Below is my column on the expanding role of corporations as surrogates for the federal government. The White House is openly calling for greater corporate action to address censorship, health care, and other issues. That call is being supported by a growing list of Democratic members, journalists, and academics who have discovered the advantages of shared corporate governance.
Here is the column:
Teddy Roosevelt gave a speech in 1902, “The Control of Corporations,” which warned of the danger of corporate power over citizens’ lives. Calling corporations “creatures of the state,” he said they must be controlled by “the representatives of the public.” Roosevelt was a Republican, but his distrust of corporations (and his later faith in big government) would become a touchstone of Democratic politics for generations, from the Great Depression to the Great Society.
Like the reversal of Earth’s magnetic poles, American politics now seems suddenly to have flipped: Democratic leaders increasingly advocate for corporate governance while Republicans voice populist themes. From supporting the largest censorship programs in history to privately mandated vaccine “passports,” liberals are looking to companies like Apple or American Airlines to carry out social programs free from constitutional and political limits imposed on the government.
This new model of governance was evident when White House press secretary Jen Psaki was asked about a mandated vaccine passport system. She responded that it is “not currently the role of the federal government” but noted that the administration hopes to see such a mandate from “private-sector entities, universities, institutions that are starting to mandate, and that’s an innovative step that they will take and they should take.”
This use of corporations is born out of political and legal convenience. Despite the rising call for mandatory vaccinations, the Biden administration clearly is not willing to face the political costs of a government mandate. As of July 11, 159,266,536 Americans were fully vaccinated — 48 percent of the country’s population. When you consider the extremely high rate of vaccination for those over 65 (an estimated 85 percent), the percentage of adults under 65 is even smaller. That is a lot of voters who would not take well to a government mandate before the 2022 election. Moreover, the Supreme Court upheld a mandatory state vaccine in 1905, but any federal mandate could face constitutional challenges.
Private companies, however, have great leeway in dictating such conditions. So some, like CNN medical analyst Dr. Leana Wen, have called for coercive measures making it “hard for people to remain unvaccinated.” That coercion would come from private companies which would deny people access to travel, restaurants, movies, schools and other aspects of modern life. Thus, as with Psaki’s statement, the Biden White House is signaling private companies to implement such a national passport system.
And companies are listening.
Recently, Morgan Stanley declared that all employees must get a vaccine to return to work. While some many have religious objections, Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman made clear in July that employees would face what Wen called “hard” times if they tried to work from home: “If you want to get paid New York rates, you work in New York. None of this, ‘I’m in Colorado … and getting paid like I’m sitting in New York City.’ Sorry, that doesn’t work.” The message could not be clearer that working remotely will come at a penalty.
If successful, corporations will manage a system of barriers and penalties to isolate the vaccine-hesitant into smaller and smaller spaces of existence. Citizens would find it increasingly difficult to be able to travel or dine out unless they meet the demands of corporate policies.
The political convenience of relying on corporate controls is most evident in the support for a massive system of corporate-based speech controls now implanted in the United States. The government cannot implement a censorship system under the Constitution — but it can outsource censorship functions to private companies like Facebook and Twitter. Just this week, the White House admitted it has been flagging “misinformation” for Facebook to censor. At the same time, Democrats like Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) have demanded that Big Tech companies commit to even more “robust content modification” — an Orwellian term for censorship. Liberal writers and media figures have called for corporate censorship despite the danger of an effective state media run through private corporations. Even Columbia Journalism Dean and New Yorker writer Steve Coll has denounced the First Amendment right to freedom of speech being “weaponized” to protect disinformation.
The public is now required to discuss public controversies within the lines and limits set by corporate censors — with the guidance of the government. Twitter barred reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop until after the 2020 election. Facebook only recently announced that people on its platform may discuss the origins of COVID-19, after previously censoring such discussion — but it still bars opposing views on vaccinations and the pandemic. Other companies actively block wayward thoughts and views; last week, YouTube was fined by a German court for censoring videos of protests over COVID restrictions. Meanwhile, Twitter censored criticism of the Indian government meant to expose mismanagement of the pandemic that is costing lives.
The common refrain from the left is that corporate censorship is not a limit on free speech because the First Amendment only addresses government limits on speech. That not only maximizes the power of corporations but minimizes the definition of free speech. Free speech is not exclusively contained in the First Amendment. It includes the full range of speech in society in both private and public forums. Yet, liberals — who once opposed the recognition of corporate free speech rights in cases like Citizen’s United — are now great advocates for corporate speech rights, in order to justify the censorship of opposing views.
Social media companies are not just any businesses, however. They were created as neutral platforms for communication between people when they were given special immunity from lawsuits. Yet these corporations now control an enormous amount of public discourse and have become a rising threat to the democratic process, expanding their authority to frame the debate on issues ranging from climate change to gender identity, from election fraud to public health. You must espouse the “truth” as established by these companies on certain questions or risk being banned as “misinformation spreaders.” Indeed, Psaki this week insisted that once people are banned by one company, they should be banned from all social media companies.
If these trends continue, citizens could find themselves effectively exiled by order of corporate governors — unable to travel or go to school while also barred from espousing dissenting views on social media. They would, effectively, be “disappeared” within a shadow state that lacks any electoral or appellate process — a dystopian brave new world that could become all too real if we allow elected officials to use corporate surrogates to control the essential aspects of our lives.
Decades after Teddy Roosevelt’s warning about corporate control, his cousin Franklin — a Democrat — warned that the “first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself.” That warning is worth repeating — indeed, worth tweeting … if Twitter will allow it.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates on Twitter @JonathanTurley.
I have nothing to add to Professor Turley’s article other than to say it is great.
Yeah, Young, the wife and I decided that our children can do without vaccines for polio, mumps and whooping cough. I’m sure their natural immunities will be enough to ward off any threats.
And on a related note, we decided the electrical wiring in our new home need not conform to so-called ‘standards’. Building standards, like vaccines, constitute an over-reach by big government.
Lmao!
eb
eb:
aninny said: “Yeah, Young, the wife and I decided that our children can do without vaccines for polio, mumps and whooping cough. I’m sure their natural immunities will be enough to ward off any threats.
And on a related note, we decided the electrical wiring in our new home need not conform to so-called ‘standards’. Building standards, like vaccines, constitute an over-reach by big government.
eb: “Lmao!”
******************************
Well I’d laugh, too, but the difference, of course, is that all of those vaccines mentioned were tested and are now FDA approved with parameters for side-effects known before given to the general population. As for Building Codes they change regularly and I’ll wager the house is not up to the latest code. See knowing things beats guessing about things even in a pithy way.
On the other hand, i do get to laugh at aninny who I rarely read.
For that matter, bribery is the way around most building and electrical codes on the books. So there’s that. Get vaccinated, Big Mess…, but I’m wagering you already have.
eb
Mespo– Too true. By the way, I am not an anti-vaxxer. I get all of them, most recently the new shingles vaccine. Vaccines that have been through the vetting process are great. As for aninny, I seldom read as well. I read automatically, a little like that guy in the famous Twilight Zone episode of the guy who broke his glasses when he finally had enough time to read. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLoNGRVeC7Y So I notice short statements by aninny but easily skip the longer ones. I imagine a lot of readers do.
Don’t kid yourself, as far as the vaccines go, mRNA is not new technology. And the J&J vaccines are even older school vax tech. The resistance is just tied to the fact your orange man played down the existence of Covid in the first place, was proven massively wrong, bungled the response to the pandemic, etc. It’s a way to keep a long lost argument simmering for the benefit of humoring both trump, and those of you who blindly followed him. That’s even before getting to the ‘I’ll wait and see how it affects other people’ selfishness.
Sometimes civic duties are called for, this would be one of them. Get vaccinated as I suspect you already have. Even Cow Flop Top did after he was saved by monoclonal anti-bodies.
eb
What are the long term effects of MRNA therapy, which has never been used on people on a large scale before on a person with an autoimmune disorder? What is the risk of autoimmune flare? There is no way to truthfully answer that question without long term clinical studies and anyone who says otherwise is either lying or is woefully ignorant.
Having acquired natural immunity through infection and recovery there is nothing anyone can say that will convince me of its safety and necessity until I see the data a few years down the road.
I am by no means an antivaxxer. I have my full Yellow Card and have no problem with traditional vaccines derived from dead virus.
Life is hard enough being an insulin dependent Type 1 Diabetic. I see no reason to risk making things worse with something I don’t need.
“What is the risk of autoimmune flare?”
***
I don’t really know but I had one family member with a severe autoimmune disease who received the vaccination and soon after had an unexpected crash and died. The doctors suspected the vaccination had something to do with the sudden and unusual change, but, again, nobody knows for sure.
The thing is those with autoimmune diseases already have an immune system that is runaway in high gear. So much so we attack our own bodies. Turning it up even further gives me a lot of concern. Will it cause my immune system to up the ante even further in its war on my body? Will it cause it to find some new organ or system to attack? Without long term studies there is no way to determine with any degree of accuracy.
currentsitguy, those are questions everybody should be asking himself given his own medical situation. After seeing what happened to my family member if I had any autoimmune disease I would avoid the vaccine no matter what. Now there are indications that those vaccinated through to the second dose may sometimes suffer a more severe disease if the virus breaks through the protection. There was a term for what happens, but I forget just now, but it was something to do with putting the immune system into hyperdrive. It seems very odd that the number of hospitalizations of people who have had both doses in the UK exceeds the hospitalizations for those with no vaccine.
Vaccinated or not, I suspect all should continue habits that minimize the chances of infection.
Sorry to hear this,, Young. Autoimmune crashes are awful. While tragic that your family member experienced this, the experience — while still in the realm of uncertainty — shouldn’t be used to shape mass public health policy.
It may seem unfeeling to say this, I understand that, but the truth is the severity of the massive effects of Covid, it’s very pandemic reality, determined things move quickly in response. The choice literally was shut down/old school public health mitigation vs. massive vaccination. I don’t like those choices any more than anyone else does. For me, personally I’ve come down on one side of the equation. Not that I don’t grant space for the other side to exist…, but I think the choice is living in that old school public health measure realm in order to do it. Truth is, viruses kill us or we kill them and every now and again one appears that has the capacity to kill way more of us if left to its own devices. Covid fit the bill on that scorecard.
“Sorry to hear this,, Young. Autoimmune crashes are awful. While tragic that your family member experienced this, the experience — while still in the realm of uncertainty — shouldn’t be used to shape mass public health policy.”
****
Of course that single experience shouldn’t shape mass public health policy. Nobody is even sure that the vaccine caused the crash, but more experienced people than I, specialists in fact, who were treating the patient suspected that the vaccine played a role.
I wouldn’t for a moment think public policy should be shaped by one tragedy. But if I had an autoimmune disease and had to decide whether or not to take the vaccine, this is something I would want to know about. I might decide that case is different from mine and get the vaccine or I might think it is just enough along with other considerations to tip the balance against the vaccine.
But I would want all the information I can get without Facebook or Biden telling me what I can know and cannot know.
We agree that public health policy should be shaped by a lot of evidence and studies on animals and groups of volunteers, but that is exactly what is lacking with this vaccine which, after all, may be wonderful–it has not been settled in the usual scientific way.
First we were asked to volunteer for what is a mass experiment into the risks and benefits of the vaccine.
Now we are almost at the point of being told to ‘volunteer’ for the experiment.
As for censorship: you really don’t need to know anything about it when you are ordered to volunteer. All you need is your orders.
That is going too far.
Truth is, Covid shone a light on the basic breakdowns of our society. Whole segments of our population couldn’t and can’t socially distance/quarantine and wait for Covid research to pan out the way it does for, say, a flu vaccine. In fact, for the discussion to be fair, the only comparison would be to take a look at how quickly a a mumps or measles vaccine came on line. Covid was a bear and it necessitated a quicker timescale for all the reasons it became a pandemic in the first place.
True, whether it be Covid, or cancer treatment, or whatever that forces quarantining as a treatment it’s not fair.
I’m not against seeing research play out fully, I did work in a research lab at Yale. And the fundamental weakness of research in clinical medicine is in its quick turn to gaming theory at a certain part of the journey…, it happens in drug research constantly.
But so much of what happened around Covid is just a direct response of having a president politicize a pandemic in order to not have to take responsibility for leading a country through it. So much of the hesitation to be vaccinated is because trump made it personal rather than put down ideology. Yes, other vaccines have had years of research behind them now…, but they were implemented as quickly as they possibly could in the acute phase. We’re just able to implement quicker now.
You and I clearly differ on this point. I’ve never gotten a flu vaccine and live a quite healthy life in response in no small part to health challenges of my own. On top of that, I’m fairly convinced I had Covid in the very early stages.
I’m someone who will address things on every single level, venturing well outside the realm of ‘conventional’ medicine in places in order to do it. And my treatment during what I consider to have been a case of Covid ventured deep into vitamin and herb treatment and I believe it gave me an edge that most don’t have. Of course, I’ve studied deeply into those subjects over the years…
Yet I still feel it was necessary for me to receive Covid vaccination, more so for alleviating the purposes of being an asymptomatic carrier. The results of this virus and its variants have been staggering in the stress put on our first response healthcare system and its my belief that this is a step that should be taken for the protection of the country rather than just waddling around in the naval gazing of personal concerns only.
eb
Polio is under control, but whooping cough (pertussis) has seen a resurgence due to people like you thinking you know more than pediatricians. Pertussis is highly contagious and its victims suffer with spasms of their throat muscles as they cough and choke. It’s awful to witness. As a public health nurse, we watched a film shot in Africa many years before, showing babies and small kids with whooping cough struggling to breathe. That image is etched in my brain. If you understood this, you wouldn’t refuse vaccination for pertussis, so the information you are relying on that “natural immunity” will protect them is not valid. I haven’t looked into mumps, but most males are aware of how this infection can spread to the testicles.
And…the reason for building standards is to prevent your house from catching on fire. So, you might say that’s no one’s business but yours, but if your house does catch on fire, it could kill or injure you or your family and also catch your neighbor’s house on fire. But, you might say you don’t live close to other people, but a firefighter could get injured trying to fight the fire. We have building standards to keep everyone safe. Why do you resent basic safety measures, anyway?
When I first heard Psakis press conference statement, and then Biden’s statement regarding covid misinformation spreading on social media and the need to censor I thought why doesn’t the government ,CDC clearly state what they are referring to,and counter the misinformation with scientifically correct information disputing claims.
Further investigation brought up an npr article citing a study done that showed 12 bloggers/websites/ twitter users et al , that are responsible for the majority of spreading misinformation
https://www.npr.org/2021/05/13/996570855/disinformation-dozen-test-facebooks-twitters-ability-to-curb-vaccine-hoaxes
The 12 individuals are a mixed bag of anti vaccers , holistic non medical gurus, some doctors , natural products promoters , one Nation of Islam adherent and more .. There is a link in the article to “the list”.
Facebook has shut down and or censored some of the postings, accounts , but not all.
Milley is a hack and a bit nuts. He doesn’t respect his constitutional limits set by our Constitution. He has been wrong on too many things and rather than face criticism, he made statements inconsistent with his job. In Vietnam we had POW’s hold out under torture, but Milley can’t seem to take the slightest bit of criticism and yields under such pressure.
No military individual of his nature should occupy such a position in a country where the Commander and Chief is the President.
SM
SM “No military individual of his nature should occupy such a position in a country where the Commander and Chief is the President.”
***
Agreed. And no President should be obviously senile.
Young, Milley was ignoring a psychotic president suffering delusions of grandeur. Trump actually imagined the country couldn’t survive without him. In reality, Trump’s handling of the pandemic suggested America would be challenged to withstand a second Trump term.
“Trump’s handling of the pandemic suggested America would be challenged to withstand a second Trump term.“
It is amazing how little thought goes into your replies. Trump gave us the vaccine Biden is now hawking (as are you). Of course Biden had some other things to say when Trump was President. Biden doesn’t care about America, he cares about being in office and selling his son’s paintings, and supporting the Biden Crime Syndicate while keeping his son out of jail.
https://twitter.com/KyleMartinsen_/status/1416094954603044864?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1416094954603044864%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.powerlineblog.com%2Farchives%2F2021%2F07%2Fjoe-biden-and-kamala-harris-anti-vaxxers.php
You and the Dem party you follow need to be more consistent.You probably need to start basing your comments on facts you can prove.
SM
Gray Anonymous:
If Trump ‘gave us the vaccine’, why is Trump’s base trying to make vaccine refusal a ‘civil rights’ issue??
There’s a huge contradiction here. Technically Trump presided over a rapid development of vaccines. But was that really Trump’s idea, or Dr Fauci’s?
Trump, in fact, would have had us believe that Hydroxycloroquine was an adequate substitute for vaccines.
And Trump being Trump was determined to keep that argument going as long as possible.
Trump succumbed to the virus himself and was spared serious illness only because he had access to special cocktails made with stem cell technologies.
“If Trump ‘gave us the vaccine’, why is Trump’s base trying to make vaccine refusal a ‘civil rights’ issue??”
It is a civil rights issue when one starts forcing people to take experimental drugs and vaccines. That is what the Nazi
s did.
Trump’s base is following the science and I will venture to say that most of his base that are old and sick have taken the vaccine unless they were already infected.
Why is the administration not following the science.
Why has the administration made it a political issue rather than a health issue.
https://twitter.com/KyleMartinsen_/status/1416094954603044864?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1416094954603044864%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.powerlineblog.com%2Farchives%2F2021%2F07%2Fjoe-biden-and-kamala-harris-anti-vaxxers.php
Why are good scientists being censored?
Do you know what science is?
The contradictions are on your side of the aisle. Try explaining the video.
“Trump actually imagined the country couldn’t survive without him. ”
***
I don’t know what President Trump imagined, but it looks as if he imagined right if he did imagine that.
And I for one am entirely grateful he was exactly where he was to blunt the traitorous orange fat hog from trying to overthrow the Constitution and the government.
eb
Milley is a hack and a bit nuts. He doesn’t respect his constitutional limits set by our Constitution. He has been wrong on too many things
I agree, to a point. Adding the tag line…”he’s been wrong on too many things” muddies the principle at work. Your correctly identified, constitutional limits. The leftist are adapt at imploring the ‘ends justifies the means’ scam. Thats what has been happening for the last 16 months. The suspension of the constitution because they had to save lives (they failed). Judges, sucked up to the tyranny because they did not want to get “mean tweeted” for following the constitution and support rights protected by the constitution.
Our rights are not ‘conditioned’ circumstances, it really doesn’t matter if its for the ‘right’ reasons.
Now it is vaccine talk that is banned, next up it will be “the economy is so important that anyone who mentions inflation must be censored”, followed by the new “gun crises” which necessitates censoring anyone favoring the 2nd Amendment. Of course female body autonomy is vital and therefore any mention of banning abortion must be silenced. Arguing against trans men in women’s locker rooms is “violence against trans” and must be banned.
Now Justice Holmes and other lefty fascists can you please tell is one thing that the left supports that you would be willing to have banned. You banned the NY Post for reporting on Hunter’s laptop…and it proved to be the truth. You banned talk of a lab leak for the virus…and it proved to be true or possibly true. Now please tell us ONE TIME where something favorable to liberals has been censored. You banned Trump and let the leaders of Iran tweet. You ban the Post and have no restrictions on info from China. You ban many conservatives and yet you allow Tlaib and Omar to have all the space they need.
The left is taking over the country through government, college, the media, Hollywood and big tech.
Good.
eb
EB thinks censorship is “good”. Just marinade in that sauce for awhile.
I’m just a monster!!
eb
The Left is operating under a Pro-Choice selective, opportunistic (“=”), relativistic (“ethical”) religion that denies women and men’s dignity and agency, and reduces human life to a property for the sake of social progress, social justice, and redistributive change. This is the same approached that they followed in order make a statement, and claim resources, in Africa, notably South Africa, at the cost millions of lives on a forward-looking basis.
I never hear from the ACLU anymore. Why is that?
The ACLU no longer exists, it us now the ACLU-DEM.
Turley In Full Trump Mode With Themes Of Persecution
Are the ‘civil rights’ of anti-vaxers a fight worth pursuing when the Delta Varient threatens a pandemic sequel? Apparently Johnathan Turley thinks so. Here Turley tells us that the sensitivities of anti-vaxers should outweigh any danger of a second quarantine.
Like the U.S. really needs to flirt with a second economic shut-down to accommodate the stupidity of so-called Christian Conservatives? Like we really need to burn another trillion dollars to keep the economy going while everyone sits out the Delta Varient?
Enough already! Let’s just tell these Red State idiots that they can sit home, unemployed at their own expense, if they can’t be bothered to get vaccinated. It’s really that simple!
Corporate America has no obligation to accommodate stupid people.
Is that a racist remark or just a dumb one? Do you want to discriminate more against black workers? That is one of the groups with the lowest vaccination rates.
SM
Here Gray Anonymous makes the dubious argument that stupid Whites should be allowed to piggyback on stupid Blacks.
No, I am demonstrating how poor your argument actually is. I think people should think for themselves. It seems you have adopted the opposite attitude and believe someone needs to think for you.
SM
Gray Anonymous, obviously a lot of people can’t be trusted to cooperate with public health measures. The fact that millions still smoke cigarettes is evidence of that reality.
And one should note that many of the Blacks falling through vaccination cracks live in southern Red States where local governments are typically blasé on public health issues.
It is obvious you like to tell others what to do even though you lack sufficient information to make such decisions. That is typical for totalitarian governments, so one can only assume you have a dislike for our Constitutional Republic that protects the individual’s civil liberties.
Think of yourself as a Marxist, Nazi, Maoist or any other form of totalitarian supporting person.
If a person wishes to smoke and it is not causing harm to another that is his business not yours.
The facts you are trying to produce are not based on research. Only what comes out of your mind. Try making an intelligent argument instead os that one can respond to it.
Don’t demean Black people in your arguments. Stop pretending they can’t think for themselves. That type of thinking leads to racism.
SM
Ten bucks says Allan typed that while chain smoking.
eb
Bug, what you are saying is, you don’t know what you are talking about. I don’t smoke. Leave 10 bucks with Darren.
You have proven to us that you have difficulty managing your own life so stop trying to manage the lives of others.
+100
eb
Blaming and accusing Trump supporters and RED states is the Democrat playbook and “narrative” which should not be confused with “facts” or anything remotely resembly “truth.”
The fact is that it is mostly Democrats or unaffiliated who are NOT getting the shot.
Are the ‘civil rights’ of anti-vaxers a fight worth pursuing
Such weak misleading talking points. Lacking any substance. I can tell because you are forced to use emotional phone labels
“ant vaxers” are not the issue her. Leftists own the anti vaxer credentials. What we have here are people making informed decisions concerning their own medical care. You can opine that their choices are wrong, even though you lack any facts to support the opinion, but you have no facts to label these people as “anti vaxers”
I got vaccinated at the earliest opportunity for my “group” I had already been tested positive for covid antibodies and dont need to be vaccinate. Millions fall into that category.
The question I cannot get a single expert to address, What is the magic number to attain herd immunity?
The lack of transparency on this one question ruins the credibility of the so called experts.
“it can outsource censorship functions to private companies like Facebook and Twitter.”
With CDA section 230 I prefer to call it sub-contracting censorship. That is against the First Amendment
It’s another day & another scientific study
More vaccinated people are testing positive for the China virus Delta mutation.
Take the New York Yankees for example. 6 team players were all vaccinated, but also tested positive for the China virus. These guys spit all over the place. Be careful wear you walk…..And stay away from the dugout & locker room.
Read a study coming out of Israel showing 40% (3,000 of 7,700) of those recently infected with COVID had the vaccine, while only 72 cases were people who had the virus previously.
Dr. Robert Malone, a pioneer in the field of mRNA vaccines, is concerned about the trend of increases of cases in countries that are heavily vaccinated vs those that are not.
Seems to me we dont know enough about either COVID or the vaccine/s to say with any certainty.
I had it last fall. I have had the flu that was worse.
“That call is being supported by a growing list of Democratic members, journalists, and academics who have discovered the advantages of shared corporate governance.”
That sounds like fascism.
Sounds like? It is. I’m shocked Americans are so complacent about this.
“warned of the danger of corporate power over citizens’ lives.”
And Republicans are pushing charter schools!
Statism (and corporstism) from both sides of the aisle is rising fast. And not just statism. Dare I say fascism where (certain select) private businesses gain but the public swallows any loss?
That is not pushing corporate power. That is competition for failed public schools where the parents see their children being short changed by petty individuals who want power for their union, themselves or otherwise make money off the public school system,
In the end there are two groups of children graduating from NYC inner schools. Those that graduated without proficiency in the subject matter and those that graduated with proficiency where some actually end up going to college. If the taxpayer is called on to finance the education of the young then at least let that education be successful.The charter schools have accomplished that goal.
I do not understand how some find it better to graduate failing students rather than students who have acheived the academic goals set by the community.
“The charter schools have accomplished that goal.”
They do not achieve that everywhere. They are not a panacea.
And, they do erode self-governance.
Prairie, let’s compare the needs between your anecdote and my study. What is the population of you town or small city? NYC is over 8 million.
Let us compare your data to mine. You have provided nothing that has panned out. I provided a full blown study involving. The k-12 in NYC is probably around a million. In all your examples that panned out to say you were correct did you have 10,000? No. I don’t think you had any.
“And, they do erode self-governance.”
They both support self-governance and detract from it, but based on NYC charter schools are an overall boon to self governance. Somewhere around 1 million are given more freedom of choice. Do you have proof to prove that wrong? No.
I provided data about New Orleans. Nearly half their schools, all charters, are getting Ds or Fs.
“I provided data about New Orleans. Nearly half their schools, all charters, are getting Ds or Fs.”
***
I wonder who is running them. That could make a difference.
“I wonder who is running them. That could make a difference.”
People who want to run charter schools. When they are doing badly enough, the schools close and the families have to find another school. If nearly half are getting Ds or Fs, what are the odds of getting another crappy school? Just because someone new opens a new charter school does not mean it will definitely be replaced with something better. It just gets replaced with something different that may or may not pan out.
Why are those schools still failing? Is it crappy leadership, crappy teachers, crappy curricula, poor organization, poor discipline, all of the above, or is there something else going on that the public schools faced, too?
I provided data about New Orleans. Nearly half their schools, all charters, are getting Ds or Fs.
I did not see the data you’re referring to here. Perhaps it’s newer than this 2016 article. But as Young pointed out, results varying may have something to do with who is running them. It would be interesting to know if those that were running the closed public schools were now running the charter school.
The reforms included closing or replacing schools that were underperforming, as measured by test scores. To assess the impact, the researchers in this study compared students in closed or taken-over schools with students at similar schools that were not eliminated. They found that the strategy seems to have been effective in New Orleans, where students saw large increases in standardized test scores. But in Baton Rouge, the effects were the opposite: High school students were significantly harmed when their schools were shuttered.
https://www.the74million.org/article/research-shows-students-can-benefit-when-a-school-closes-but-only-if-there-are-better-ones-to-attend/
You provided data about New Orleans. I looked it up and what I saw and presented back to you was that though the charter schools weren’t doing well, the public schools that preceded them were doing worse.
Then I brought up the fact that I didn’t think they offered competition and I was concerned with how the charter schools were formulated. I don’t think they were voluntary or involved choice. They certainly didn’t have a lot of aspects of the charter schools in NYC.
I questioned you about these things, but you had little information and didn’t seem to desire further review into the subject. If what I read was correct, charter schools were better than the public schools that preceded them, then your point was moot and should have permanently been put in the dust bin.
I find it amazing that you bring New Orleans up again when you had nothing more to say before and it looked like you were wrong.
I had a good reply ready to send when my dang phone froze, so I lost it.
“If what I read was correct, charter schools were better than the public schools that preceded them,”
They went from 70% failing to about 40% being rated Ds or Fs. So, over 1/3 are still terrible. Better, but still pretty bad. I cannot remember what the percentage increases to when schools with C-ratings are added in. Many, many black kids are not going to be escaping poverty with this many schools still demonstrating inadequacy. Further, if I recall, the worst-rated schools were primarily attended by black or Hispanic kids. They were not going to or getting in to the highest-rated schools. When they did move, they tended to move laterally rather than up into a better school.
“I find it amazing that you bring New Orleans up again when you had nothing more to say before and it looked like you were wrong.”
I do have more to say and I do not think this is settled. I am having trouble making enough time to do adequate research to support my points. Pubmed makes it easy to research and the abstracts are good. It is not as easy to source education research. It takes time to read and review and my time lately has been limited and sporadic.
Why did you bring up New Orlean’s charter schools when I adequately debunked the information at hand the last time we discussed this city? I noted at the time that neither you nor I had enough facts to draw conclusions so I don’t know why you brought New Orleans up again without new data supporting your case.
We discussed a variety of things that could alter the results including the recent hurricanes. Presently we have a tremendous study with loads of data available, so why would anyone back track to a data-less argument?
I have no problem looking at things that challenge the NYC study, but we have been at this for months or longer.
You are bouncing all over the place. I think that might be due to the fact you don’t like the idea of charter schools being paid by the state along with the fact that the teachers might get a lower paycheck. You don’t seem able to defend these positions so I think you wish to try other avenues instead. That doesn’t work. Figure out what your biggest objection to charter schools is and stick with it in argument.
My argument in favor of charter schools is that the kids are being educated which is what the taxpayer is paying for.
S. Meyer,
I don’t mind that we continue to discuss this. It is a complex issue that requires a great deal of discussion to properly understand the pros and cons and effects upon society (or different parts of society).
“I think that might be due to the fact you don’t like the idea of charter schools being paid by the state along with the fact that the teachers might get a lower paycheck. You don’t seem able to defend these positions”
I do not think the state (which means local control has been lost) should pay charter schools. That is too many layers removed from the people of the communities in question; local communities should decide how they want to educate children in their communities. The state does not pay, taxpayers pay. We authorize the government (consent of the governed) via our representatives or community-wide votes to levy taxes for those things we have mutually decided will benefit the community at large. Taxpayers best understand their local circumstances, so as much decision-making as possible that affects the local level should stay at the local level. State-level decisions should be for things that affect the state as a whole.
I’m not focused on paychecks when it comes to this argument. I am concerned about self-governance.
I do care about attracting and retaining highly educated and high-quality teachers to the teaching profession, but charter schools would want to do this, too, and I don’t think the paycheck is the main criteria for attracting people to this calling. Our culture is broken when it comes to teachers. They are not expected to be highly educated or skilled at their craft, as they should be; rather, they are insulted as, ‘since you can’t do, you teach.’ Teachers should be held in high esteem (and they should be deserving of it, too).
“Figure out what your biggest objection to charter schools is and stick with it in argument.”
My biggest objections are regarding local control and self-governance. When the state starts to take over the greatest degree of governance, that causes people to hand off more and more of their responsibilities, their duties as citizens. It becomes ‘somebody else’s job’, some faceless government employee.
Education is a complicated enough issue that I’m not inclined to focus on one element of charter schools to the exclusion of other legitimate points of concern. Elements of successful charter schools can most definitely be seen in expectations, consistency, discipline, and a culture of excellence. Public schools are fully capable of instituting such things.
I have additional concerns regarding their overall efficacy. We have two primary case studies: New Orleans and New York. They seem to be polar opposites, based on the research we have both provided.
Rather than dismiss the data from New Orleans we ought to explore it in contrast to New York’s so we can understand them both better. What is going on here? Why have New Orlean’s schools not been as (apparently) successful? How do the achievement Bell Curves compare?
From what it sounds like, NYC charter schools have an overall Bell Curve skewed more to the right, with more charter schools successfully educating students such that they not only graduate high school but continue into and complete some kind of post-secondary education (is this an accurate assessment of NYC charter schools?). New Orleans appears to have a Bell Curve shifted further to the left (since about 40% of schools are getting Ds and Fs). Many of the students graduating from these charter schools struggle in college and end up not completing a college education.
What is going on between the two? The charter schools in New Orleans more closely resemble a free market since they are ALL charter schools. One possibility: there are no public schools which would have to take the kids who are not able or willing to make the sacrifices and meet the expectations of charter schools like Success Academy. No one has to make the effort to put their name into the lottery to get into a charter school. That’s NYC. The bar is already slightly higher in NYC for the charter schools, since parents have to care enough about education to even make that effort.
I do think some parents NEED an outside entity holding them accountable. This is why I have agreed with you that charter schools could be very beneficial in struggling communities where families may need the extra structure and accountability. Their self-governance is not so hot already. However, ideally, I would prefer the whole community be able to self-govern effectively. As a constitutional republic, it is not good for any of our cities to not be very good at effective self-governance (and that goes right down to the responsibilities and duties of the individual).
“My argument in favor of charter schools is that the kids are being educated which is what the taxpayer is paying for.”
That is not enough. Taxpayers are not a cow to be milked. This a government of the people. We are to be part of the conversation regarding budget, expenses, upkeep, and improvement of our communities at the local, state, and federal level. We elect representatives to represent our perspectives and positions on the various and sundry issues that affect us as a community (with our God-given rights as individuals taken into consideration). If these representatives do not represent us anymore, we vote against them and if enough people are in agreement that their views are not represented, then that person is voted out of office. It requires people to pay attention. It requires people to step up to the plate and run for office, if need be. If not me, who? If not now, when?
People need to pay attention to their schools (and communities). They need to ask hard questions.
I will try to do more research later this evening after I bake a cake for an activity tomorrow. I am going to be busy for a few hours with other duties, too. My summer has not been one of leisure whatsoever.
“It is a complex issue”
The issue requires data. The data for NYC has been provided. It accounted for selection problems and made a head-to-head comparison that has been provided. It demonstrated that the charter schools educated previously failing classes of children while the public schools did not. You have not shown that any of its data was poorly created or any reason why the study should not be accepted as valid. This puts the burden of proof at your feet.
There is nothing to discuss since you don’t think the state should pay for charter schools even when the citizens of the state vote in favor of them. You don’t seem to recognize the power of the teacher’s unions, or you don’t realize that they place themselves ahead of the students. You also don’t understand that school taxes are to educate the students, not to fund the teacher’s union and create municipal buildings for their sake.
It is odd for you to say, “Taxpayers best understand their local circumstances..” because the so-called taxpayer isn’t watching where the money goes, and the kids remain ignorant. I guess that is why the taxpayer voted for those that approved the charter school system.
You repeat the above concern saying, “My biggest objections are regarding local control and self-governance. ” My answer remains the same. You seem to believe in form over function.
“Education is a complicated enough issue that I’m not inclined to focus on one element of charter schools to the exclusion of other legitimate points of concern.”
Really? Do you prefer focusing on reliable data or anecdotes and shallow opinions from friends? Do you wish to concentrate on failure?
“We have two primary case studies: New Orleans and New York.”
That is not true. We only have one study. The other is a series of unreliable and unconnected bits of data. By the way, that data shows New Orleans improved with the charter schools though I don’t think that was good enough.
If you want to know why New Orleans failed, you must understand how the system functioned and compare it to NYC. The word charter is meaningless. How things are permitted to operate is the key.
“Rather than dismiss the data from New Orleans”
You had no confirmed data. You had anecdotes, one of which proved an improvement with charter schools, though that is not success. NYC’s methodology is a proven success.
“What is going on between the two? The charter schools in New Orleans more closely resemble a free market since they are ALL charter schools. ”
Wrong. You don’t have the data to make that statement.
“No one has to make the effort to put their name into the lottery to get into a charter school.”
If I understand you correctly, what you are trying to say is wrong, and I believe we went over that last time. There is so much data in NYC that one can make comparisons to handle this question of selection as well.
S. Meyer,
“Then I brought up the fact that I didn’t think they offered competition and I was concerned with how the charter schools were formulated. I don’t think they were voluntary or involved choice.”
They offer competition because they are all separate entities–like a bunch of different shoe stores. If I recall from my reading, students can go to a private school or one of the many charter schools available. Students can choose amongst many different charters. Some may have entrance requirements (test scores).
I can’t comment on what you are saying until you are sure of the facts. The NYC data is quite extensive.
Seth,
Here is a good article regarding this thread.
The Real Problem? Teachers’ Unions
The real systemic problem of poor-performing public schools like BCPS is neither funding nor racism, but teachers’ unions. The K-12 public education bureaucracy has been set up to benefit these unions, not children. With backing from Democrat allies, teachers’ unions have become an impediment to any meaningful education reform.
They have opposed anything that may challenge their status quo, from performance-based pay to accountability or competition. They have kept failing schools such as Augusta Fells open at the expanse of children and communities because these schools provide union employees with well-paying jobs. They have spread misinformation about charter schools and done everything in their power to prevent parents from choosing which schools are best for their kids.
https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/20/public-schools-systemic-problem-isnt-racism-or-money-its-teachers-unions/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=the_federalist_daily_briefing_2021_07_20&utm_term=2021-07-20
Olly, in an earlier discussion Prairie said something like,… it was unfair to make the teachers union compete with charter schools because charter schools pay so much less to their teachers.
My suspicion is that the one who talked to Prairie about New Orleans was a teacher or married to one. If I am wrong about either of these things, I am sure Prairie will correct me.
I have one object. I want the poor in inner cities to have a chance. I want the kids educated and even think the parents should be allowed to study to become educated. The teachers union is interested in one thing only, the teachers union. There are many great teachers, but there are a lot of lousy ones as well.
Thanks for the article.
Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGfa9pDYRPs
I hadn’t seen that video. I understand unions should are there to advocate on behalf of teachers, but who is advocating on behalf of the students and parents? I’m assuming the free legal representation these teachers have available is being funded by the union. Perhaps parents need to establish their own union.
There were several videos of this type. Did you see the one where they admitted to a rapist remaining in the school system?
There are very few advocating for the students. Political power is in the hands of the teachers union and Democrats in NYC. There is no reason for the lower income inner city youth to not have access to a decent educational environment. Taxpayers spend a lot of money, but those on the left don’t care about the drugs, lack of police, teachers that don’t teach or who are paid to sit in a room rather than teach, graft, etc. The politicians worry about those with the biggest wallets and mouths. NYC is notoriously to the left.
Right now instead of tending to these kids the Biden administration is impoverishing us with open borders, M-13, drugs, killers and rapists, etc. This administration cares nothing about the poor or the minorities as one as they get their votes.
I agree Seth.
This video is good in it’s entirety, but at the 36:30 point they are addressing the public school system.
The public school may not be redeemable.
S. Meyer,
Dang-it, S. Meyer! I need to go bake a cake! I’m going to be up too late again.
“Prairie said something like,… it was unfair to make the teachers union compete with charter schools because charter schools pay so much less to their teachers”
I do not care about the teachers unions. They cause plenty of problems.
“My suspicion is that the one who talked to Prairie about New Orleans was a teacher or married to one.”
Huh? Who talked to me about New Orleans? I am doing my best to find data about test scores, exit outcomes, how the systems work in different locales.
“I want the poor in inner cities to have a chance. I want the kids educated and even think the parents should be allowed to study to become educated.”
I agree. However, I also do not want to undermine self-governance in general either. Inner cities are basket cases with very low self-governance, as far as I can tell. Charter school may be efficacious in such places. Charter schools are not appropriate everywhere due to the erosion of self-governance. Should self-governance be increased or decreased?
“The teachers union is interested in one thing only, the teachers union. There are many great teachers, but there are a lot of lousy ones as well.”
I agree.
Prairie, you might not now care about teacher’s unions, but one of your previous arguments was that the system was unfair and charter school teachers were paid less. (I don’t know if they are paid less, the same or more.) You may not care about teachers’ unions, but you cared about unfairness in comparative salaries that may or may not exist.
“Huh? Who talked to me about New Orleans? ”
Your initial response indicated that you heard about New Orleans from another. It’s not crucial because you added some quick research and drew your conclusions. How did you first decide that New Orleans was a source of charter school data?
“I also do not want to undermine self-governance in general either.”
Neither of us wishes to undermine self-governance, but there are different ways of undermining it. When the schools are bad, whoever is responsible is undermining self-governance because the taxpayer’s money is not being used correctly.
“Inner cities are basket cases with very low self-governance, as far as I can tell.”
Then your primary argument against charter schools doesn’t exist. You talked about a lot of other things. Do they no longer exist as well?
And, they do erode self-governance.
When parents choose a charter school over a public school, they are by definition exercising self-governance. Your comment assumes once parents make this choice, they no longer govern their children’s education. That’s an absurd assumption. Parents that are proactive in this effort to find the best schooling option for their children are not going to rest apathetic to a diminishing return on their investment. They will seek the best option, even if that means taking the hit on the cost of private schools or even the home school option. Your advocacy for public education as the best form of education self-governance is irrational in the wake of the overwhelming evidence that the teacher’s unions and school boards openly defying the will of parents objecting to their leftist, racist indoctrination of their children.
Olly, people without children in the district still pay to support public education. They attend school board meetings, talk to their elected representatives (school board members), some sit on curriculum committees, keep watch on the school finances, and VOTE for those people making decisions with their money, among other things. If their money is also being used at these charter schools, they should have that same access and those schools should have accountability to more than just parents. Parents were not elected to make decisions with the public’s money.
“overwhelming evidence that the teacher’s unions and school boards openly defying the will of parents objecting to their leftist, racist indoctrination of their children.”
This is NOT happening everywhere.
And, charter schools can teach that nonsense and there is no place for the public at large to express its ire. The public at large has no school board meeting equivalent at the myriad of charter schools at which they can inquire about policies and curricula.
This is NOT happening everywhere.
Can you tell me what school districts do not employ educators connected with the largest teacher’s unions in the country? How about what cities, or what states?
And, charter schools can teach that nonsense and there is no place for the public at large to express its ire.
I suspect you’re now resorting to hypotheticals because you cannot cite examples of this taking place. Of course they can express it. And when their concerns go unheard, they disenroll their child and choose a different option.
Teachers unions do not determine the curricula. That is up to the teachers (to a certain extent), curriculum and instruction directors, principals, and/or superintendents and school board. Parent and community member input is part of these discussions and approval process. The state Department of Ed usually has mandated expectations, too, regarding standards.
People who do not have children therefore do not have children to disenroll. They have no means of expressing their views on how their money is spent!
Teachers unions do not determine the curricula.
Right. And politicians take an oath of office, so our rights are secure. You cannot possibly be that naïve.
They have no means of expressing their views on how their money is spent!
Sure they do. First of all, they can move. Secondly, as you said yourself, they can reach out to their elected representatives at the local, state and national levels. You know, the people they VOTE for making decisions with their money, among other things. Although you didn’t include them above, they also have a voice through local school boards, regardless of whether they have children attending or not.
They should be able to reach out to their local school boards which were organized to govern local education. City councils have little to do with the governance of education in a locale. Same with the state and federal levels in terms of local-level issues and concerns. Governance and oversight should be most vigorous at the local level where people are most acutely aware of their local needs.
You said they have no means of expressing their views on how their money is spent! Since you have dismissed the obvious and stated the obvious, it’s apparent you need the last word.
Done.
“Since you have dismissed the obvious and stated the obvious”
I’m sorry, Olly. I am missing your point. I’m not meaning to be difficult. I am tired. And, I think I am not being clear because I feel like we are not understanding one another. Seeking clarity over agreement.
“they also have a voice through local school boards, regardless of whether they have children attending or not.”
How do they, the taxpayer, have a voice regarding how their money is spent in charter schools via the local school board?
It may be different state to state, but in PA, local school boards do not have oversight of the charter schools that get money from their districts. It doesn’t appear the state provides much oversight either since there is a waste of taxpayer dollars in a few of the (cyber) charter schools people I know are attending.
“They should be able to reach out to their local school boards which were organized to govern local education. “
In NYC the few that knew how to reach their school boards tried and failed. The rest weren’t that well educated, so the school boards didn’t reflect their needs. A higher level of government recognized their needs as did the people and charter schools were begun. Education improved.
In power the school boards being political destroyed the education of the minority students. With charter schools minority students are passing, going to college and have a chance at a good future.
Prairie, I like you, but I don’t know where your head is at.
S. Meyer,
“In NYC the few that knew how to reach their school boards tried and failed. The rest weren’t that well educated, so the school boards didn’t reflect their needs. ”
The crap going on in NYC is not what happens in the rest of flyover country. Please stop generalizing. It seems you only know NYC. Are people incapable of asking questions in NYC? I do not think so. If they aren’t sure how to contact their school boards, then they can ask teachers or principals. Heck, even a social worker should be able to direct them. Typically, school board information is linked right on the main page of the school district webpage.
Small cities and towns will not have the problems these enormous, bloated districts seem to have. People can talk to their school board members at the grocery store, football games, and other local functions. I am able to communicate pretty easily with my school board members (as do many other people in my community). They are very responsive. You will throw that out as anecdotal, but my experiences are not that out of the ordinary in other smaller communities.
Education levels do not need to be reflected on the boards. Board members just need to familiarize themselves with the lives and needs of the people in their districts–school board members can seek out a wide range of concerns and perspectives.
“With charter schools minority students are passing, going to college and have a chance at a good future.
Prairie, I like you, but I don’t know where your head is at.”
Thank you, I appreciate that. My head is worried about the preservation of self-governance. I have said, repeatedly, that perhaps charter schools are beneficial in poorly governed, broken communities. One of our main points of disagreement is whether charter schools should be expanded to more communities nationwide. The nation does NOT look like inner city NYC.
People made bad decisions with laws in the past–that does not justify them as right or just or or wise or even Constitutional.
People allowed the erosion of their rights when too many supported the passage of the Patriot Act. People ignored the erosion of their rights to due process with the passage of the 2012 NDAA (foolishly thinking Obama’s signing statement meant anything). People need to stop letting their rights and ability to self-govern erode and trampled upon when they get convinced to support disastrous legislation.
I, too, want to make sure poor and minority kids can get the opportunity to gain an excellent education. A way to achieve this WITHOUT damaging our system of self-governance or supporting a greater degree of corporatism should be sought. All I hear you say is ‘rah, rah NYC charter schools’ as though that solves everything. It doesn’t. Self-governance should be encouraged and increased rather than shrugged away and eroded by letting people mindlessly hand over what is precious.
We live in a republic if we can keep it. I doubt that pushing for more charter schools will help us keep it.
Tomorrow will be a busy day so I will probably have to wait to reply to anything until another day.
“The crap going on in NYC is not what happens in the rest of flyover country. Please stop generalizing.”
Prairie, stop right there. It is you who is generalizing, not me. In most threads, I have explicitly said that my data and discussion come from NYC. I have been clear on that over and over again. Yes, as stated before, it is my opinion that wherever the schools are not doing the job and a sufficient student population exists, one could try the NYC model. It would be best to use a similar model with a head-to-head competition between public and charter schools stopping the school system from imposing its bureaucracy onto the charter schools. Both methods will benefit from such a market being created.
You brought up New Orleans, not me. That was an attempt not to show NYC charter schools didn’t educate but that charter schools are bad for society. (Your ever-present argument, self-governance, seems lame to me under the circumstances.
“It seems you only know NYC. ”
Prairie, at least I know the details of one city. You haven’t provided sufficient information for any city. I don’t talk about specific educational activities elsewhere because I don’t have adequate data. But, I do know what is going on in other cities and based on reports, inner-city children are not being educated in most public schools. I don’t want to get into demographics, but for circumstances to be similar to NYC, one needs a minority of a certain percent of the population. That doesn’t mean the NYC model can’t be applied elsewhere. It only means that the data to extrapolate becomes more difficult.
We should ask ourselves whether or not children are sufficiently educated with the available resources and whether or not the job is performed in the best possible way.
You are very glib in your discussion of NYC charter schools, especially where self-governance is involved. The basic information exists and is easy to locate so that you can do it by yourself. I am interested in educating the children, and charter schools did a fantastic job in NYC. If in NYC the “school board information is linked right on the main page of the school district webpage,” as you suggest, is an advantage to the public school then, it should be evident to everyone that the charter schools succeeded where the public schools failed. Instead of improving the public schools, the system is trying to add rules and regulations to charter schools so the charter schools cannot function effectively. Their idea is that they should bring the charter schools down rather than bring the public schools up. How is that for what you call self-governance?
“Small cities and towns will not have the problems these enormous, bloated districts seem to have. ”
Prairie, if the children are being educated in the best way possible, there may be no need to change. That is what I said in at least one other discussion.
“You will throw that out as anecdotal, but my experiences are not that out of the ordinary in other smaller communities.”
Name five communities where you know that information first hand and can provide data on how the education system works, not what they tell you on the website.
“Board members just need to familiarize themselves with the lives and needs of the people in their districts–school board members can seek out a wide range of concerns and perspectives.”
That is a lot of fluff. Kids are either being adequately educated or not, which should be your primary concern.
“I have said, repeatedly, that perhaps charter schools are beneficial in poorly governed, broken communities.”
That is a reasonable assumption that I don’t believe you have said before. However, my statement is that wherever children are thought not to be adequately educated, one should look into the problem and look for ways to make public schools competitive.
“The nation does NOT look like inner city NYC.”
No, it doesn’t, but that doesn’t mean your children are adequately educated. We saw differences in education between the rural north and rural south, so don’t start saying that small communities have no problems.
“People allowed the erosion of their rights when too many supported the passage of the Patriot Act.”
Don’t start changing the subject. If you want to take it to the self-governance level, then the question of federal taxes for school systems will arise, followed by state and local taxes for school systems. It is no a slam dunk that government should be guaranteeing free education to all. That is where your idea over control of education begins.
“I, too, want to make sure poor and minority kids can get the opportunity to gain an excellent education.”
What you have said here and elsewhere tells a different story. I am sure you feel that way, but your arguments should line up in the same direction as your feelings.
“All I hear you say is ‘rah, rah NYC charter schools’ as though that solves everything. It doesn’t.”
That is BS because virtually every time we have discussed charter schools, I have stated that my only data is from the NYC school system, and the results were fantastic. I even said that I didn’t advocate testing charter schools without enough students to have a head-to-head comparison. In that case, I would have to look at what exists in the present carefully. I and others also said school systems could treat charter schools differently, and that would cause results to be different.
What you are doing is refusing to recognize that charter schools have the potential of reversing what we see today, but you don’t seem to like to hire companies that have a proven record and duplicate their methods.
“We live in a republic if we can keep it. I doubt that pushing for more charter schools will help us keep it.”
That makes it sound like you don’t understand the complexities of our system of government and what it requires. Our system of government requires an educated population, and presently, the uneducated part that wants to tear it down can only see the known freebies and never consider the unknown or the freedoms they are supposed to possess.
S. Meyer,
I apologize for the delay. I have had a busy couple of weeks. Thank you for your patience.
“In most threads, I have explicitly said that my data and discussion come from NYC.”
That is so. However, often your argument seems to veer towards portraying charter schools as all looking like the very best in NYC. I am looking more broadly at how well charter schools are doing in general. While I have not had the opportunity to thoroughly examine charter school success nationwide, I have examined the New Orleans system to some degree and found that, while they are doing a bit better than they were prior to Hurricane Katrina, charter schools have not been a panacea. Nearly 40% of these charter schools are getting Ds or Fs. Another large proportion are only a C in terms of quality. Many minority students do not transfer into higher-performing schools and many students have to deal with serial closures of charter schools. There are underlying issues that even charter schools have not been able to transform. Charter schools seem to be falling into a Bell curve of quality. They will not all look like Success Academy and not all students are ready and willing to conform to their expectations. What then?
“You brought up New Orleans, not me. That was an attempt not to show NYC charter schools didn’t educate but that charter schools are bad for society.”
No, I was showing that there is another side to the story. Not all charter schools look like the highly successful ones highlighted in the NYC study you are citing. I am extremely wary and hesitant about the effect of charter schools on society and self-governance. In order to accurately weigh their pros and cons, there needs to be an accurate picture—and that picture is not all sunshine and buttercups.
“Your ever-present argument, self-governance, seems lame to me under the circumstances.”
Why? If self-governance is eroded, what is left?
“You haven’t provided sufficient information for any city.”
I have provided quite a bit of information for New Orleans in prior conversations.
“We should ask ourselves whether or not children are sufficiently educated with the available resources and whether or not the job is performed in the best possible way”
Absolutely. I am asking this in my own locale and trying to address it.
“Instead of improving the public schools, the system is trying to add rules and regulations to charter schools so the charter schools cannot function effectively. Their idea is that they should bring the charter schools down rather than bring the public schools up. How is that for what you call self-governance?”
I agree with you that they seem to be more focused on undermining charter schools than addressing the deficiencies of the public schools. That is certainly a failure on the part of the administrators.
Self-governance comes from the people. What is getting in the way of the people in exercising their self-governance?
I would argue that one element of interference is that NYC and other massive school districts are simply too large to allow for effective self-governance (inadequate representation for the number of people–not local enough). These school districts should be broken up into smaller bites so that the people in the different regions can more effectively communicate with the people they elect.
Do you think breaking NYC into smaller districts would help (small enough that districts would only have one high school with no more than 1800 students or so)? Could this help improve education and strengthen the self-governance of neighborhoods and communities because they are a more manageable size?
“Name five communities where you know…”
Absolutely not. Geez, I’ve been too specific about my location already, but I am not going to share that kind of location info with the whole world. I do have pretty good information on quite a few surrounding school districts because I know people whose children attend or the people I know teach/have taught in these districts. I could certainly know more, but my knowledge is more than an overview of these districts’ websites and coursework documents.
When I wrote: ““Board members just need to familiarize themselves with the lives and needs of the people in their districts–school board members can seek out a wide range of concerns and perspectives,”
I was responding to: ““In NYC the few that knew how to reach their school boards tried and failed. The rest weren’t that well educated, so the school boards didn’t reflect their needs.”
You responded: “That is a lot of fluff. Kids are either being adequately educated or not, which should be your primary concern.”
I think we are talking past each other. What did you mean, “The rest weren’t that well educated, so the school boards didn’t reflect their needs”? Perhaps I misunderstood you.
I wrote: “I have said, repeatedly, that perhaps charter schools are beneficial in poorly governed, broken communities.”
You responded: “That is a reasonable assumption that I don’t believe you have said before. However, my statement is that wherever children are thought not to be adequately educated, one should look into the problem and look for ways to make public schools competitive.”
Your response is rather frustrating. Have you shared your username with someone who does not have a history of our exchanges? I am left to wonder because responding to me stating, ““I have said, repeatedly, that perhaps charter schools are beneficial in poorly governed, broken communities” as though “I don’t believe you have said before [this reasonable assumption] is quite perplexing. I have said this very thing many, many times before. It makes me wonder how carefully you are reading my responses.
“However, my statement is that wherever children are thought not to be adequately educated, one should look into the problem and look for ways to make public schools competitive”
Why make them more competitive, per se? Why not just better at educating? Public schools already compete with their neighboring districts as to whom has a better district.
“No, it doesn’t, but that doesn’t mean your children are adequately educated. We saw differences in education between the rural north and rural south, so don’t start saying that small communities have no problems.”
Goodness gracious, I know this too well (and am trying to address it). Small communities can definitely have problems. But, those problems do not look just like the problems NYC is facing.
When I brought up the Patriot Act, I was not trying to change the subject. I wrote:
“People made bad decisions with laws in the past–that does not justify them as right or just or wise or even Constitutional. People allowed the erosion of their rights when too many supported the passage of the Patriot Act.”
Charter schools are an erosion of self-governance because unelected people are allowed to make decisions with other people’s money. People allowing for charter schools is a decision that eroded their rights just as they allowed their rights to be eroded with the passage of the Patriot Act.
“If you want to take it to the self-governance level, then the question of federal taxes for school systems will arise, followed by state and local taxes for school systems. It is no a slam dunk that government should be guaranteeing free education to all. That is where your idea over control of education begins.”
That is a fair point of discussion but somewhat tangential to the point at hand. Government is still guaranteeing free education to all, even with the involvement of charter schools. Now, though, elected officials can pass the responsibility off for managing taxpayers’ money and pass off the responsibility of making sure the schools are doing a good job. Now it is all on the shoulders of unelected parents to determine these things. That is not how a republic works.
““We live in a republic if we can keep it. I doubt that pushing for more charter schools will help us keep it.”
“That makes it sound like you don’t understand the complexities of our system of government and what it requires. Our system of government requires an educated population, and presently, the uneducated part that wants to tear it down can only see the known freebies and never consider the unknown or the freedoms they are supposed to possess.”
I agree that our system of government requires an educated population. I agree that there are far too many people that are inadequately educated and who do not really understand or appreciate ‘the freedoms they are supposed to possess’. But, does it follow that they should lose these freedoms to somehow learn about them to then regain them? I do not think so. If these freedoms are lost, I do not see them being regained. Freedom is a concept that requires exercise in order to be maintained.
“your argument seems to veer towards portraying charter schools as all looking like the very best in NYC. ”
Prairie, I don’t know what you are thinking. My argument is that a study was done comparing public schools to charter schools in NYC. The comparison made sure the public and charter schools compared would be in the same building, from the same demographic, picked by lottery, and compared using matching years. All of those criteria and more were to make sure the selection process was as accurate as possible. One could even compare the children from one family where some were picked for the lottery, and some weren’t. The conclusion was that charter schools performed tremendously better than the public schools they were compared with.
We cannot look at situations where charter schools do not exist. We also can’t look at situations where charter schools do not act independently from the school system. We must compare them to others while avoiding selection. So far, you have provided none.
“I am looking more broadly at how well charter schools are doing in general.”
What you have been looking at showed you nothing. We either have a crisis in education, or we don’t. If we don’t, nothing needs to happen. If we do, we need newer and better ideas. I believe we have a crisis in education which will cost future generations their standard of living. I am not willing to wait for that to happen. Instead, I advocate trials of charter schools where public schools seem to be failing. You offer the status quo.
“I have examined the New Orleans system to some degree and found that, while they are doing a bit better than they were prior to Hurricane Katrina, charter schools have not been a panacea ”
You have no data and very little information. According to you, charter schools are doing better than New Orleans’ public schools that preceded them. That is known as an improvement. I think those schools are managed differently than NYC schools and, if so, I would advocate change in management. The political leaders in NYC are doing things that will likely make charter schools in NYC more like New Orleans charter schools, thereby reducing the effectiveness of NYC charter schools.
“Charter schools seem to be falling into a Bell curve of quality.”
That will be the same everywhere, including NYC, except for the fact that in NYC, the bell curve showed vast improvement, so that charter schools moved the entire curve substantially to the right. The majority of the schools, if not all, did that. I don’t think you understand that the entire system with all the different charter schools improved.
“No, I was showing that there is another side to the story”
You didn’t. You showed that charter schools improved student success in New Orleans as bad as the schools may be.
I believe New Orleans dictated things not necessary to the education of the children.
Charter schools came in after Hurricane Katrina wrecked everything, so they started at a disadvantage.
“Not all charter schools look like the highly successful ones highlighted in the NYC study you are citing.”
1) How do you know? Do you have accurate comparisons? No. That type of statement is made up.
2) Not all charter schools are run like NYC charter schools. NYC seems to have hit a good formula, so good that the teachers union and NYC politicians are trying to destroy the system.
“I am extremely wary and hesitant about the effect of charter schools on society and self-governance.”
You keep repeating that, but it sounds like a red herring since many things affect self-governance in a far worse way without providing the benefits. If self-governance were that important, one must question the public school system itself and school taxes. Maybe the localities where each public school system exists should decide on the level of taxes for that school system. Perhaps, for self-governance considerations, public monies should be restricted or not used at all. I am not advocating that. In this case I don’t think you will find genuine self-governance desirable.
“In order to accurately weigh their pros and cons, there needs to be an accurate picture—and that picture is not all sunshine and buttercups. ”
The school system in NYC was a complete disaster. With charter schools, it is proportionately less of a disaster. I am not looking for sunshine and buttercups. I am looking to reduce the disaster.
“I have provided quite a bit of information for New Orleans in prior conversations.”
The only quantitative information you provided in New Orleans was that the school system improved when it switched to charter schools.
“I agree with you that they seem to be more focused on undermining charter schools than addressing the deficiencies of the public schools. That is certainly a failure on the part of the administrators. ”
That means the administrators of public schools aren’t able to address the deficiencies of the public schools, which has been proven over many decades. That means the public school system in NYC is not doing its job.
“Self-governance comes from the people. What is getting in the way of the people in exercising their self-governance?”
Maybe you don’t understand what self-governance entails. Perhaps you don’t understand the politics of self-governance. Let me provide a synonym, autonomy. That is not an exact meaning, but if you think of autonomy, you will obtain a better answer than you have today.
“Do you think breaking NYC into smaller districts would help”
Do you think the politicians and teachers’ unions want to give up power?
What do you think charter schools are doing? In essence, they are breaking up NYC into more localized schools and doing much better by doing so.
>> “Name five communities where you know…”
> “Absolutely not. Geez, I’ve been too specific about my location already, but I am not going to share that kind of location info with the whole world.
You know people, which means you have testimonials, not data. I brushed my teeth with Brand X toothpaste, and my teeth are much whiter.
You have no data. If you did, you could use similar criteria for comparison, and you would be able to tell us the restrictions placed on the charter schools. You wouldn’t have to name the schools or say where they were. It is possible those you talked to have a strong affinity for the teacher unions and don’t want their power reduced. Charter schools reduce the power of the teachers’ unions. The reason to have schools is to teach young minds, not to support the teacher unions.
“I think we are talking past each other. What did you mean, “The rest weren’t that well educated, so the school boards didn’t reflect their needs”? Perhaps I misunderstood you.”
I can’t recall the exact conversation. The school boards are more interested in the teachers union and politics than they are in the students.
Since you are providing the exact quote of what you said before (it’s in quotation marks), you should be able to provide the link or where it occurs. In that way, I will have context so I can be more exacting in my response.
Don’t be frustrated because I have pointed out that I don’t know if all school systems will be better off with charter schools. That is why, where one questioned a need, I advised testing in areas where the school system is large enough for direct comparisons between public and charter schools.
I read your responses very carefully and respond carefully as well. I remember listing some of your primary concerns at once, and I don’t recall that quote being one of them.
“Why make them more competitive, per se? Why not just better at educating?
Competition leads to improvement through adopting new features. Markets compete for customers, and that pushes the system forward.
“Public schools already compete with their neighboring districts as to whom has a better district. ”
That doesn’t seem to provide the impetus necessary.
“Charter schools are an erosion of self-governance because unelected people are allowed to make decisions with other people’s money.”
Then complete the thought and end the use of other people’s money to educate children. I am not advocating that, but when you support a principle, you have to be more complete in your advocacy.
“That is a fair point of discussion but somewhat tangential to the point at hand.”
My comment regarding self-governance and school taxes is not tangential. It is central to the idea of self-governance. Always remember, ‘he who pays the piper calls the tune.’
Your final paragraph is about freedoms being lost, but charter schools in NYC, for the most part, are removing power from the teacher unions and politicians, not the people.
There’s a sign on the outhouse (poop cage) door at my marina: GYFCS. That means Get Your Friggin Covid Shot. Then it says:. Before You itShay!
These vaccone scolds are ignorant of history.
Remember the last pandemic?
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=115001
25%!
What an abysmal failure!
And they think it wilo be different this time.
Ever since Obama I’ve thought the same, true liberalism is coming from the other side at this point. The dems have gone mad, and it is truly shocking to anyone old enough to remember.
I read somewhere a few years ago that voting against them is self-preservation, and I agreed. I believe that they do too, hence the democrat led efforts to strip voting of any efficacy whatsoever. I never thought they’d be the corporate party either, but here we are, knee deep in actual leftist fascism, in the formerly freest country on earth.
Can we reverse it?
Thank you, Prof. Turley, especially for the following paragraph — “If these trends continue, citizens could find themselves effectively exiled by order of corporate governors — unable to travel or go to school while also barred from espousing dissenting views on social media. They would, effectively, be “disappeared” within a shadow state that lacks any electoral or appellate process — a dystopian brave new world that could become all too real if we allow elected officials to use corporate surrogates to control the essential aspects of our lives.”
Many people already find themselvees in situations approximating similar to these, which is why free speech is not simply a constitutional question. Freedom of speech is above a cultural value that is essential to an open society. FDR defined it as one of his ‘four freedoms’ in his State of the Union address in January 1941. FDR was a Democratic, but cut from a different cloth than today’s party leaders. How different is clear from his comments beginning at pargraph 66 regarding “the foundations of a healthy and strong democracy” and his vision for a world founded “upon four essential human freedoms” — “freedom of speech and expression,” “freedom to worship God” in our own way, “freedom from want” (“a healthy peacetime life”), and “freedom from fear” (which required “a world-wide reduction in armaments”).
https://voicesofdemocracy.umd.edu/fdr-the-four-freedoms-speech-text/
The argument that private companies can restrict speech may be correct in a narrow legal sense, but to suppress speech in a way which favors a particular group or political party undermines our society by rejecting basic cultural values (including free speech, tolerance for opposing views, and protection of minorities) and replacing them with the values of the corporation, an entity in which the boss dictates and the workers obey. Companies are not democratic; they are hierarchical and authoritarian. So a republic which adopts coporate values and norms ceases to be democratic; it becomes a bureaucratic dictatorship, and one which silences the minority becomes, as Mill noted, a tyranny of the majority.
Our values underpin our legal system and our social institutions; if they are compromised, so are the systems and institutions they support. A corrupt judge is a corrupt judge from whom one cannot expect a fair application of the law, and a tech company or media outlet which colludes with the government to suppress information critical of the government and disseminate information favorable to it resembles the newspapers and magazines which followed the party line in Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union.
The argument that private companies can restrict speech may be correct in a narrow legal sense, but to suppress speech in a way which favors a particular group or political party undermines our society by rejecting basic cultural values (including free speech, tolerance for opposing views, and protection of minorities) and replacing them with the values of the corporation, an entity in which the boss dictates and the workers obey.
An Old Guy,
You bring up a very important point regarding cultural transformation. Cultures change slowly. In our system, they’re like the bowling lane with bumpers. Government sets and enforces laws and regulations to guide a culture within the constitutional lane. When those laws and regulations exceed their authority, and/or violate civil rights, they are challenged and struck down as unconstitutional. This is the normal ebb and flow of constitutional governance and culture. The response by the culture is typically reflected in the next election cycle. But when the government “partners” with corporations to do what they cannot, the culture is forced outside the lane quickly without recourse. The sudden transformation becomes “normalized”. The political class and their administrative state will seize upon this new paradigm and in the blink of an eye, the people are staring at the security of rights 5 lanes over. The next election cycle cannot come soon enough. And when it does, it won’t be a surprise to discover they will be looking for an authoritarian leader that “promises” a return to constitutional order that will “feel” as though we lurched 5 lanes the other way.
In a capitalistic society, the capital always controls the message. What’s so hard to understand about this? Look at how Fox “News” has insinuated its talking points into the common zeitgeist. I mean, check out how Tuck-ems works his game…
https://www.cnn.com/videos/media/2021/07/18/charlotte-alter-tucker-carlson-interview-tuckerism-sot-rs-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/business-media/
eb
” the capital always controls the message. “
…And people vote with their feet.
SM
Review your use of appendages.
eb
Bug, I understand your response. You follow a fascist type religion so you want people to walk in lock-step like they did in Nazi Germany. Your reply makes absolute sense from your perspective.
SM
I’d suggest you have a talk with Milley on the subject.
eb
Monopolies and monopolistic behaviors are antithetical to capitalist economies, and, in America, they are illegal.
And widely practiced anyway.
eb
When corporations control government it is called Fascism
When government controls corporations it is called Communism
When corporations operate independently it is called Capitalism
Guess where we are?
Not the last one!
If the private censorship is done at the direction of government, it is still a government action and subject to the first amendment.
What’s the difference between communist censorship and that done in the west?
Very little, the main point is the suppress unwanted ideas. And to do it in the name of fighting for justice.
antonio
It will be interesting, to say the least, to see what a Federal court–hopefully the Supremes–says about your first supposition. Why aren’t actions like the one the WH admitted to–but tried to justify–last week an end-run around the First Amendment? Discovery alone in such a lawsuit will speak volumes.
@justice holmes
You’re such a hypocrite. In another 10 years, you’ll be the first to support “hate speech” laws in the name of stopping “hate”. And you’ll do it while claiming to support the first amendment. With few exceptions (JT being one) liberals only supported free speech when it was communists and poronagraphers being suppressed.
I would respect them more of they would just admit such
antonio
If Americans accepted taking away the liberty of smokers to light-up indoors and forcing them like second-class citizens outdoors, they will cotton to the idea of being required to get vaccinated in order to be allowed indoors as a responsible and considerate citizen. We even have to wear seatbelts for our own protection! We are such sheeple!
If you want Trumpists to get vaccinated, simple- hand out a free semi-automatic weapon. That’ll do it!
You may want to know who is not getting vaccinated.
https://jonathanturley.org/2021/07/17/the-lethality-of-free-speech-biden-denounces-big-tech-as-killing-people-by-not-censoring-speech/comment-page-2/#comment-2106853
There does not seem to be information available regarding vaccination rates among Slavic populations. (I know there was an influx of Slavic immigration to the Los Angeles area about twenty years ago.)
Perhaps so, but the Trumpists are the loudest voices in the room denouncing the tyranny of the medical establishment in pushing for vaccinations. Trump recently said:
“Joe Biden kept talking about how good of a job he’s doing on the distribution of the Vaccine that was developed by Operation Warp Speed or, quite simply, the Trump Administration,” the 45th president said in a statement released via his Save America PAC on Sunday. “He’s not doing well at all. He’s way behind schedule, and people are refusing to take the Vaccine because they don’t trust his Administration, they don’t trust the Election results, and they certainly don’t trust the Fake News, which is refusing to tell the Truth.”
It’s bad enough that Trump is an unmitigated liar, but what is worse is that his lying is a point of pride for Trumpists.
“Trump is an unmitigated liar,”
Have all presidents lied at one time or another? Yes. However, Trump has been the most honest and transparent. If he weren’t, Jeff would have listed his most significant lies. Jeff hasn’t, and that makes Jeff a liar. Add to that the Biden lies Jeff can’t see. That makes Jeff a fool.
Did you listen to Biden and Harris lie about the vaccine? On tape, they lied for political reasons. This didn’t help the vaccine acceptance rate. Now that Biden is President, he says the opposite and again lies about the vaccine.
The administration and Biden have tried to censor scientists and doctors concerning the vaccine. That doesn’t help the vaccine acceptance rate either.
Between Biden being two-faced about the vaccine, trying to censor legitimate vaccine information and pushing 12-year-old females to take the vaccine when it is still experimental, one has a legitimate reason to believe the Biden administration isn’t looking out for the people. Is he looking out for big pharma’s profits? Does Jeff have stock in Pfizer?
Additionally, 12-year-old girls can’t even go to the bathroom without fearing an adult male being in the toilet because of Biden’s policies. A little strange and scary.
I have a question, Jeff, do you loiter in the bathrooms where 12-year-old vaccinated girls are?
Another fine comment designed to obfuscate the issue presented, Justice Holmes – either you support free speech, as did your namesake, finally, or you don’t. There is no middle ground. Citizens United was a free speech case regardless of what you think. Ironic, as much woke corporate money is going to the party that supported the ban on corporate contributions. You may want to read this article by Victor Davis Hanson as it regards wealth and political contributions. https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/biden-obama-hillary-democratic-party-victor-davis-hanson
I’m not comfortable with limiting free speech but I’m also not with Individuals who wantonly and with malice publish lies! As to corporations and governance, it might be a good idea for you, Professor, to remember who supported Citizen’s United and who weaponized corporate money in the area of politics, the GOP!
As to the reach of the First Amendment, it does only apply to government actors and you know it. The platforms about which you speak enjoy their power because of Republican action.
As to corporate power, the Republican Party has made the corporation the Uber mensch…..able to pollute and abuse for “fun and profit” and avoid even the bulk of taxes the rest of us pay.
One more tie bit….the former president and his gang have suggested journalists and their sources should face not just censorship but execution.
Holmes, yiu and Biden should look up HYPERBOLE. Or basically…LYING!
@JusticeHolmes: “…wantonly and with malice…?” That’s a bold statement. And your proof that Joe E. Citizen is maliciously posting an article that disputes a government position…?
I believe you might want to take a look at who sits at the pinnacles of some of the most powerful corporations in the world. They are not Republicans.
And one more TIDbit…your comment about “the former president” is irrelevant in any context. And if we’re going to play the “whataboutism” game, let’s discuss the recent spate of calls to kill conservatives for a variety of reasons, calls that are allowed on Twitter.
“Professor, to remember who supported Citizen’s United and who weaponized corporate money in the area of politics, the GOP!”
That was decided on based on the law (quite different from what we are seeing today).
Hypocrisy is when one side advocates against a position, but as soon as the position is convenient they advocate the other side. I keep hearing these conveniences from you, Holmes, post after post. Do you realize you fit the definition of a hypocrite?