Huck/Konopacki Labor Cartoons |
Democrats
for Education Reform (DfER) is a veritable who’s who of Education Deformers,
privatizers, vultures and union busters. In California the group includes Gloria
Romero, an anti-teacher Democratic state legislator, as well as Ben Austin,
a leader of the astroturf organization Parent
Revolution. One of DfER’s primary
objectives is to get pro-charter school, anti-teachers’ union officials elected
to office.
Eric Bauman,
chair of the Los Angeles County Democratic Party, says the group’s name sows confusion
and implies Democratic Party support for DfER-backed candidates when none
exists. The Los Angeles Times reported this week that Bauman sent
a letter to DfER accusing it of violating California’s election code and
ordering it to "cease and desist" its "unlawful" use of the
word "Democrat."
Bauman said
his fight was ". . .about preventing voters from being fooled."
However, the
Democratic Party itself is engaged in the much larger deception of suggesting
that it is somehow defending Public Education when many of its members have
supported and promoted the same agenda as DfER.
It is true
the DfER is all about gutting teachers’ unions, tenure and due process rights,
as well as promoting charter schools, vouchers and other privatization schemes.
But what has the Democratic Party done for education lately? Gov. Brown is currently
extorting the public by threatening to slash another $5-6 billion from K-12
education if it does not support his tax increase this November, a tax increase
that would temporarily increase taxes on the wealthy, while also imposing a
regressive sales tax increase that would disproportionately harm lower income
residents.
The
Democrats did virtually nothing to halt the looting of $20 billion from K-12
education over the past four years. They have sat idly by as class sizes have
mushroomed, while nurses, counselors, librarians and course offerings have been
decimated. They have worked side by side with Democratic Gov. Brown to slash
teachers’ pensions. They willingly participated in the corporate sellouts known
at Race to the Top RttT, Common Core Standards (CCS) and NCLB.
The Times’
article framed the situation as turf war between various factions in the
Democratic Party. And to some extent they were right. However, what is most
unpalatable about DfER to Democratic Party hacks is not its disingenuous
adoption of the name “Democrat,” but its presumptuous challenge to the teachers
unions’ status as the preeminent non-corporate donors to Democratic Party
candidates.
However, from
the perspective of teachers, students and those who care about the quality of
education in California, DfER’s party affiliations are irrelevant. DfER, like
many of its allies on both sides of the aisle, still wants greater
privatization and weaker unions and job protections, and it wants these things
not because they will help children (they won’t), but because they will help
business.
Obama Chooses Charter School Shill as
His California Spokeswoman
According to
the Times, the California Federation of Teachers (CFT) is irate over Obama’s
decision to choose a Parent Revolution executive as his spokeswoman in California
and has even threatened to back out of his reelection campaign if he doesn’t
fire her.
The Times
portrayed the CFT’s response as petty Party politics, suggesting that the CFT
was simply refusing to work with someone it didn’t like. Gloria Romero went
even further, calling it “threatening” and “bullying,” thus lending credence to
the argument that it is a turf war
between Democratic Party factions.
Yet one must
remember that Parent Revolution’s main purpose is to rally parents to demand
that their neighborhood schools be turned over to Educational Management
Organizations (EMOs) and private charter school operators, thus abolishing
existing teacher contracts and union protections and reducing parental and
community control by allowing management decisions to be made behind closed
doors by EMO board members.
Hence,
Obama’s California spokeswoman is not just a shill for the charter school and
privatization movements, but further evidence of his general hostility toward
teachers’ unions and K-12 education. Considering his extortionist Race to the
Top competitive grants program, and his support for increasing privatization
through charter schools and Common Core Standards, teachers should NOT be
supporting his campaign, regardless of his choice for California spokesperson.
Obama, in practice, as well as intent, has been as antagonistic toward public
education and teachers as the Bush Administration.
This brings
us back to the question of Party factionalism versus Party loyalty to Capital.
If Obama, DfER and so many other prominent Democrats are supporting vouchers,
charter schools, CCS, RttT, evaluation reform, and other questionable,
unproven, yet highly profitable changes to public education, it would seem
reasonable to presume that they are in it for the money, just like their
Republican counterparts. That is to say, they support these “reforms” because
they are good for business.
The only
significant difference between overtly anti-union Democrats like Gloria Romero
and ostensibly pro-union Democrats like Jerry Brown is their rhetoric and their
funding streams. Romero’s group, DfER, takes in much of its funding from
anti-teacher philanthropies, while Brown takes in much of his funding from the
teachers’ unions. In the end, they both are bad for teachers and for students.
No comments:
Post a Comment