Democrats and School Choice

Democrats are reflexively against anything that gives parents more freedom to rescue their school children from the maw of the failed public education system.  RedState ponders how this may have influenced the elections in Georgia and Illinois this week.

My friend Roland Martin put one of these on my radar. In Illinois, prominent black ministers around the state cast their lot with the GOP. They encouraged congregants to abandon Governor Quinn in Illinois and support the Republican. That made a real difference in the metropolitan Chicago area, where the Republican this time outperformed prior Republicans.
Another one that is a real surprise to me is Georgia. But it is abundantly apparent from the turn out data and the anecdotal evidence. Black voters were turning out for Democrats in early voting. In fact, I’m told that privately the GOP saw Democrats outpacing them in early voting around the state. But on Election Day, black voters stayed home. 

One might wonder why Democrats are so adamantly opposed to school choice when it seems so popular with urban blacks, a big part of their base.  My answer: #unionism and #feminism.

At the end of the day, the teacher's unions donate far more money, "the mother's milk of politics" than the already locked up votes of blacks appear to be worth to Democrats.  The public school system is a way to recycle tax dollars into campaign cash.  Charters and their ilk are often non-union and upset this apple cart.

The more overlooked issue is feminism.  Charter schools are seen as a threat to the public school systems in the white suburbs.  In order to be free to "lean in" and "have it all" suburban moms and especially the core constituency of single moms need the free baby-sitting of the public schools.  Never mind that charters can also provide that function, the mere threat to the established order of government provisioning to their offspring is viewed as a threat by many such Moms. (Married women are far more likely to view the government as competitor for the family resources because married men are outperforming economically, so it makes sense for married women to reduce the competition for resources from the government.)  And don't forget that the public schools are a jobs program for women, much more so than men.  Not to say that there aren't great teachers, but reform of the schools is always attacked as a threat to the "middle class" as if the government creates the middle class.

Finally, the public schools serve as a great propaganda outlet for the left.  The left always is seeking to influence the culture, especially through the schools and universities.  Charter schools threaten the leftist union control of the message.  If you haven't noticed public schools getting more authoritarian with zero tolerance policies and the suppression of free speech, you're not paying attention.

So poor black moms hoping to "win the lottery" and get their kids out of poverty?  Sorry, we Democrats already haver your vote. Or do we?

Government Schools - Jim Crow, Pedophilia and Racism

Item 1. In Louisiana, the law firm of Blackwell and Associates is sending threatening letters on behalf of teacher's unions to small private schools, threatening to sue them and prevent Louisiana students from leaving public schools under a voucher program that lets children leave failing schools. (You can contact the law firm at the link.) From the Pelican Post:

The letter goes on to insist that each school inform the Department of Education that it will not accept funding through the voucher program until the legal challenge has been resolved. Failure to do so by Friday, July 27 at 4:00 P.M. will result in the union instituting litigation against the school.

Clint Bolick, Vice President for Litigation at the Goldwater Institute in Arizona, has argued and won landmark cases in state and federal court on behalf of school choice programs around the nation. “In over two decades of school choice advocacy, I’ve never seen thuggery of this magnitude. What the unions can’t accomplish in the courtroom, they’re trying to achieve through bullying schools whose only offense is offering educational opportunities to children who need them.”

The teacher's have already lost the first round of this case in appeals court, this tactic, is intended to slow the program down "by any means necessary," according to the threatening letter. As the WSJ points out, it used to be slave holders and later Jim Crow that sought to prevent black children from learning to read, now its the teachers unions.

Item 2. In New York City a teacher in Queens had a sexual relationship with a 13-year old girl and sent her inappropriate messages through email and Facebook.Of course, he wasn't fired for this offense merely removed from the classroom. It may be many years before the taxpayers stop paying his salary.

Another example from 2007: Teacher William Scharbach was found to have inappropriately touched and held young boys. "Respondent's actions at best give the appearance of impropriety and at worst suggest pedophilia," wrote the arbitrator—before giving the teacher only a reprimand. The teacher didn't deny the touching but denied that it was inappropriate.

Why does this happen? The teacher's unions insist on arbitration for all allegations of teacher misconduct including sexual predation. With arbitrators beholden to the unions for their pay, teachers will be sitting in jail before they are ever off the payroll.

Item 3. In Tennessee, the State Board of Education overruled the Nashville's board of education denying Great Hearts Academy authority to open a charter school. The reason for the initial denial is rooted in race based politics; Critics said Great Hearts’ schools would lack diversity and some of its potential students would not have transportation to get there. (Source: The Tennessean) Race based decision making has no place in America, but we are a long way off. The public education system continues the most backward part of government.

Message to Liberals - Unions Are Destroying Government

Liberals who want government to take over ever larger parts of the economy have an enemy, public employee unions. The poor service and high costs associated with public employee unions makes government the unaffordable source for services.

Exhibit 1: Charter School Successes. Charter schools are outperforming public schools. There, I said it. There will be lots of criticism that this isn't proved, but even The Economist is conceding that when states get the law regarding charter schools right, they out perform. Further, they deliver superior performance at lower cost. First on the performance.

The Credo study has been criticised for not comparing the results of children who have won charter-school lotteries with those who have not—a natural experiment in which the only difference between winners and losers should be the schooling they receive. Such studies suggest that charters are better. For example, a lottery study in New York City found that by eighth grade (around 13), charter-school pupils were 30 points ahead in maths.
. . .
Credo finds that students in poverty and English language learners fare better in charters. And a national “meta-analysis” of research, done last year for the Centre on Reinventing Public Education in Seattle, found charters were better at teaching elementary-school reading and mathematics, and middle-school mathematics. High-school charters, though, fared worse. Another recent study in Massachusetts for the National Bureau of Economic Research concluded that urban charter schools are shown to be effective for minorities, poor students and low achievers.
. . .
Massachusetts, meanwhile, has had excellent results and is strict about the schools it allows to operate; the state will step in and close an underperforming school at short notice. Caps on the number of charters in a state drag down performance as much as lax oversight, because they cramp the diversification of the market and discourage investment. Bad laws make bad charter schools.

Further, in Colorado, we have seen that charters can deliver for significantly less than public schools. The reasons are that the unions push for levels of staffing and benefits that are unaffordable. Further, the state educracy imposes unreasonable rules on education. If liberals want government to deliver education, they need to support reforms that mimic free markets, like open enrollment across district lines and within districts and giving principles full control of budgets and the ability to hire and fire. Liberals need to stare down the unions if they care to save public education and force reform. Parents are voting with their pocket books when they can afford to do so and abandoning public education. What's your answer, liberals?

Exhibit 2. Bankrupt Municipalities. California now has four cities that have filed for bankruptcy. I will concede that union pensions are not the sole cause, but they are contributing factors. Bob Beckel keeps saying that this isn't the unions fault, because elected officials negotiated these contracts in "good faith bargaining." There are a number of flaws with this logic. First, the politicians did not negotiate in good faith; they are afraid of union dues funding campaigns against them. Second, the pension benefits don't accrue until long after they have left office. This is why government employee pay and benefits should not be negotiable, but set by law. This is how the federal government does things, and I have yet to hear a liberal complain that the federal work force is "oppressed." Stockton and San Bernadino in California and Scranton in Pennsylvania are the biggest recent municipal trouble spots. Consider this from San Bernadino:

Two years ago, Husing told city leaders to consider dismantling the city's police and fire departments and instead contract with the county sheriff and fire agencies. Public safety accounts for nearly 75% of the city's general fund budget.

"The costs for police and fire have tended to crowd everything else out," Husing said. "They immediately started attacking the idea. It just shows how powerful those unions have been in that community."

Police union President Steve Turner said officers have done more than their share to help bail out the city, agreeing to a temporary 10% cut in compensation. He discounted the escalating employee pension costs, which are expected to increase from $6.5 million to $7.5 million this fiscal year, as a major contributor to the city's financial woes.

"Public pensions are not what's breaking the bank in this city," he said. "It's the mismanagement. Spending money like there's wheelbarrows of it."

Given that the city's budget shortfall is $45.8 million, he may have a point about the pensions, specifically, if he's telling the truth. But if the city is facing a 15% increase in public pensions in a single year, that sure isn't helping. The OC Register has a different take:

For example, San Bernardino's contribution rate to its "public safety" – police and firefighter – pension payments for fiscal 2012-13, which began July 1, is estimated at 30 percent. But for employees classified as "Miscellaneous," the contribution is 17 percent. In that city, 75 percent of the budget goes for "public safety." Which means 23 percent of the city budget goes to police and fire pensions, money not available for other services.
This was the result of the "pension spiking" for public-safety employees that occurred in many localities beginning in 1999, and which we warned about at the time. There had to be a day of reckoning, especially after the dot-com bust of 2000-01 and the housing meltdown of recent years diminished the investment returns for pension funds. This is that day.

Further, why would outsourcing public safety to the county save so much money? Clearly, labor costs are a big deal. If you are a liberal, consider this. You want cities to do more for there residents, but no one is going to vote to allow that if it means cutting police and fire protection. In one bankrupt city, this now takes up 75% of the budget due to high labor costs. Labor and pension costs are going to eventually drive out every service cities attempt to provide. What is the liberal solution, more taxes? Do the people of San Bernadino, a large percentage with underwater mortgages really need to pay more taxes? I await an answer.

Teacher's Unions Act Like Thugs in Adelanto

The WSJ has an article today on how parents in Adelanto, CA near Victorville, were harassed over their desire to get a decent education for their kids at Desert Trails Elementary. Further, after they successfully petitioned under California's "Parent Trigger Law" for changes to the governance of their school; at least two parents had their names forged or altered on a rescission document. With teachers unions acting like such thugs, why do we let these people educate our children? Because the thugs are mostly from the unions; the teachers themselves aren't so bad. But teachers should reconsider the support they give to their union, it is giving teachers a bad name.

Few dispute that Desert Trails Elementary fails its students, yet last week the Adelanto school district ruled that the trigger drive lacks majority support because 97 parents rescinded their original petitions.

But based on interviews we've conducted and sworn affidavits we've reviewed, it's clear that many parents were harassed into rescinding.

In the Desert Trails parking lot and at front doors across Adelanto, strangers confronted parents and spread untruths about the trigger drive: that it would force the immediate closure of Desert Trails, for example, or result in the firing of all teachers, or cause certain children to be expelled. Some parents heard the trigger drive was an embezzlement scheme. Others had their immigration status questioned.

. . .

At least three Adelanto parents have also signed affidavits swearing that the rescission documents bearing their signatures were doctored before being delivered (in photocopied form) to the district.

And from the LA Times:

Those involved in the rescission effort, including the California Teachers Assn., the Adelanto District Teachers' Assn. and Chrissy Alvarado, a parent leader opposed to the parent trigger petition, denied any wrongdoing.

Finding That Cloud in the Silver Lining

Well poor Jerry Brown, rising tax revenues are complicating his plans to raise taxes. Headline from the Mercury News:

Higher tax revenue complicates Brown's tax pitch
California's tax revenue is running well ahead of projections, but the governor's office said Friday that has not simplified the challenge of closing the state's $15.4 billion deficit.

Of course it hasn't, because the Governor wants to raise your taxes, no matter what.

Meanwhile, teachers unions and their allies demonstrate the height of hypocrisy by holding a prayer vigil at a Catholic church?

About 300 teachers and other advocates, organized by the California Teachers Association, staged a religious-themed rally and prayer vigil Monday on the steps of Sacramento's historic Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament.

This, from a group that opposes both prayer in schools and any form of private school? Oh well, I oppose prayer in public school also, but these people are absurd. They claim they are protesting "for the children."

As Roger Hedgecock pointed out today, if these teacher unionists really cared about the children, they wouldn't oppose vouchers. They would allow school choice, even within the public school system. They wouldn't cling to a seniority system that requires layoffs of the most recently trained teachers. They actually care only about their own power as union officials and the teachers that support the unions care only about their job security and children can go hang.

The public education system is less and less effective. It does nothing to engage parents in the teaching of children and thus fails utterly. It costs more than the equivalent Catholic systems which are similar in size. We need vouchers and choice, because if parents and children were consumers of education, innovation and improvement would follow.

Why School Choice is Important

A little off the beaten path of auto company bailouts and Senate seats for sale comes the following news. The Arizona Supreme Court heard oral arguments today on the issue of school vouchers for special needs and foster children. This is an important case for America. As has been par for the course, the teacher's unions are arguing against anything that improves education for America's children, in this case our most disadvantaged.

The vouchers for special needs and foster children were approved two years ago, and they have been challenged twice. The lower courts have ruled that the use of vouchers at private schools is unconstitutional.

On what grounds you might ask? Because sometimes the funds are used at private schools that are ... gasp... associated with religious (read Christian) entities. Yes, my friends, some Americans are Christians. So if I donated my tax rebate check last summer to my church, has the federal government subsidized United Methodism? Quelle horreur! Someone notify the ACLU!

But the real tragedy is human. Despite assertions to the contrary, the public schools are not meeting the needs of these children (and most children, but one case at a time). Please view the video below to see the effect an adverse ruling would have on one family.




H/T: Institute for Justice