SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the public-money-for-private-profit dept.
Common Dreams reports
The Seattle Times reports that
The ruling--believed to be one of the first of its kind in the country--overturns the law [I-1240] voters narrowly approved in 2012 allowing publicly funded, but privately operated, schools.
Teacher and author Mercedes Schneider offers more on the Act:
As is true of charter schools nationwide, the charters in Washington State (up to the current ruling) were eligible for public funding diverted from traditional public schools. Charter schools were approved via a November 2012 ballot initiative (I-1240, the Charter Schools Act) in which charters were declared to be "common schools" despite their not being subject to local control and local accountability. And also like America's charters in general, Washington's charters are not under the authority of elected school boards.
Thus, Washington voters had approved to give public money to private entities--a one-way street that provided no means for such funds to overseen by the public.
[...] The new ruling (pdf)[1] states that charters, "devoid of local control from their inception to their daily operation", cannot be classified as "common schools," nor have "access to restricted common school funding."
[...] "The Supreme Court has affirmed what we've said all along--charter schools steal money from our existing classrooms, and voters have no say in how these charter schools spend taxpayer funding," said Kim Mead, president of the [Washington Education Association], in a statement.
"Instead of diverting taxpayer dollars to unaccountable charter schools, it's time for the Legislature to fully fund K-12 public schools so that all of Washington's children get the quality education the Constitution guarantees them," Mead continued.
The Associated Press reports that the state had one charter school last year, and eight more have opened in the past few weeks.
I pity Ms. Schneider's students if she routinely starts sentences with conjunctions--especially consecutive, redundant conjunctions.
[1] I had trouble with the connection.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 07 2015, @03:05PM
There's a hell of a lot of hidden story here which isn't actually covered in the summary or links, and most of it is the context created by the state's history.
Washington's single most powerful lobby (in financial terms) is the teachers - even as a group distinct from the other public servants. The prior governor was pretty much in the pocket of the teachers (ex teacher herself) and the current governor pretty much owes his seat to them (the competition had solid support - the vote was fairly close). So as far as political power is concerned, the teachers are kingmakers in Washington.
This decision comes (roughly) on the heels of one which stated that the state government was actually obliged to fully fund (not a clearly defined term, actually) public education. This turns out to be problematic, because the last decade or two has been a nightmare of rising taxes, rising (frequently frivolous or unwise) scope of government programs, raided rainy day funds to the point that there have been some pretty aggressive rebellions of the public who made substantial showings against increased taxes - but in the teeth of a legislature which will not collectively do much to the budget in terms of state programs.
You'd think that failing to pass a budget would bring everything to a halt, but that's not how it works in Washington, because the prior budget is simply automatically pulled forward, and pro-rated by income. State borrowing doesn't go out of control because there are (mercifully!) limits on it.
However this does mean that there's only so much money, and if the legislature cannot or will not pass a budget, the courts are called upon to decide where the money goes. The charter schools being defined as not-quite-common is actually a footnote because Washington is so hostile to alternative education that the charter schools are a tiny, tiny group. The amount of money this will send back to the regular state schools is a sneeze in a tornado.
Washington also is arguably the single state in the union which is most hostile to home schooling, which is interesting because the exact same people who would jump at charter schools and alternative schooling have created de facto unfunded charter schools by organising home schooling collectives. I've run into some of them - and the kids look bright, engaged, well socialised and well supervised. The parents collaborate to find their most qualified teachers in all subjects to make sure that their kids get top notch information in all fields.
The fact is, this terrifies the teachers' unions. Not because they're short on money - they actually get their money as part of a mandatory diversion from all teachers' salaries (Washington is Employment At Will, but isn't Right To Work; Washington is an Agency state in which union dues are paid regardless of union membership) - and not because of power (they're already kingmakers) but because of legitimacy. Parents are so furious about the quality of education in Washington that they will pay all the taxes, hold their noses, take all that time out of their days and still do home schooling rather than even begin to contemplate putting their kids in regular schools.
You might say: "Oh, but that's in rural Washington, far from the urban intellectuals of Seattle."
You'd be wrong. I'm talking Redmond, Kirkland, Seattle, Everett. Highly educated, well informed people who have every alternative at their disposal.
This ruling was just a minor battle, and a minor victory for the teachers' unions. In fact, I predict that it will be a pyrrhic victory because the people who are angry enough to support charter schools and home schooling collectives and alternative schools aren't going to be any less angry, and quite a few people who liked charter schools but were otherwise ambivalent are going to be even more hostile.
If you really want to sum up this story in context, then the headline should be something like: "Teachers' Unions Use Court to Paddle Washington State. Washingtonians Now Angrier."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 07 2015, @04:11PM
So much wrong here. Not sure if the unions are the biggest lobbiest anymore. I'm pretty sure industry has far surpassed them. The unions if anything are weakening here as elsewhere. I urge people to look at the financing of I-1240; the initiative that put charter schools in the state. Heavy funding (something like 10:1) by gates, broad, and the Wallmart clan. over the unions. We were bombarded by advertising by only one side. The union can only lobby with money contributed separately from union dues. Not the ogres that people make them out to be. Pretty toothless at the end of the day.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 07 2015, @04:55PM
The teacher's union is, as of recent figures, the biggest single lobbying group in Washington. These are public figures, go check them out yourself. I see no reason to expect that this has changed in 2015, but I guess it's possible. You'll want to get the numbers from the public disclosure commission - they have a website and everything.
Alternatively, if you're lazy, you can just google for "news washington olympia biggest lobby teachers" and find lots of news stories.
You're wrong about the dues thing - the terms of the Washington State Supreme Court's judgement on the topic of agency fees and freedom of speech issues simply stipulated that agency fees can't be used for political purposes, but that all other funds may - thus basically freeing the unions to pay administrative costs from agency fees, and do anything else with all the rest. Again, the ruling is public record.
You need in this context to distinguish lobbying from other political spending as well. These are different numbers. Advertising for an initiative is not lobbying, and they do plenty of both.
I'm not saying the unions are ogres. I'm not saying they shouldn't exist. I'm not even saying that they shouldn't lobby. I'm saying that as a group they are greatly threatened by alternatives and have done everything in their power to restrict those alternatives at every turn. Charter schools? In the ballots and courts, check. Home schooling? They tried to stamp it out and finally managed to restrict it massively, check. Private schools? They couldn't outlaw those, but paradoxically their hostility massively increased the independence of the private schools because now they owe the unions absolutely nothing. The same goes for religious schools, who are basically private schools with organised backing.
And to what end? They have ringfenced financing, a large captive audience, they have mostly lapdog school boards, you would think that the quality of education would be absolutely second to none, you'd think that Washington would utterly crush Finland, Singapore and all those other famously successful countries.
But no. The education available in Washington's public schools is mediocre, and when measured against the expenses, an incredibly expensive mediocrity at that.
And the teachers' unions prescription? More teachers, more money, fewer people in alternative education. That at least hasn't changed in the last decade or more that I've been watching this issue.
(Score: 2) by albert on Monday September 07 2015, @05:31PM
Gates is not Microsoft. The Walmart clan (Sam's now-elderly kids) is not Walmart.