not departed the actual world of education. Administrators still brag about, or bemoan, their VAM scores. VAM scores still affect teacher evaluation. And VAM scores are still bunk.

And that leads to what may be the most disturbing aspect of Greene’s piece for states like Oklahoma. He reviewed a range of studies around 2014 and 2015 that made the overwhelming case for abandoning the use of VAMs for accountability purposes. Since Ryan Walters has said he’s been consulting with the architects of the Houston IDS regarding a plan for taking over the Tulsa Public Schools, the most relevant and frightening research Greene cites for Oklahoma document the destructive role that VAMs played in Houston.

Reading Superintendent Miller’s and Greene’s work makes me, once again, rethink my efforts to persuade administrators and politicians to reject test-driven accountability. I worry that education leaders will revert back to the “culture of compliance,” and obey Walters’ demands. I keep remembering the time when one of the nation’s top experts, John Q. Easton of the Chicago Consortium on School Research, came to Oklahoma City and explained why it is impossible to improve schools without first building trusting relationships, and warning about untrustworthy accountability metrics. Afterwards, in the parking lot where administrators were more likely to feel free to speak their minds, the OKCPS’s top researchers agreed, but warned that the new types of tests resulting from NCLB (with Criterion Based Tests replacing Norm Referenced Tests) would completely corrupt our data.

Then, we had an agreement with MAPS for Kids volunteers that the OKCPS would be clear in telling teachers that their job was teaching to state standards, not standardized tests. When NCLB was implemented, however, I was in the meeting where top administrators recalled years of ridiculous mandates and then jolted us all by saying the district had no choice but to expand high-stakes testing. I was the only one who pushed back. A smart, sincere, veteran administrator replied, “John, I always say you don’t make a hog bigger by weighing it. But this is politics. We have no choice.”

On the state level, I joined an informal committee with superintendents trying to draft NCLB policies that would be less destructive. I was tasked with studying the Ohio standards. Because it was then a swing state, Ohio was granted the most freedom to get around the most destructive accountability mandates. The thought was that NCLB’s worst aspects would not survive the 2004 elections, so we sought to kick the ball down the field until evidence-based policies returned!?!?

So, I kept trying to be diplomatic, bridging differences with both – corporate reformers who would not reconsider their ideology-driven mandates and educators who felt they had to comply with those mandates. On one hand, unity is more important when our democracy – not just public education – faces existential threats. On the other hand, discussing these historic facts could be a unifying force. After all, so many of today’s teachers and parents have experienced the damage done by test-driven, competition-driven schooling. I suspect that many of them would appreciate a discussion of the history of those failures.

The 21st century is full of hard truths about the way that the holistic instruction students need for a better future was undermined. And then came Covid, and then came the Moms for Liberty. Reading Rob Miller and Peter Greene, and the science they present, is convincing me that I also must learn from failures to openly oppose corporate school reforms, in addition to fighting back against fanatics like Ryan Walters.

By the way, Walters just announced his plan to create a “one-stop shop” for teacher training, development and financial services. He unexpectedly ended the state’s relationship with:

The three organizations, which have wide membership throughout the state are the Oklahoma State School Boards Association (OSSBA), the Cooperative Council for Oklahoma School Administration (CCOSA) and the Oklahoma Public School Resource Center (OPSRC). In a news release, Walters said without providing examples that the three organizations “work in tandem with national extremist groups that seek to undermine parents, force failed policies into the schools, and work against a quality education in Oklahoma.”

The Cooperative Council for Oklahoma School Administration responded, “Last year, over 5,400 educators attended CCOSA’s professional development events to serve those members, focusing on topics such as school finance, special education law and teacher evaluations.” The OPSRC did not reply, but apparently, Walters broke ties with them because they hired a former district superintendent, April Grace, who was his Republican opponent for state superintendent. Before education leaders try to cooperate with Walters in order to avoid his full fury, they should remember that the OPSRC is funded by the Walton Family Foundation and other philanthropies that support corporate school reforms! That’s one more reminder that revenge, not school improvement, is his focus.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Closing schools, Corporate Reform, Disruption, Education Industry, Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), Failure, NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Oklahoma, Race to the Top, Teachers, VAM (value-added modeling)
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »