I mentioned in my last column/post here that one should read several books before voting in the August 28 primaries - in order to help conservatives and public school advocates decide who to vote for. It would be obviously be too much of a time investment to spend weeks researching candidates as to their potential public school support - for one or two elections. One may simply spend 5 minutes reading the following post to arrive at the same conclusions for voting:
Anyone who regularly reads this column/blog knows that I often quote from the book Reign of Error by Diane Ravitch. I have two copies of the book... if I lose one, I'll still have a spare (LOL). I really received the second copy from Diane Ravitch herself. Several years ago, while attending an education convention, I waited in line patiently to meet Dr. Ravitch as she signed copies of the book. The book was being sold at the convention, and Ravitch had already addressed the several thousand public school advocates in attendance. Those ahead and behind in line had their books in hand ready to be signed. I had already owned the book for a couple of years and read it several times over, but did not bring it with me. As It came my turn to briefly visit with Dr. Ravitch, she noticed I had no book - so I explained I already owned one. As we spoke, she reached over to a copy, signed it For Jim, Diane Ravitch - and handed it to me. I only wanted to tell her how much Oklahoma public school advocates appreciate that she has stood up for our local public schools in her more than one dozen books. What is truly amazing was that there were several conservative Oklahoma Republicans in line with me (one republican representative directly in front of me) and several liberal Democrats.
An excerpt from the concluding chapter of Reign of Error - The Pattern on the Rug, p. 321, states:
"Conservatives should be at the forefront of the effort to oppose privatization because the public school is a source of community, stability, and local values. Conservatives do not tear down established institutions and hand them over to the vagaries of the free market or the whims of the financial and political elites. Conservatives do not destroy communities. What we are witnessing today is the Walmartization of American education, an effort to uproot neighborhood schools and Main Street businesses and outsource their management to chain schools and chain stores run by anonymous corporations. If they do not make their bottom line, they may pull up stakes and abandon the community, leaving it bereft, as many chain stores and charter chains have already done. Conservatives protect their community and its institutions. There is nothing conservative about the chain-store mentality that is being introduced into the control of schooling."
This one concluding statement sums up much of the book for public school advocates nation-wide. Dr. Ravitch identifies the financial and political elites as corporates and non-profits that "have names that are appealing and innocuous, like the American Federation for Children (AFC), the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), Chiefs for Change (state school superintendents), Democrats for Education Reform, Stand for Children, Teach for America, the Heartland Institute, the Heritage Foundation,the Walton Family Foundation (WFF), ... The political elites "are Republicans and Democrats. They include President Barack Obama and Secretary Arne Duncan, as well as Democratic mayors in such cities as Newark, Chicago, and Los Angeles. Elected officials of both parties have signed on to an agenda that threatens the future of public education.
Dr. Ravitch goes on to say - The leading corporate elitist funders (emphasis mine) of the corporate reform movement are the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which supports charter schools and test-based teacher evaluation; the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation, which supports charter schools and trains urban superintendents (EM) in its managerial philosophy; and the Walton Family Foundation which funds vouchers and charters (EM). These wealthy and powerful foundations have overlapping interests. They subsidize many organizations in common, such as Teach for America (which recruits young college graduates to teach for two years in low-income schools), the KIPP charter schools ...
Anyone reading the above excerpts may now reasonably ask - How does all this factual information apply to Oklahoma public schools and the Oklahoma political/corporate elite? Several groups mentioned above, including the AFC, ALEC, and WFF, have local and state branches which attempt to influence state legislators and officials into supporting profitable corporate bills or profitable corporate rules (in the case of elected state officials such as the State Superintendent of Schools).
The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), according to SourceWatch, is a corporate bill mill... Through ALEC, corporations hand state legislators their wishlists to benefit their bottom line, profits. Corporations fund almost all of ALEC's operations, which usually involves support and contributions to state lawmakers campaign accounts. Corporate entities, state chambers of commerce, and profitable non-profits such as the Walton Family Foundation and Stand for Children (Vouchers) write checks to those state legislators who will front (author) their preferred state legislation. Diane Ravitch mentions ALEC time and time again as a major player in the corporate school reform movement. Only a few of those OK State Legislators with ALEC ties include:
*Rep. Bobby Cleveland (R-20), attended 2015 ALEC Annual Meeting
*Rep. Charles McCall (R-22), registered member
*Rep. G. Harold Wright, Jr. (R-57), ALEC State Chair and ALEC Public Safety and Elections Task Force Alternate, attended 2015 ALEC annual meeting
*Sen. Julie Daniels (R-29), registered member
*Sen. Kim David (R), ALEC State Chair
*Sen. Gary Stanislawski (R-35), ALEC Task and Fiscal Policy Task Force Member
*There are several more listed members, but as of the 2018 primaries, many are no longer present.
The WFF is one such profitable non-profit which is a major player in the walmartization of America's public schools and has an Oklahoma branch - the Oklahoma Public School Resource Center (OPSRC). The name alone is appealing and innocuous (Diane Ravitch), and implies that "we're here to help" public schools. Nothing could be further from the truth, however, as they are here for corporate profits at the expense of Oklahoma public schools and taxpayers. It is led in Oklahoma by Executive Director Brent Bushey. I've personally met Brent Bushey and find him to be a likable fellow who can discuss most subjects most agreeably. He is indeed the "superstar" hired by the WFF (out of Michigan) to "silence" our public schools. Damon Gardenhire, former chief spokesperson for former State Superintendent and Chiefs for Change member Janet Barresi and friend & confidente' of Brent Bushey - wrote this about local school superintendents in 2012: "Just keep in mind that the local supts will keep doing this (opposing vouchers for private and charter schools)... until choice (vouchers) is introduced (forced) into the system. Until then, they will continue to play these kinds of games. Only choice (legislatively forced vouchers) can be the fulcrum to make them truly responsive. A big part of why I took the Walton gig was because I see real promise for bringing positive pressure to bear (on superintendents) that will help cause a tipping point with enough superintendents that ugly voices like **** ******* will begin to be small and puny."
Damon Gardenhire left his job with Janet in 2012 and was quickly employed by the Walton Family Foundation as a Senior Program Officer in charge of working closely with the WFF's team of K-12 education reform (corporate vouchers) experts to incorporate efforts from across the country, partnering with Oklahoma stakeholders (Brent Bushey and the OPSRC) to build on the state's current momentum for voucher reform. To be very clear, the Walton Family Foundation is the "For Profit, Non-profit" branch of Wal-Mart. The Wal-Mart corporation is in the business of providing goods and services to customers (which many small and local businesses provided in the past). Wal-Mart and other international and world corporations enter a community to sell everything - from hardware, groceries, farm and ranch supplies, auto parts, pharmacies, to now liquor and possibly optometry. It not only competes with local businesses for customers, but its ultimate goal is to run our local businesses out of town. Wal-Mart will then be the "sole provider" for all goods and services in our local communities. Wal-Mart is a retail giant however, so can't corner the market for services provided by the state - such as education... unless it has a non-profit. Enter the WFF! and Damon Gardenhire... and Brent Bushey. These two corporate employees are charged with taking over our Oklahoma traditional public schools - and replacing them with corporate charter brand of public education. Like Gardenhire said in 2012 - If enough local superintendents can be convinced to follow the Wal-Mart brand of public education, the "ugly" superintendents will not be effective in protecting our public schools. Brent Bushey will stop at nothing to do the WFF's work - even providing campaign donations to potential corporate candidates. If the targeted recipient candidate accepts the cash, and is elected - the office holder is now bound to the WFF.
Corporate candidates' winning elections has been as predictable as the Golden State Warriors winning the NBA Championship. One can usually "follow the money" to corporate and charter school support to determine the winner in any state level election. The corporate reform tide seems to be turning on the WFF, however, as several conservative republicans have forced run-off elections for their corporate opponents, while several other corporate republicans have been eliminated altogether. For instance, the most high profile corporate elimination was in the race for the republican nomination for governor. The corporate republican love child, Todd Lamb, came in third place in the (R) primary, not making the run-off. He had collected more corporate donations ($millions) than any other candidate, and had been campaigning for several years for his chosen seat. He was the chosen replacement for Mary Fallin - chosen by corporate charter and private school interests (which often partner with big oil) to send $millions to corporate welfare groups. Oklahomans began to understand the facts surrounding Lamb's candidacy, and sent him packing. Several incumbent, corporate candidates for the state legislature were also sent packing in the primaries - while several more face runoff elections. Several more corporates even resigned early, having seen the "handwriting on the wall" - including House District 42 Representative Tim Downing. Remember, Downing was one of the nineteen "no teacher pay raises ever" crowd who was always supporting corporate charters and vouchers. After only a year and a half on the job, Downing began to prepare for his 2018 re-election bid by "polling likely voters" as to his first term effectiveness. The responses were evidently less than positive - so he decided to give up his seat, and pass the "baton" to another - Allie Burgin. The "baton" consisted of a $2,700 donation (the max allowed) to Allie's campaign. District 42 voters saw through the corporate charade, and Burgin was also rejected. Tim Downing also contributed $1,000 to the Hofmeister campaign as noted below. Many more examples of corporate influence not being so influential have been recorded this year, but it has not stopped the advocates of charter/private reform (Brent Bushey) from trying. Mr. Bushey has realized that even the WFF $millions are limited, so has reduced his spending to only one or two elected officials - such as the State Superintendent of Schools, Joy Hofmeister. As a matter of fact, Mrs. Hofmeister has accepted campaign donations from:
Tim Downing, District 42 State Rep, $1,000
Brent Bushey, Executive Director OPSRC, $500
Ben Harris, EPIC Charter Schools, $2,699
Josh Brock, EPIC Charter Schools, $2,700
Chris Brewster, Charter School Administrator, $250
Greater OKC Chamber PAC (Dark Money), $1,500
(*These are only a few of the groups and individuals which are supporting Joy Hofmeister in her 2018 campaign)
While Superintendent Hofmeister may claim to "not be influenced" by this influx of campaign cash, she has voted for corporate charter reform in the past (see Seminole Public Schools charter). Several traditional public school and student advocates have also donated to the Hofmeister campaign, but indications are that it is to counter the $thousands from the charter industry. Several others are passionate in their support of Joy Hofmeister, and have urged those that aren't convinced to just "ask questions" concerning her allegiance to traditional public schools and its students. A few have privately asked the hard questions of Joy, but have received "less than satisfactory" answers in return, so we'll now ask them in writing and hope we get answers from her -
So, Joy: You were elected in 2014 on a wave of public school support from teachers, student parents, administrators, professional groups, and unions - because you opposed the corporate reform movement and indicated your support for our traditional public schools... and teachers... and traditional advocates... and traditional public school students. You even accepted "dark money" support from education groups and corporate groups in order to get elected. The questions -
1) If you do not support the corporate deform movement, why have you accepted campaign support from those listed above and many other corporate deformers?
2) If you truly support local control of our public schools, why have you supported the state school board taking control away from local boards (In the past, you've indicated "it's for the kids")?
3) If you truly support teachers, why have you supported legislative candidates who do not support teachers (In the past, Joy Hofmeister has run ads in support of legislative candidates like Tim Downing, etc..., all who voted "no teacher pay raise ever" - and against pro-public school candidates, whether (D) or (R))?
4) If you truly support public school advocate candidates for office, why have you only supported (R) candidates, and not the (D) or (I) public school advocates (In the past, Hofmeister has endorsed several anti-public school candidates and criticized several pro-public school candidates)?
Many public school advocates want to know the answers to these questions and many more before voting in the August 28 runoff and the November general election for State Superintendent of Schools.
No comments:
Post a Comment