Fight Big Pharma! Here Is How

By dianeravitch
April 20, 2022 //
11

A group called Public Citizen has advice about how to bring down the high cost of prescription drugs:

Asthma. 

COVID-19. 

Diabetes. 

Hepatitis C. 

HIV. 

Prostate cancer. 

Millions of Americans who suffer from these conditions (and others) can’t afford the medicine they need. 

Why? 

Because of sheer greed on the part of pharmaceutical companies. 

  • For the 20 top-selling drugs, Big Pharma made more in the U.S. than in every other country on Earth combined.
  • That’s particularly outrageous given how much research and development is paid for by the American people. (The taxpayer-funded National Institutes of Health alone spends $40 billion a year on R&D.)
  • In essence, we are paying through the nose not once but twice!

But We the People can fight Big Pharma’s immoral price gouging.

The federal government can overcome patent monopolies by authorizing generic competition — either for products it will pay for (like medicines purchased through Medicare) or for publicly-funded medications. 

Generic competition is a game-changer: The FDA has found that the introduction of generics can lead to price reductions of 95%. 

And, crucially, the federal government *already* has the power to do this — which would be transformative in making essential medicines affordable for millions of Americans. 

To proceed, we don’t need Congress to do anything. The Biden administration can act on its own. 

Tell the Biden Administration:

Use your existing authority to introduce generic competition for medicines. By doing so, you can lower drug prices, improve the lives of millions of Americans, make progress on confronting the epidemics of our time, and improve health equity.

Add your name now.

Thank you for taking action. 

For progress, 

– Robert Weissman, President of Public Citizen


Public Citizen | 1600 20th Street NW | Washington DC 20009 |

Categories Biden, Health

North Carolina: Whining by Charter Schools Is Proof They Need to Be Reformed

By dianeravitch
April 20, 2022 //
10

Kris Nordstrom of the NC Policy Watch notes the loud whining by charter advocates who are outraged by the common sense reforms proposed b6 the Biden administration’s Department of Education. They are whining, writes Nordstrom, because they are guilty of every malpractice that the reforms aim to cure.

Nordstrom begins:

Advocates for charter schools have long justified the existence of charters by claiming they serve as laboratories of innovation for traditional schools. They have claimed that operational flexibility and exemption from regulation allows them to operate more efficiently than traditional public schools. And they have claimed that they are not only willing – but better suited – to serve students from families with low incomes.

These premises have been disproven over the course of North Carolina’s nearly 30-year-long experiment with charter schools. There are no examples of charter school innovations that have offered new approaches for traditional schools (after all, traditional schools can’t follow the example of “successful” charters that garner high test scores by pushing out struggling students). Nor have charters delivered efficiency gains. Charters spend substantially more on administration than their traditional school counterparts. Most North Carolina charters outspend their neighboring traditional schools while serving a more advantaged student population and delivering weaker academic outcomes. Meanwhile, North Carolina charters continue to exacerbate racial segregation and raise costs for traditional inclusive public schools.

Charter advocates have long disputed the overwhelming evidence of their ineffectiveness. But now, they are making the case themselves.

At issue are recent changes to the terms of the federal Charter School Program (CSP) grant programs. The CSP provides money to states to run grant programs, “to open and prepare for the operation of new charter schools and to replicate and expand high-quality charter schools.” North Carolina was awarded these federal grant funds specifically to support charters, “focused on meeting the needs of educationally disadvantaged students.”

Unfortunately, the program run by North Carolina’s Department of Public Instruction has failed to meet these goals. Much of the federal funding has been awarded to schools with a history of serving as white flight charter schools and that enroll substantially fewer students from families with low incomes than nearby inclusive public schools. Incredibly, Torchlight Academy was awarded a $500,000 grant in 2020. Just two years later, this school has had its charter revoked for rampant corruption and poor student results…

Are high-quality charters unwilling to operate if they can no longer divert as much money as possible into the pockets of corporations? Are charters unwilling to serve as laboratories for innovation that work with traditional public schools to expand promising practices? Are charters unable to craft community impact statements because they are unable to demonstrate community benefits? Are they unwilling to commit to greater school integration efforts because they’d rather effectively pick and choose who their students are?

By opposing the CSP rule changes, charter supporters are implicitly answering the above questions in the affirmative. Their protests affirm the arguments made by charter critics that such schools are overly focused on profit-hoarding, unable to serve as collaborative partners in developing and scaling instructional innovation, exacerbate budget challenges, and contribute to segregation.

The proposed CSP rule changes do not in any way undermine charter schools. They simply ask charters seeking supplemental federal funds to try to live up to the promises made by charter advocates. The protests of charter advocates indicate that – as many of us have been arguing for years – charter schools are largely unable to live up to these promises.

And if charters are – as they now admit – unable to meet these promises, then policymakers should question not just whether they deserve supplemental federal funding through the CSP…but whether such schools are deserving of public funding at all.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corruption, Education Industry, For-Profit, North Carolina, Racism, Segregation

Jane Mayer: A Dark Money Group That Is Trying to Block Every Biden Nominee

By dianeravitch
April 20, 2022 //
51

Jane Mayer is a brilliant and meticulous journalist for The New Yorker. She is the nation’s leading expert on “Dark Money,” the money funneled into politics whose donors are anonymous. In this article, she details the group that was behind the effort to derail the Supreme Court nomination of the highly-qualified Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. The smear campaign was ultimately unsuccessful, because it was built on lies and distortions, and the attacks foundered in the face of Judge Jackson’s poise, demeanor, and temperament.

Formed in 2020, the group is called The American Accountability Foundation. It is registered as a tax-exempt charitable organization (like the odious ALEC), but is up-to-its-eyeballs in negative political activism. Its goal appears to be to block all Biden nominees with smear campaigns, lies, and distortions of their record and their views.

She writes:

While the hearings were taking place, the A.A.F. publicly took credit for uncovering a note in the Harvard Law Review in which, they claimed, Jackson had “argued that America’s judicial system is too hard on sexual offenders.” The group also tweeted that she had a “soft-on-sex-offender” record during her eight years as a judge on the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. As the Washington Post and other outlets stated, Jackson’s sentencing history on such cases was well within the judicial mainstream, and in line with a half-dozen judges appointed by the Trump Administration. When Jackson defended herself on this point during the hearings, the A.A.F. said, on Twitter, that she was “lying.” The group’s allegation—reminiscent of the QAnon conspiracy, which claims that liberal élites are abusing and trafficking children—rippled through conservative circles. Tucker Carlson repeated the accusation on his Fox News program while a chyron declared “jackson lenient in child sex cases.” Marjorie Taylor Greene, the extremist representative from Georgia, called Jackson “pro-pedophile.”

Their attack on Judge Jackson failed, but Mayer shows that they have slimed other well-qualified nominees, leaving key positions unfilled. she calls AAF “the slime machine.”

Among the nominees the group boasts of having successfully derailed are Saule Omarova, a nominee for Comptroller of the Currency, and Sarah Bloom Raskin, whom Biden named to be the vice-chair for supervision of the Federal Reserve Board. David Chipman, whom the President wanted to run the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and David Weil, Biden’s choice for the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor, both saw their nominations founder in the wake of A.A.F. attacks. Currently, the group is waging a negative campaign against Lisa Cook, who, if confirmed, would become the first Black woman to serve on the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors.

Tom Jones, the A.A.F.’s founder and executive director, is a longtime Beltway operative specializing in opposition research. Records show that over the years he has worked for several of the most conservative Republicans to have served in the Senate, including Ron Johnson, of Wisconsin; Ted Cruz, of Texas; Jim DeMint, of South Carolina; and John Ensign, of Nevada, for whom Jones was briefly a legislative director. In 2016, Jones ran the opposition-research effort for Cruz’s failed Presidential campaign. When I asked Jones for an interview, through the A.A.F.’s online portal, he replied, “Ms. Meyers . . . Go pound sand.” Citing an article that I had written debunking attacks on Bloom Raskin from moneyed interests, including the A.A.F., he said, “You are a liberal hack masquerading as an investigative journalist—and not a very good one.” Jones subsequently posted this comment on his group’s Twitter account, along with my e-mail address and cell-phone number…

Mayer describes vicious A.A.F. campaigns against Biden nominees, most of whom were women or people of color. one such was the sliming of Lisa Cook.

Mayer writes:

Liberal and conservative political groups habitually scrutinize a prominent nominee’s record or personal life in search of disqualifying faults. But the A.A.F. has taken the practice to extremes, repeatedly spinning negligible tidbits or dubious hearsay into damning narratives. The group recently deployed its unorthodox methods, Politico has reported, while “desperately pursuing dirt” on Lisa Cook, the nominee for the Federal Reserve. Cook, who has been a tenured professor of economics and international relations at Michigan State University since 2013, has attracted bipartisan support. Glenn Hubbard, the chair of the Council of Economic Advisers during the George W. Bush Administration, has said, “Cook’s talents as an economic researcher and teacher make her a good nominee for the Fed, adding to diversity of perspectives about policy.” In college, Cook won a Marshall Scholarship. She subsequently obtained a Ph.D. in economics from the University of California, Berkeley, taught at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, and served as a staff economist on President Barack Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers. She also held appointments at the National Bureau of Economic Research and at various regional Federal Reserve banks. The A.A.F., though, has portrayed her as unqualified, and suggested that her tenure at Michigan State is undeserved.

On April 13th, Jones sent out the latest of at least three e-mail blasts from the A.A.F. to about fifty of Cook’s colleagues at Michigan State. In the most recent of these messages, which were obtained by The New Yorker, Jones said that Cook “did not warrant” tenure. Through a Freedom of Information Act request, the A.A.F. obtained records showing that the school’s provost had granted Cook full professorship in 2020, overruling a decision not to give her that title the previous year. Jones sent these personnel records to dozens of Cook’s colleagues, and asked, “Are any of you concerned that . . . she’s not good enough to sit on the Federal Reserve Board?” He urged any detractors to “not hesitate to” contact him. Meanwhile, Jones fished for further information by posting a message on an anonymous online gossip forum, Economics Job Market Rumors, which has been decried by one prominent economist as “a cesspool of misogyny.”

Some of the A.A.F.’s attacks on Cook carried racial overtones. Cook had made donations to bail funds for impoverished criminal defendants, including racial-justice protesters who had been arrested; she was following a tradition of activist lawyers in her family, and considered it a form of charity. The A.A.F. argued on Twitter that she had made “racist comments” and “even bailed out rioters who burned down American cities.” Cook’s reputation was sullied enough that the Senate Banking Committee vote on her nomination resulted in a tie, with no Republicans supporting her. Cook’s nomination can still proceed to the Senate floor, but her confirmation remains in limbo, as one conservative news outlet after another repeats the A.A.F.’s talking points. A writer for the Daily Caller, Chris Brunet, said in a Substack column that Cook is a “random economist at Michigan State University who has shamelessly leveraged her skin color and genitalia into gaining the backing of several key White House officials.” Brunet tweeted proudly that his critique had been promoted on Fox News by Tucker Carlson.

Cook’s nomination might yet go forward, but other targets with exemplary records, have been rejected because of A.A.F. slime campaigns.

Dark Money is a blight on our democracy. This particular group is using its resources to derail the agenda of the Biden administration. It is yet another strategy to undermine our democracy by preventing the duly elected President from staffing his administration with fully qualified appointees of his choice.

Categories Accountability, Dark Money, Evil, Lies

Florida Rejects 54 Math Textbooks, Claiming Many Contain “Critical Race Theory”

By dianeravitch
April 19, 2022 //
148

Florida is spinning downward into a pit of political ignorance.

The state rejected 54 math texts on grounds that some contained critical race theory, others referred to Common Core concepts.

The rejected books make up a record 41% of the 132 books submitted for review, the Florida Department of Education said in a statement.

Of them, 28 were rejected because they “incorporate prohibited topics or unsolicited strategies, including [critical race theory],” the statement said.

Critical race theory has been described by scholars as an examination of racism and its impact through systems, such as legal, housing and education. However, it is typically not taught in K-12.

Twelve books were rejected because they did not meet Florida’s benchmark standards, while 14 books were rejected because they both included prohibited topics and failed to meet curriculum standards.

The names of the rejected books were not included.

Since the names of the rejected books were not revealed, no one can judge how dreadful or how innocuous the content is.

State House Member Anna Eskamani said, “I get it. The goal of math is to solve problems which the Republican Party of Florida doesn’t like to do.”

Among grade levels, 70% of the math materials for kindergarten through fifth grades were rejected. Twenty percent of the materials for grades 6-8 were rejected, and 35% of materials for grades 9-12 were rejected.

Categories Accountability, Censorship, Common Core, Curriculum, Florida, Stupid

Dr. Charles Luke: Will Texas Politicians Keep Promoting Vouchers Despite Years of Failure?

By dianeravitch
April 19, 2022 //
10

The subject of vouchers—public money for religious and private schools—has been proposed in every legislative session since 1995. Vouchers have gone down to defeat every time.

Dr. Charles Luke of Pastors for Texas Children wonders whether the voucher lobby—led by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick—wants another showdown. How many times do you have to fail before you get the message?

Dr. Luke writes:

Vouchers have never fared well in Texas, failing each legislative session since 1995. Conversations with a variety of state legislators and Austin-based politicos indicate that while, vouchers will likely pass the Senate in the next legislative session in 2023, it is still unlikely that they will pass the House. In the regular session of the 87th Texas Legislature, the Texas House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to prohibit state funds from being used on school voucher programs.

On top of vouchers consistently failing in the Texas Legislature, three other states have recently voted against vouchers. Oklahoma, Georgia, and Utah recently rejected private school vouchers aimed at providing state dollars to private schools.

In Oklahoma, a voucher bill that would have provided $128.5 million taxpayer dollars for private schools failed in the Senate by a narrow margin in March of this year. Senate Bill 1647, called the Oklahoma Empowerment Act, was defeated by a 24-22 vote against the bill. The bill, authored by Senate Pro Tem Greg Treat was also supported by Governor Kevin Stitt who pledged to sign the bill if it passed. Had the bill passed the Senate, it likely would have failed in the House as Speaker Charles McCall had said he would not give the bill a hearing.

Opponents of the bill cited multiple problems. Rev. Clark Frailey, the Lead Pastor of Coffee Creek Church in Edmond and the Executive Director of Pastors for Oklahoma Kids said, “In Oklahoma, there are many reasons to oppose private school vouchers that are funded by taking resources away from public schools. There are religious liberty problems, constitutional issues, and practical implications for parents. In this session, it was made quite clear by parents in rural, urban, and suburban Oklahoma communities that they want well-resourced schools in their own communities. They are not interested in being forced to transit hours a day just to have access to good schools.”

Likewise, Georgia Senators refused to pass a voucher bill supported by their Senate Pro Tem, Butch Miller. Senate Bill 601, which would have given private schools up to $6,000 per student, failed by a vote of 29-20. While supporters of the bill argued that it would give some parents more educational options, opponents pointed out that the voucher would likely be used by wealthier parents that are able to supplement tuition from their disposable income. “If you were really going to try to allow lower income families to exercise school choice, this bill would be means-tested,” said Sen. Elena Parent, an Atlanta Democrat. “Instead, it’s going to be used a lot more by individuals who already have the means.”

In February, Utah lawmakers overwhelmingly rejected a $36 million voucher bill which would have provided leveled funding for private schools based on the parents’ income. House Bill 331 was struck down by a vote of 22-53. Critics noted that, even at the highest funding level, the amount of the voucher would not have covered private school tuition for many schools in Utah. Others questioned the accountability of private schools’ use of public taxpayer dollars, pointing out that private schools are not held to the same transparency standards as public schools. “I don’t see strong accountability measures here,” said Rep. Joel Briscoe of Salt Lake City. “There’s very minimal accountability measures here and then with an opportunity to opt out.”

All the issues cited in these cases have been raised in Texas for nearly 30 years since vouchers were first proposed in the Texas Legislature.

Vouchers do not typically provide enough money to cover private school tuition, so they are often used by parents wealthy enough to send their children to private schools already. They normally do not cover transportation costs so poor parents who are often working more than one job may not be able to get their kids to a private school, even if they could afford to supplement the voucher. Many private schools are religious in nature. Should taxpayer funds be used to provide a religious education in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?

Finally, vouchers are a redistribution of taxpayer funds to private citizens that divert funds from the common good of public education. Is it even right or just that such a thing occurs?

While some state leaders and voucher proponents claim that Texas citizens want vouchers, a recent poll has shown that parents overwhelmingly approve of Texas public schools and that 80% of them would keep their kids in their current school even if other options were available.

Categories Accountability, Education Industry, Religion, Texas

Mercedes Schneider: Ripping Off the Hmong Community in Minnesota and Wisconsin

By dianeravitch
April 19, 2022 //
4

Mercedes Schneider writes here about an outrageous financial scam in Wisconsin and Minnesota that was inflicted on members of the Hmong community.

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced charges against a Hmong woman who had made extravagant promises to investors, then defrauded them.

On April 13, 2022, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed charges against Wisconsin resident, Kay Yang, for “conduct[ing] a fraudulent investment scheme targeting members of the Hmong-American communities in Wisconsin and Minnesota.”

Schneider goes into the details, and she points out that the same financial advisor counseled a Hmong charter school to invest the school’s endowment in a risky fund. Unfortunately, they took her advice, although the school leaders violated Minnesota law by making a risky investment with the school’s funds.

There is another twist in Yang’s story, one that the April 13, 2022, Twin Cities Pioneer Press captures as it alludes to Yang as “having ties to a St. Paul (MN) charter school board”:

Kay Yang has been described in a separate legal matter as a “close personal friend” of Christianna Hang, founder and former superintendent of Hmong College Prep Academy, one of Minnesota’s largest charter schools.

Hang was looking to invest some of the school’s money in May 2019 when Yang referred her to Woodstock Capital LLC, a hedge fund based in London.

That fall, Hang wired Woodstock $5 million in school funds, in violation of state statutes that limit what schools may invest in. Eighteen months later, just $700,000 remained.

The school now is suing Woodstock, alleging its investment either was stolen or badly mismanaged.

Woodstock called the loss a matter of bad timing, saying the coronavirus pandemic made it “possibly the worst time in recent world history for investments such as those made by hedge funds in general.”

Hang and her husband, chief operating officer Pao Yang, resigned from the school at the end of last year with a combined $350,000 in separation payments.

No criminal or civil enforcement charges have been filed in the charter school matter.

The school gambled away its $5 million

Wow.

Through her foolishness, Hang lost $4.3Mof the $5M of HCPA’s money.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Fraud, Minnesota

Who Is Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro?

By dianeravitch
April 18, 2022 //
14

Have you lost faith in our elected officials? Let me introduce you to my personal hero. Rosa DeLauro. I have met with her several times, and she was always attentive and thoughtful. I love her values, and I love her too. It’s a very small tribute to this great woman, but I take this opportunity to add her to the blog’s honor roll for standing up forcefully to the bullying of the charter lobby.

Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro is one of the most powerful members of Congress. She is a Democrat from Connecticut. She is an outstanding liberal who fights for children and working people.

Please read her bio.

Rosa DeLauro is the Congresswoman from Connecticut’s Third Congressional District, which stretches from the Long Island Sound and New Haven, to the Naugatuck Valley and Waterbury. Rosa serves as the Chair of the House Appropriations Committee and sits on the Democratic Steering and Policy Committee, and she is the Chair of the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Subcommittee, where she oversees our nation’s investments in education, health, and employment.

At the core of Rosa’s work is her fight for America’s working families. Rosa believes that we must raise the nation’s minimum wage, give all employees access to paid sick days, allow employees to take paid family and medical leave, and ensure equal pay for equal work. Every day, Rosa fights for legislation that would give all working families an opportunity to succeed.

Rosa believes that our first priority must be to strengthen the economy and create good middle class jobs. She supports tax cuts for working and middle class families, fought to expand the Child Tax Credit to provide tax relief to millions of families, and introduced the Young Child Tax Credit to give families with young children an economic lift.

Rosa has also fought to stop trade agreements that lower wages and ships jobs overseas, while also protecting the rights of employees and unions. She believes that we need to grow our economy by making smart innovative investments in our infrastructure, which is why she introduced legislation to create a National Infrastructure bank.

Rosa is a leader in fighting to improve and expand federal support for child nutrition and for modernizing our food safety system. She believes that the U.S. should have one agency assigned the responsibility for food safety, rather than the 15 different agencies that lay claim to different parts of our food system. Rosa fights against special interests, like tobacco and e-cigarettes, which seek to skirt our public health and safety rules.

As the Chair dealing with appropriations for Labor, Health, Human Services, and Education, Rosa is determined to increase support for education and make college more affordable for more American students and their families. She is also fighting to protect the Affordable Care Act so that all Americans have access to affordable care. Rosa strongly believes in the power of biomedical research and she is working to increase funding so that we can make lifesaving breakthroughs in science and medicine.

Rosa believes that we have a moral obligation to our nation’s veterans and their families, and her concern for these heroes extends to both their physical and mental well-being. Rosa supports a transformation in how the Department of Veterans Affairs is funded, including advanced appropriations for health services, to ensure its fiscal soundness; and she successfully championed legislation to guarantee that troops deploying to combat theaters get the mental health screening they need both before and after deployment, as well as championed legislation that now provides assistance to today’s Post-9/11 veterans choosing to pursue on-the-job training and apprenticeship programs.

Rosa belongs to 62 House caucus groups and is the co-chair of the Baby Caucus, the Long Island Sound Caucus, and the Food Safety Caucus.

Soon after earning degrees from Marymount College and Columbia University, Rosa followed her parents’ footsteps into public service, serving as the first Executive Director of EMILY’s List, a national organization dedicated to increasing the number of women in elected office; Executive Director of Countdown ’87, the national campaign that successfully stopped U.S. military aid to the Nicaraguan Contras; and as Chief of Staff to U.S. Senator Christopher Dodd. In 1990, Rosa was elected to the House of Representatives, and she has served as the Congresswoman from Connecticut’s Third Congressional District ever since.

Rosa is married to Stanley Greenberg. Their children—Anna, Kathryn, and Jonathan Greenberg—all are grown and pursuing careers. Rosa and Stan have six grandchildren, Rigby, Teo, Sadie, Jasper, Paola and Gus.

Download Congresswoman DeLauro’s Biography

Download Congresswoman DeLauro’s Official Photo

Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro and I in 2018: My hero.

Categories Connecticut, Education Industry, Equity, Funding, Honor Roll, Justice, Supporting public schools, Unions

The Full Text of Cong. Rosa DeLauro’s Letter Endorsing Reforms for Federal Charter Schools Program

By dianeravitch
April 18, 2022 //
5

Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut is one of the most important members of the U.S. House of Representatives. She is chair of the House Appropriations Committee.

She sent the following letter to Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, endorsing the Department’s proposed reform of the federal Charter School Program and criticizing the charter lobby for spreading lies:

Dear Secretary Cardona,

In July 2021, House Democrats passed the fiscal year 2022 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies appropriations bill which included a landmark provision prohibiting federal funding to charter schools run by for-profit education management organizations (EMOs). Under these management relationships, charters accept federal funds only to have their schools run by low-quality, for-profit companies rife with conflicts of interest. The provision was designed to safeguard our critical federal investments in education and protect us all from the financial risks posed by for-profit charter schools.

Predictably, the for-profit charter EMOs were not pleased with this legislative development. In response, their national trade organization led a well-funded misinformation campaign incorrectly claiming that the provision would prevent federal funds from going to any charter school that uses a contractor for any discrete service. These unserious efforts and false claims were advanced by their national trade organization to shift outrage and attention away from the risky, low-quality for-profit charter schools they represent.

Their national trade organization is employing similar tactics through the exaggerations and misrepresentations they are spreading in opposition to the Department’s reasonable proposed regulations for the fiscal year 2022 Charter Schools Program (CSP) competitions. Rather than accommodate the bad faith efforts of a trade organization that advocates for for-profit EMOs, the Department should move forward with its strong proposals to improve accountability and transparency for the CSP program.

For-profit EMOs

The Department has long recognized the particular risks posed by for-profit EMOs. In response to a 2016 audit, the Department conceded to the Inspector General, “ED is well aware of the challenges and risks posed by CMOs and, in particular, EMOs, that enter into contracts to manage the day-to-day operations of charter schools that receive Federal funds. We recognize that the proliferation of charter schools with these relationships has introduced potential risks with respect to conflicts of interest, related-party transactions, and fiscal accountability, particularly in regard to the use of federal funds.”

Such EMO-related conflicts are on clear display in the example of AmeriSchools in Arizona. Four AmeriSchools charter schools were chartered by Reginald Barr. His late wife Sandra was the president of the schools’ board. The schools pay the EMO Edventure to manage all activities and programs; Sixty Five Plus to lease their building; and One Employment Plus to pay school employee salaries. All three for-profit companies are owned by the Barrs. Ownership of One Employment Plus is also shared by the Barrs’ daughter, Deborah LeBlanc, who also sits on the schools’ board.

In addition, for-profit charter schools, including those run by for-profit EMOs, deliver concerning outcomes for students. A 2017 report from Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes compared student performance at non-profit charters, for-profit charters, and traditional public schools and found that for-profit charters perform worse in reading, and significantly worse in math, than non-profit charters. In addition, the report found that for-profit charters perform worse in math than traditional public schools.

In light of these serious concerns, I am pleased that the proposed rule includes a clear requirement that a charter school receiving CSP funding cannot contract with a for-profit EMO; however, when considering the complicated web of for-profit conflicts in the AmeriSchools example, I recommend a modest edit to the proposed language:

  1. Each charter school receiving CSP funding must provide an assurance that it has not and will not enter into a contract with a for-profit management organization, including a non-profit management organization operated by or on behalf of a for-profit entity, under which the management organization and its related entitiesexercise(s) full or substantial administrative control over the charter school and, thereby, the CSP project.

Community Impact Analysis

The Department’s proposed requirement for CSP recipients to provide a community impact analysis will generate essential information to assist the Department’s grantmaking decisions. The language, which requires “descriptions of the community support and unmet demand for the charter school, including any over-enrollment of existing public schools or other information that demonstrates demand for the charter school…,” will generate helpful information for the Department and the public. I strongly urge you to retain this specific language in the final rule.

In addition, the Department’s proposed language aimed at determining whether a proposed charter school will increase racial or socio-economic segregation or isolation in the schools that the students currently attend is vitally important. I strongly urge the Department to retain this language to guarantee that CSP grants do not inadvertently exacerbate inequities in our public education system.

Charter School and Traditional Public School or District Collaborations That Benefit Students and Families

I strongly agree with the Department’s goal to support more CSP grants that strengthen both charter schools as well as the local public school system by establishing a new competitive preference priority (CPP). I am encouraged by the potential for CSP grants to support charters and districts through collaborations around curricula, teacher and school leader development, transportation, and other areas of shared interest. For this vision of collaboration to succeed within CSP, I urge the Department to include this priority as a CPP in the fiscal year 2022 CMO and Developer Grants competitions.

I applaud the Department for its efforts to introduce greater accountability and transparency in the CSP program. Further, I urge the Department to disregard bad faith arguments from self-interested organizations that misrepresent these important proposals. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Rosa L. DeLauro

Chair

House Appropriations Committee

# # #

delauro.house.gov

Categories Accountability, Arizona, Education Industry, Education Reform, For-Profit, Lies

Good News! Cong. DeLauro Lambastes Charter Lobby, Endorses Federal CSP Reforms

By dianeravitch
April 18, 2022 //
1

Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education, wrote about the letter that Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut sent to Secretary of Education Cardona. Congresswoman DeLauro is chair of the powerful House Appropriations Committee:

Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro, Chair of the House Appropriations Committee, issued a blistering reproach of how “the national trade organization representing for-profit EMO’s is running a well-funded misinformation campaign” to stop the proposed regulations of the U.S. Department of Education to provide more accountability and transparency in the federal Charter Schools Program (CSP).

Although Chairwoman DeLauro does not mention the National Alliance of Public Charter Schools (NAPCS) by name, that organization has been leading the campaign telling President Biden and Secretary Cardona to #backoff. “In 2019, the NACPS Hall of Fame winner was Fernando Zulueta, the founder and owner of the largest for-profit chain in the United States, Academica. Zulueta served on their board for years,” according to Carol Burris, the Executive Director of the Network for Public Education. NPE issued a report last year on the for-profit charter industry, entitled “Chartered for Profit: The Hidden World of Charter Schools Operated for Financial Gain.”

 

Burris continues, “The campaign of misinformation waged by NACPS at defeating sensible reforms in CSP regulations has been relentless. Wild and untruthful claims made include that the Department does not believe rural charter schools and culturally affirming charter schools should exist, that public school districts would need to approve new charter schools, and that the regulations would override state law. Each of these outrageous false claims are intended to do one thing–frighten parents who send their children to charter schools to oppose the regulations in order to ensure that for-profit run charters and white flight charters can still get CSP funding.”

According to the Chair’s press release, which you can find here, this is not the first time that the same organization has used misinformation in order to protect the for-profit charter industry. The “trade organization” , presumably the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, led a similar campaign of misinformation last summer, according to Chair DeLauro.

“In July 2021, House Democrats passed the fiscal year 2022 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies appropriations bill which included a landmark provision prohibiting federal funding to charter schools run by for-profit education management organizations (EMOs),” wrote Chair DeLauro. “Predictably, the for-profit charter EMOs were not pleased with this legislative development. In response, their national trade organization led a well-funded misinformation campaign incorrectly claiming that the provision would prevent federal funds from going to any charter school that uses a contractor for any discrete service.”

Chair DeLauro goes on in the release to praise the Education Department’s CSP reforms. “I applaud the Department for its efforts to introduce greater accountability and transparency in the CSP program. Further, I urge the Department to disregard bad faith arguments from self-interested organizations that misrepresent these important proposals.”

The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools received a CSP grant of nearly 2.4 million dollars in 2018, as did other charter school trade and lobby organizations who are joining the #BackOff campaign.

 

 

 

 

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, Ethics, Lies

Missouri: Legislator’s Fiery Speech Goes Viral

By dianeravitch
April 18, 2022 //
32

Ian Mackey, a Democratic state representative whose district includes St. Louis, gave a blistering speech in the Missouri legislature that scorched a Republican colleague who proposed a bill to ban trans athletes from all school sports. Mackey knew the bill would pass easily in the overwhelmingly Republican legislature. And it did. But as a matter of conscience, he spoke out against it.

Mackey’s impassioned speech has been viewed more than 2 million times on social media. He knows that the Republicans are acting not to solve a problem, but to express hatred for a tiny, powerless, frightened minority.

Republicans assume that if they ignite culture wars against gays, blacks, immigrants, and women who seek an abortion, they won’t need to come up with any policies that address actual problems, like an unfair tax system that benefits billionaires, climate change, or helping public schools. They can keep yammering about ”socialism” and ”the radical left” while doing their best to strangle any meaningful policy changes that improve people’s lives, other than their donors.

Categories Education Reform
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »