Regarding "Charter school critics' arguments lack consistency"...

   I just read the uninformed or biased opinion of The Oklahoman Editorial Board concerning "Charter school critics' arguments lack consistency". The OEB asks "Is it too much to ask for consistency from critics of charter schools?". First of all, there are literally millions of charter school critics in Oklahoma, so at least a few have always been consistent in fairly criticizing "corporate charter schools". We "inconsistent critics" in the mind of the DO Editorial Board, simply want public school decisions to be made at the local democratically elected school board level, not at the corporate non-democratically elected level. This governing philosophy is the linchpin of conservatism - "Local government decisions should be determined at the local level, not at the federal, state, or corporate level". School board members are locally elected government officials, they are not appointed to the position by a higher state or federal official. They are controlled by the local voters which includes parents of local public school students and local officials. The Ed. Op. Board refers to voters in school board elections as vague "special interests groups", so one may question just which groups the Ed. Op. writers are referring to: Democrats, Republicans, Teachers, Educators, Conservatives, or Liberals? Or maybe the real special interest group trying to control local school board elections is the Corporatists, whose primary interest is "corporate welfare".
   State Board members, on the other hand, are appointed by corporate (not conservative) state or federal officials whose apparent goal is the control of our local public schools, via corporate welfare (the acquisition of public tax dollars for corporate cronies). We'll disagree with the Ed. board's opinion that "conservative lawmakers" lack consistency - Conservatives do not lack consistency in their belief of reduced government spending and local government. I'm just beginning to critique the corporate media's opinion of our public schools, so will continue this rant after I feed the cows...
   The DO Editorial states that "local parents and officials are the ones seeking to launch charter schools", but fails to name the local parents and local officials it refers to. Many local parents and real local officials would believe the biased media, if only it would provide data which back up its claims - it's the difference in uninformed opinions and informed opinions. As a matter of fact, the local officials referred to may be the corporate entity, not local school board officials, which contacted the corporate charter group that appealed to the State Board of Education for control of Seminole Public Schools.
   Another example of what the DO Editorial Board considers a local public school is the EPIC virtual charter school chain. (If I am incorrect in assuming that the DO Editorial Board considers EPIC a public school, controlled by local parents and officials, please let me know..). Ample evidence exists that EPIC illegally provides payments to parents in return for enrolling their kids. Through corporate welfare programs provided to EPIC nation-wide by corporate state lawmakers, EPIC pays for private music lessons, private acting lessons, and much more to the parents of students. This private payola provided by corporate lawmakers, is used to entice parents to enroll children in EPIC corporate charter schools at local taxpayers expense. This is how the local taxpayer is bilked out of $ millions: Virtual school vultures circle the Oklahoma skies looking for dead or weakened public schools. Several Oklahoma public schools have been choked down by corporate legislators as a way of providing public school carrion to their virtual vulture corporate cronies. A prime example of a weakened public school which has fallen victim to corporate wolves (Oklahoma corporate legislators) is Panola Public Schools. Panola, already sick from state budget cuts, was near death as EPIC vultures circled overhead. The local Panola school officials envisioned the circling vultures as a lifeline to staying alive, so turned Panola over to the EPIC vultures - as a way of "keeping their doors open". Panola Public Schools was immediately transformed into EPIC Virtual Charter Schools, and the former Panola superintendent was transformed into the new EPIC principal. The new EPIC (Panola) Public School began siphoning students away from area traditional public schools on the promises of providing private lessons to students or the public money to pay for them to the parents of students. Like mistletoe on an Elm tree - virtual charter schools survive on the host public schools, and when the host dies, the parasite moves on - leaving nothing behind. The Virtual Vultures may be likened to the "suitcase farmers" of Dust Bowl Oklahoma during the 1930's. Just as Eastern wheat farming corporations saw hefty profits in buying up or leasing land in the western Oklahoma for plowing up our topsoil, the present-day Virtual Education corporations see the failure of our lawmakers to properly fund public schools as a panacea of profit. The real victims of the Eastern farming corporations were our family farmers and ranchers which is not unlike the real victims of the Virtual Vultures: the charter school students (who often return to their traditional public school, but only after the virtual school has collected the state aid), the public school students in traditional public schools (who had their funding reduced to pay for the Virtuals), and state tax payers (who have been bilked out of $ millions to pay for a public school which is not even real).
   Another example of "stealing $millions from tax payers" are the TIF charter schools mentioned in another post. In south Oklahoma City for instance, two charter schools are being built for $60 million, an elementary charter and soon to be high school charter. The $60 million was acquired by a real estate developer through promises to develop a specific area in the OKC School District. The only problem is that OKC school district voters did not approve a "bond" for building the two schools. The only approval was given by the OKC city council. The revenue for building the two charter schools did not originate from local property taxation, but from the state aid that all other public schools should have received. The billionaire entrepreneur has the money game figured out - bilk tax payers out of $millions, in order to become a wealthier billionaire. But he's even smarter than the average billionaire, because he's not bilking OKC tax payers - only who he believes are the "stupid" rural tax payers. So, I have a question for the DO editorial board: The fact that a billionaire real estate developer in Oklahoma City will build two charter schools, at a cost of $60 million which comes from many rural tax payers and rural public school students... Is that not "robbing traditional public schools" to pay for the billionaire developer's "private" charter schools? I have a feeling his little charade will come to a screeching halt within two years.
   Back to the Op. Editorial board's shallow and offensive remarks: "... school boards tend to be dominated by special interest groups whose goals don't always align with the broader community". There are approximately 517 local school boards with about 2000 members in Oklahoma. The board members (all of which are parents of students, local business owners, and other local public school supporters) have been elected by their local voters to serve students, which is the special interest group referred to by the DO Ed. board. I am offended by this remark, but not nearly so as most local school board members are.
   The DO editorial board opines "Is it too much to ask for consistency from critics of charter schools?", so we must naturally believe that part of the inconsistency the corporate media complains about is the matter of "school choice". In other words, since Senator Sharp is a Republican, he must adhere to the national republican party position for our public schools - that "every parent in America has a right to spend public tax dollars on any form of private, home-schooling, private skill lessons, virtual education corporations (both national and foreign), brick and mortar charter schools, and on and on and on... In the small collective mind of the DO board, no tax increases would be too high to support any form or style for furthering any student's education. It's called competition for Oklahoman's tax dollars, and billionaire developers want their fair share...
   I don't personally know Senator Sharp's political philosophy concerning public education, but we must assume he believes that "public tax dollars should go to public services". He must believe that lawmakers don't have the right to direct public money to private and corporate charter schools. But then again, he probably hasn't received any campaign donations from corporately managed education systems or private corporate schools - so has no personal interest in "paying them back", as many corporate lawmakers do...