Open letter to Mr. Ben Austin regarding LAUSD proposed rule changes

To his credit he posted the following on the 21st: Ben Austin "I actually happen to agree with Robert Skeels on this particular issue. the more accountability, transparency, and opportunity for parent and community input, the better."

From:     Robert D. Skeels <rdsathene@sbcglobal.net>
Subject:  Open letter to Mr. Ben Austin regarding LAUSD proposed rule changes
Date:     September 21, 2009 13:12:02 PDT
To:       Ben Austin <baustin@parentsunion.org>, info@parentsunion.org

Mr. Austin:

On August 25, 2009 you and your organization claimed a victory that was in your words "historic." You've stated "we need true accountability" in our school district on numerous occasions. You're on the record that LAPU/Parent Revolution supposedly both stands for and has won transparency, accountability, and parent involvement in LAUSD.

Shockingly, your closest allies on the LAUSD Board, President Monica Garcia and Vice President Yolie Flores Aguilar -- at the behest of your close friend Mayor Villaraigosa -- have suddenly proposed taking all that back from you tomorrow. That's right, all of the things you claim to have garnered via "grassroots organizing" could vanish instantly with the passage of "Proposed Changes to Rules of the Board of Education."

The proposed rule changes will eliminate LAUSD committees, limit the number of board meetings, and ALL BUT ELIMINATE PUBLIC COMMENT, COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, AND DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION. They want to take away the only opportunities for parents and community to speak directly to the board at the very podium you yourself have spoken from many times Mr. Austin! If the board votes to implement these rules, then LAUSD becomes just as opaque, undemocratic, top down, private, and unaccountable as the boards of typical CMOs and EMOs.

Mr. Austin, here's a golden opportunity to prove your rhetoric is sincere in both practice and principle. Will you take a public stand, preferably on behalf of your organizations LAPU and the so called "Parent Revolution," against the proffered "Proposed Changes to Rules of the Board of Education?"

I'll let you know where I stand. I stand with my community in demanding a transparent LAUSD fully committed to democratic principles with complete participation of all stakeholders. I stand firmly with LAUSD Board Member Marguerite P. LaMotte's principled statement "We are giving away our schools and now we want to get rid of transparency... so we can do whatever we want in the dark of night."

So where do you stand Mr. Austin?

Do you and your organization really stand for accountability, choice, transparency, and parent involvement in LAUSD? Will you allow the board to snatch away the victory you've claimed against what you've termed the "Beaudry bureaucracy?" Are you and your constituents against the "Proposed Changes to Rules of the Board of Education?"

Anything less than a simple yes or no answer would be disingenuous. In fact, not taking a stand against the "Proposed Changes to Rules of the Board of Education" is tantamount to supporting it.


Advocating Public Education


Robert D. Skeels


CC: grose@parentsunion.org, superintendent@lausd.net, mayor@lacity.org, councilmember.reyes@lacity.org, marguerite.lamotte@lausd.net, jason.song@latimes.com, howard.blume@latimes.com, mariel.garza@dailynews.com, verline.moore@lausd.net, lannie.foster@lausd.net, vernail.skaggs@lausd.net, paubla.gutierrez@lausd.net, sara.bailey@lausd.net, richard.vladovic@lausd.net, nury.martinez@lausd.net, steve.zimmer@lausd.net, tamar.galatzan@lausd.net
BCC: Dozens of education and community activists, social justice advocates, and members of organized labor.
ENC: Copy of the current "Proposed Changes to Rules of the Board of Education."

Open letter to Mr. Ben Austin regarding LAUSD proposed rule changes

All about the Kids -- thanks for overcrowded classrooms Yolie!

We're now several weeks away from the giant crocodile tears shed by LAUSD Vice President Flores Aguilar when she defended her [1] privatization resolution as being all about the kids. Indeed, all of the Corporate Charter Choice resolution's defenders constantly went on and on about how the resolution somehow put kids first. The way proponents framed it, anyone opposed to their neoliberal tenets of privatization and corporate handouts was against kids. Highly paid Green Dot executive Ben Austin's now infamous schtick about a "system designed for adults by adults," was intended to create a false dichotomy between children and their parents, and is a great example of such unscrupulous rhetoric. However, real education activists [2] saw through what Quang Tran cites as VP Flores Aguilar's "principles, [and] moral conviction."

We knew this of course, because of a vote Ms. Flores Aguilar made a few weeks earlier -- to lay off hundreds and hundreds of teachers. The direct results of her vote is massive class size increases: "Budget cuts push some classrooms way over capacity." Some principles and moral conviction. Of course this was by design, to make public schools more prone to failure in order to bring in another wave of privatization. In fact, Ms. Flores Aguilar's cynical vote to massively increase class sizes for public schools followed by her resolution to privatize nearly a third of the district comes straight out of the playbook of corporatization advocates like Newt Gingrich, The Hoover Institution, The Hudson Institute, and the Cato Institute.

Where were all these so called children's advocates like Ben Austin, Maria Brenes, Quang Tran, and Gabe Rose when the board was deciding to fire teachers and increase class sizes -- guaranteeing a substandard education for children? Sure it isn't as glamorous to protest the school board as it is to appear on TV with self colonizers like Bill "blame the victim" Cosby [3], but you think all these people claiming they passionately support education would have joined us protesting both the budget cuts and increases in class sizes. None of them said a word, and now we see the results of Ms. Flores Aguilar's vote, with "English and math classes have gone from an average of around 34 students last year to 42 this year."

I'm sure the young women of Fairfax High sitting on the file cabinets in the photo accompanying the Los Angeles Times article really appreciate all you've done for them Vice President Flores Aguilar! Thanks for all your advocacy for the kids!

NOTES

[1] More properly, Marshall Tuck and the Green Dot grant writing staff's resolution written at the behest of Eli Broad and the Mayor.

[2] In other words, activists who don't get paid six figures a year to be activists and have read Paulo Freire. The Wall Street Journal recently listed Austin as an activist, which is exactly what he postures as, despite having never been an activist in his entire life. If Parent Revolution's Austin or any of his network of rich boys with white savior complex were really children's' advocates, then where were they when the community was engaged in struggle against the budget cuts? Green Dot's Ben Austin was almost certainly lounging at home in his gated Beverly Hills community while we supported the parent campers at John Liechty Middle School and Miguel Contreras Learning Complex. While LAPU's Ben Austin enjoyed lavish luncheons with ever the opportunist Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, we supported the hunger strikers and parents in front of Cortines office. While Ben Austin was endorsing fat checks from Eli Broad and William Gates, we were raising funds for Aurora Ponce. A "parent advocate" and "revolutionary" indeed! Furthermore, Austin's constant mention of his daughter's school is just another example of his unending stream of lies. Ben Austin has two daughters, a toddler and an infant. Someone should ask the pathological liar which one of those children currently attends a LAUSD school.

[3] http://www.parentrevolution.org/index.php/blog/entry/the_parent_revolution_will_be_televised/

All about the Kids -- thanks for overcrowded classrooms Yolie!

In Depth: Jonathan Kozol

Books on TV C-Span2 presents In Depth: Jonathan Kozol click the link entitled Watch This Program to view the amazing interview. Roughly three hours with the most respected voice on education today. Warning to privatizers like Green Dot, corporate hacks like LAPU/Parent Revolution, and union bashers like Ben Austin: you will not enjoy this program! GEM posts this excellent quote describing the content of the program.

[Kozol] IS A SHARP CRITIC OF THE CLASS AND RACE BASED EDUCATION SYSTEM IN THE USA.

He also challenges many of the "reform" policies such as the NCLB "teach to the test mania", rote learning, Charter schools and vouchers. He is not afraid to take on Sec. Duncan and others who want to use a business model for education, blaming teachers and their unions , and replacing many experienced African American teachers with White "Kinderwonder" middle class recent Ivy League graduates who will only stay in teaching a few years as they have in New Orleans and Chicago, etc.

He points out how KIPP and Green Dot charter schools cherry pick their elite students while leaving most other poor children in run- down Ghetto schools.

From the In Depth website:

Author and education activist Jonathan Kozol was our guest for In Depth on Sunday, September 6, 2009.  Mr. Kozol is the author of over a dozen books, including The Shame of the Nation: The Restoration of Apartheid Schooling in America, Savage Inequalities: Children in America’s Schools, and Death at an Early Age: The Destruction of the Hearts and Minds of Negro Children in the Boston Public Schools that was the recipient of the National Book Award for Science, Philosophy, and Religion in 1968. Mr. Kozol is the founder of Education Action an organization that advocates against the government’s No Child Left Behind legislation and promotes educational reform in the public school system.

In Depth: Jonathan Kozol

Los Angeles Immigrant Workers March for Immigration Reform

September 5, 2009. Roughly 700 workers and supporters braved 96 degree temperatures in the late summer sun during their march through downtown Los Angeles. Workers from Overhill Farms, American Apparel, and Farmer Johns called the action under the banner of "Marcha para Reforma Migratoria" (March for Immigration Reform), to demand President Obama stop both sanctions to employers, and employee verification, which have led to the mass firing of people.

Marchers carried signs demanding a halt to the firings, and chanted in unison along the route. A popular chant was "¡Obama escucha, estamos en la lucha!" (Listen Obama, we're engaged in struggle). Spirits were exceptionally high, in part due to palpable anger workers feel over what have become clear enforcement only policies stemming from Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano's office.

The slightly over a half mile route ended at Los Angeles' historic Pershing Square where a range speakers addressed the rally. The speakers were primarily workers from the effected workplaces. They addressed several issues including the fact that their employers were under no obligation from the government to fire their workers. They told of how employers often used this tactic to eliminate experienced workers, and replace them with lower paid workers with no benefits.

One woman's sentiments were particularly powerful:

"Many of us supported President Obama because he promised us hope, change, and immigration reform. Instead we all lost our jobs, and many of us may be deported. What sort of hope is that? I have children to feed, and now I have no job."

Nativo Lopez called on Obama and Napolitano to end punitive enforcement measures including 287(g), E-Verify, and Secure Communities immediately. Many speakers demanded the administration stop pushing talk of comprehensive immigration reform into the future and to embrace the tenets of the "Legalize America" campaign.

Another rally is planned for this October. Given the rampant increase of DHS/ICE enforcement policies as of late, there's an urgent need to continue this push back and demand legalization for all immigrants now!

Los Angeles Immigrant Workers March for Immigration Reform

Marguerite P. LaMotte's Open Letter to LAUSD President over board becoming more opaque

Sunday, 30 August, 2009 1:09PM

Monica,

I have just read your memo dated (actually it is not dated) entitled "Proposed Changes to Rules of the Board of Education".

My first reaction was that after the controversy caused by the Board's action on Tuesday and the possible legal ramifications of that, let's find another way to alienate and disenfranchise the people who elected us to office - not only is the Board abdicating some of its responsibilities to external operators, now the Board wants to eliminate its committee structure which is its only opportunity to ensure some degree of transparency and accountability of the takeover process and operations. Your opening paragraphs state...

"INTRODUCTION

As the Los Angeles Unified School District strives to absorb significant budget cuts, the Board of Education--together with the rest of the District--must increase the efficiency of its operations. At the same time, as the public governance body for the District, the Board must fully maintain its commitment to transparency and inclusiveness.

Below please find several recommendations to streamline Board operations. The proposals were designed to maximize efficiency, transparency, and inclusiveness. These changes would apply to the 2009-10 School Year only, and would be subject to evaluation and revision in the following years. The "Rationale" and "Challenges" represent my own best thinking; the "Legal Implications" were provided in a memo from the Office of the General Counsel (attached). This memo is intended as a springboard for discussion and action by the full Board of Education."

I think your recommendations are the antithesis of reasons why our constituents elected us to represent them on the Board and do the opposite to "maintain its commitment to transparency and inclusiveness." Small school districts have difficulty being transparent with a single monthly meeting. The sheer volume and magnitude of this District dictate more than a single meeting if transparency is really the goal.

Rather than eliminating the committee structure, may I suggest the Board's consideration of the following:

1. Because the current structure provides our stakeholders access and fosters real inclusion through their participation, input, and involvement and negates some of the charges of exclusivity that are often lodged against the Board, assemble a representative group of all stakeholders to review, refine, and streamline committees for the 09-10 school year. Results to be presented in thirty days and during the interim, committees that are currently on the books operate so that the business of the District is handled properly. We are beginning the third month of this fiscal year and we still are not organized as a "full seven-member Board."



2. The accompanying legal opinion indicates this should be discussed openly at a regular meeting. The Special Meeting on Tuesday is not a regular meeting and because this is so serious and important to our constituents, I suggest we not take action on this under the cover of dark, but at a regularly scheduled televised meeting for full transparency. Like special interests, our constituents deserve some consideration, also.



3. As I stated earlier, there is no date on the proposed recommendations, but at the latest, is was publicized last Thursday, which gives Board members (who were not privileged to it earlier per our conversation last Wednesday) and constituents one working day to prepare any type of response or plan to be at a Tuesday meeting. (Monday is Admissions Day, a holiday.) For this reason, coupled with the rationale given in Bullet 2 above, it would behoove this Board to postpone this discussion.

Personally, just like the Mayor predicted the votes on his Resolution, I feel that it is a foregone conclusion that the same is true for this action, I felt compelled to at least make this appeal on behalf of parity for the hundreds of thousands of constituents who still have some trust and hope in our efforts as public servants - some of whom I have taken the liberty to copy on this e-mail.

I await your response.

Respectfully,

Marguerite

Marguerite P. LaMotte's Open Letter to LAUSD President over board becoming more opaque

Carrie Jacobson's response to an Eductopia Corporate Charter Article

Educator Carrie Jacobson was kind enough to give me permission to reprint her response to an Eductopia article on corporate charters and privatization.

You can read the article and other responses at http://www.edutopia.org/public-schools-becoming-charters -- "Public Schools Changing into Charters"

It goes very deep. Deeper than most think.

First, I should say that I am a teacher in a West LA middle school that is specifically being targeted by a hostile charter takeover, because we are the neighborhood school of a highly paid "consultant" of one of the largest corporate charter operators in existence, who also happens to be a city official with strong personal ties to the mayor and the organizer of the most vocal of the parent groups advocating for charters.

With that said, let me give you a little background of our demographics and experience, and then I will respond to your article.

Roughly, 71% of our student population is living in poverty and are on the federal lunch program, a la Title 1, 23% are special ed with moderate to severe learning disabilities, and 35% are english language learners. 12% are Caucasian, 33% are African American, 55% Hispanic. We have a nominal amount of Asian and Pacific Islanders, but not enough to make even 1%. I would say that of the 12% Caucasian, about 10% come from the neighborhood with the rest of the school's population bussed in from Mid-City or beyond.

For many years, parents that visit our campus have expressed fear when they see our diverse student population. They ask if it is true that we've stopped busing, or that they want their child in the gifted classes because "those" children do not have the work habits or would be a negative influence on theirs, or that we have a reputation for a culture of failure and have a "gang" problem (we don't). They've actually been rude enough to say these things directly to myself and others that work here, with students within earshot.

Frankly, they are afraid of the very thing that the teachers, administrators, and staff members believe is one of our greatest assets: We are a true microcosm of Los Angeles. We are unique. Thirty different languages are spoken on our campus. We have a student body that is growing up without racial prejudices and biases because they are personally familiar with the variety of cultures, sub-cultures and ethnicities that exist in this city - the very thing desegregation was to promote. It is working on our campus!

Yet, we are a PI 5+ school primarily due to the lower test scores of the Ells, special ed, and the kids living on the edge in poverty and/or homeless, AND the fact that many are holier than thou, nothing-can-affect-or-touch-me, the devil may care, young adolescents (as we all once were) - just as most schools across the country are. Yet they "fail" to score well on an upper-middle class normed test.

Their scores have nothing to do with their learning. I personally get them all to read and critically discuss Shakespeare, yet we are a "failing" school.

Now my response:

You should be very afraid of the corporate privatization of public schools. It is the new form of segregation, union busting, and graft. The robber barons are back.

The mayor in Los Angeles has been seduced by the money and power in the Westside - the greatest opponents of desegregation still. And this mayor has the majority of the school board in his pocket, as well as the promises of support by the wealthy charter EMO/CMOs.

Particularly on the Westside, it is the final push back, the last, bitter act (for now) of the white flight that began with the desegregation of public schools and the busing that began in LA in the 1970s. It is also brown flight in South and East LA (read up on Ritter Elementary, for instance).

All of these people will profit greatly by charterization - don't let the term non-profit fool you. Most of the PI schools are in South and East LA, and there are way more of them than on the Westside.

When you really study the Chicago and NY models, you will see the lack of access to neighborhood schools for special ed kids and the behavior problems when they get expelled from their neighborhood charter - if they can even get in on their lottery systems (which are a part of the charter movement here).

In Chicago, I believe this has a direct connection to the rapid rise of violence and murder rates of children this year. These kids are very, very angry as they become more and more disenfranchised. Here in LA at Locke HS, Green Dot expelled 8 kids last year - who must take multiple buses now to attend regular public schools (if they go at all).

Finally, the rhetoric that has been ingrained in the masses through the continuous marketing of "failing schools" and NCLB has clearly worked. Schools are judged strictly by this one test, not by what goes on in the schools themselves.

It seems that the soldiers for democracy and the true advocates for children are now left to fight this monster alone, as they sweat in their classrooms, offices, cafeterias, and the maintenance sheds in their schools. Fortunately, many parents and students are right there with them, too, otherwise we would all simply walk away to earn a better living in other fields that require our level of education. We do not have many friendly outlets to allow our voices to be heard above the clamor and rhetoric of the special interests that would like to monopolize our schools for profit and/or political gain.

To your assertion that the problem lies in capitalism, my reply is simply that democracy is neither easy, nor pretty, and requires an educated populace. However, a fully educated populace creates a society that questions authority - something that capitalism can not have in order to function to its fullest profit potential, or even function at all. Capitalism requires the system of haves and have nots. Think about it...

Carolyn Jacobson
Emerson Middle School
Teacher
Grade 7 Los Angeles

Carrie Jacobson's response to an Eductopia Corporate Charter Article

Open Letter to Howard Blume from Professor Ralph E. Shaffer

AN OPEN LETTER TO HOWARD BLUME [and the Editorial Board], in response to his article on L A charter schools, 9/2/09

Was it an inadvertent selection of words, Howard, that led you to refer to the Flores Aguilar plan in your second paragraph as a "school control" program rather than one of "school choice?" You are, in fact, absolutely right in calling it "school control." There never was any "choice" given to students, teachers or parents in the resolution that the LAUSD board adopted. The "choice" in her plan was in the form of outside operators "choosing" which schools they would pick off. Can't you see a smoke-filled room where Villaraigosa, Barr, Palisoc and others are meeting to decide who bids for the right to "control" which campuses?

I thought from the onset that the use of "Choice" in Aguilar's resolution was a come-on, designed to lure unsuspecting but dissatisfied parents into thinking this plan was somehow going to give them a greater say in the education of their children. But, Howard, you know that was never the intention of the charter crowd or the mayor's cabal. It was always an empty gesture - and it worked. Where is the charter school in L A that truly gives parents a decisive voice in the education of their kids? It would be the exception to an almost ironclad rule of no parental authority.

I assume you are aware, Howard, that "school choice" was a code phrase used by the anti-integration rednecks and ultraconservative gentility who wanted the right in the 1960s and 70s to send their kids to racially homogeneous public schools or, better yet, get a voucher from the state to send their kids to private schools. What you may not be aware of is that the California charter school law was enacted in the early 1990s partly as a ploy to block the voucher movement.

May I make a suggestion for a future article over your byline: interview Gary Hart and Delaine Eastin, the two legislators who ushered the original bill through the state legislature. Ask them to comment on how the charter school movement of today equates with the very precise objectives they had for such schools. Also ask them what they think of this whole new cottage industry of charter "companies" - I'm glad to see that you are referring to them as "companies" rather than "educationally institutions," which they are not. We might as well have Blackwater running the schools.

Anyway. a published interview with Eastin and Hart ought to win a Pulitzer.

So now it's in the open. The Flores Aguilar plan was really a move for "control" of the schools by charters and has nothing to do with "choice." We will probably never again hear the word "choice" used in connection with this theft. And theft it is. Didn't Cortines use the word "steal" in a quotation in your article?

As I read your piece it became apparent that a flock of vultures is drooling over the feast that will begin in January. And the vultures are Villaraigosa, Tuck, Hill, Palisoc, Barr, Austin, and the angels bankrolling them: Broad and Wasserman. You tell us that Broad wants to dismantle the LAUSD. I'm not surprised. One of his pets, Green Dot, has apparently catered to him by writing into the curriculum at Locke a requirement that all students there will have to demonstrate a "belief" in capitalism. My, my! Editorial page editor Jim Newton stands by Broad, citing the philanthropist's liberalism. Well, he isn't liberal when it comes to allowing students to have freedom of thought. Apparently Broad would like to dismantle the First Amendment to the U S Constitution as he works to dismantle the LAUSD.

Perhaps, then, "control" has a greater meaning. Not only will private entrepreneurs - with their six figure salaries at their "noon-profit" charters - control the billions of dollars in school property but they will also "control" the mindset of the students they plan to "educate." I will not be surprised if the guru of American Indian Public Charter School in Oakland makes a play for an LAUSD school. You surely remember that character, Howard. Your fellow reporter Mitchell Landsberg did a piece about him in late May, describing how the kids there have to give a pledge every morning -not to the American flag ... but to "Capitalism." This is also the guy who tells teacher applicants that no liberals need apply. He ought to fit right in with the Flores Aguilar "control" plan. Yes. not only will the charters control the property, they will also control kids' minds.

I know you love Green Dot, Howard. You've listened to Steve Barr and his cronies far more than you have to those of us who see in this plan the destruction of public education. You are cordial to the opponents, but in the end Broad is where the power is and it's the Broads of this community who will carry the day. The real opposition to this plan did not come from A J Duffy and the UTLA. Duffy and UTLA were, however, a convenient whipping boy. Reference to them in the Times brings back memories of the old days - before Otis Chandler - when the Times was so anti-union that some of us were ashamed to admit we read the sheet. But vilifying the union was a winning tactic for the plan. It certainly took up enough space that there was no room for genuine opposition to Flores Aguilar's proposal. And, of course, the op-ed staff refused to run two powerful submissions that spoke direct about L A charters and their operators. And Newton could write with a straight face: the Times wants "an honest campaign."

There was no honest campaign, Howard. The Times, Green Dot, the mayor and Broad won. But they didn't do it honestly. And if the Times can live with that, it speaks volumes about the journalistic integrity of the Editorial Board and the staff writing about education.

To the victors go the spoils, and in L A the rot will be worth billions to those vultures.


Ralph E. Shaffer
Professor Emeritus, History
Cal Poly Pomona

Open Letter to Howard Blume from Professor Ralph E. Shaffer

Brian Jones: Public Schools vs. Corporate Charters

The incomparable Brian Jones debates a suit over the evils of privatization.

Brian Jones: Public Schools vs. Corporate Charters

Choice and Accountability according to Green Dot's (Counter)Revolution

The Parent (Counter)Revolution, and its financiers including Green Dot, Alliance, and Bright Star love to gush on and on about the words "choice" and "accountability." The word choice also features prominently in the title of the LAUSD Vice President's Corporate Charter School Choice Resolution (more properly Public School Choice: A New Way at LAUSD), despite the fact that nowhere in the resolution is there explicit language allowing parents and communities a choice of which operator seizes their school. [1]

The words choice, accountability, and competition play a big role in Ben Austin's 1980's business buzzword bingo schtick. The way he tells it, you'd think parents will now have a smorgasbord of premier educational choices at their disposal, regardless of where they live, or their socioeconomic status. If only it was like that! Ask the good folks of Maywood how they feel about the so called choices they've been given.

Well it turns out the corporate hacks and free market sycophants running Green Dot's front group Parent Revolution (née LAPU), have an entirely different understanding of the words choice and accountability than the rest of us. Remember, part of our oppressor's advantage lies in their ability to define the terms used in the debate. You know, "the ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas."

Here is the school privatizers' conception of accountability and choice, straight from Green Dot's LAPU/Parent (Counter)Revolution own website's Corporate Charter FAQ [2]:

How are charter schools held accountable?

Unlike a traditional public school, parents choose to put their children into charter schools. If a charter school is not meeting a parent's expectations, the parent can simply switch their child back to the traditional public school, or a different neighborhood charter school. If enough parents are unhappy with the charter, the state will shut it down. Parents have choice, and the school is held accountable-unlike traditional public schools.

Translation from corporate-speak: While you have no recourse or redress whatsoever with the unaccountable corporate charter school's administration or the CMO's equally unaccountable unelected board, you can choose to enroll your child back in a traditional public school! That's right folks, your choice is limited to Barr's way or the highway!

Sounds like Green Dot's corporate hacks have employed the hackneyed right wing idiom in which people somehow "vote with their feet." This false notion of choice is often proffered by reactionaries like Robert Galloway and Dick Cheney in regards to chronic labor and human rights violator Wal-Mart. No small coincidence that the notorious Walton Clan also runs corporate charter schools as well.

To all the corporate charter advocates foisting their right wing agenda on us: a choice between undesirable outcomes isn't a choice, it's a dilemma!

Real choice comes from being able to participate fully in the process. Real choice would involve accountability from top to bottom. Real choice is part of our vision for both education reform, and a society in which workers and ordinary people would have real and meaningful control over every aspect of their lives.


[1] To Superintendent Cortines credit, he seems a little less hostile to community input than LASUD VP Flores Aguilar is. Recall how defensive Ms. Flores Aguilar and Garcia were during the August 25, 2009 LAUSD Board meeting when Mr. Zimmer and Ms. Martinez tried to add some toothless amendments including language providing for parent and community input. In addition to be unequivocally opposed to any language mentioning actual input or choice, all Garcia and Flores Aguilar could say repeatedly was "How will that effect charters?"

[2] http://www.parentrevolution.org/index.php/pages/frequently_asked_questions_about_charters

Choice and Accountability according to Green Dot's (Counter)Revolution

On Parent Revolution (née LAPU) Pretending to Distance Themselves from Green Dot

Los Angeles Parents Union's (LAPU aka Parent (Counter)Revolution) Gabe Rose and Ben Austin have been hard at work trying to obfuscate the connection between their Astroturf organization and their parent corporation Green Dot. This is understandable considering the political pressures that have begun mounting since some of their secrets have been revealed and their nefarious connections to certain LAUSD board members, the Mayor, and other officials are now public knowledge. At the August 25, 2009 LAUSD Board meeting when Ms. Garcia and Ms. Flores Aguilar's adamantly denied their corporate charter choice resolution had anything to do with charters, until Mr. Zimmer and Ms. Martinez tried to add some toothless amendments, then all Garcia and Flores Aguilar could say repeatedly was "How will that effect charters? Will that effect charters? Counsel, would that restrict charters?" As vapid, vacuous, and disingenuous those rogue board members appeared, so does LAPU when it tries to deny its direct relation ship with Green Dot.

Here's an example via Gabe Rose posting on the LAPU message board for the hostile take over of Emerson Middle School [1]:

I don't believe Green Dot has interest in coming into the Emerson community... Parent Revolution works with a number of the highest quality charter operators in LA... Just wanted to help this dialogue remain productive--doesn't make a ton of sense for it to center entirely about Green Dot.

To Gabe Rose's credit, Parent (Counter)Revolution does now represent several corporate charter organizations. Fresh out of college, Mr. Rose probably has had little exposure to Barr, Petruzzi, and Austin's insatiable greed and ruthlessness. Also in Mr. Rose's defense is the fact that he might not be aware of the origins of LAPU/Parent (Counter)Revolution.

To educate ourselves on the origins of LAPU, let's look no further than a Green Dot white paper entitled "Green Dot Public Schools & Los Angeles Parents Union" [2] since it is more authoritative than anything I could write:

Recognizing the need for parents to organize and work collectively to demand high-quality education, Green Dot formed the Los Angeles Parents Union (LAPU)

There you have it, Green Dot's own admission they founded LAPU. For those still maintaining Parent Revolution is a wholly different organization see: "Parent Revolution was started by a coalition of organizations, led by the Los Angeles Parents Union (LAPU)." [3]

I've been accused of hyperbole when discussing Green Dot's despicable plans to privatize as many schools as possible. Well, here's another interesting quote from the document introduced above:

Green Dot’s initial strategic plan called for opening 100 charter high schools like Ánimo in neighborhoods across Los Angeles

100 schools! Maybe, just maybe, I wasn't exaggerating, huh? That's what happens when you get a group of right wing ideologues from the DLC/DFER and shower them with millions of dollars from real estate tycoons from Los Angeles and convicted predatory monopolists from Redmond. Given the nature of the Corporate School Choice Resolution, Green Dot may well end up with many more than 100 schools. As I've written before:

I think an important point to make about Flores-Aguilar's plan is that there's really only one organization with massive outside funding and a bevy of professional grant writers to present seemingly the best plans on paper in order to garner a lion's share of the 50 schools. While everyone is saying other organizations like UTLA or community groups can submit plans, how do they compete against organizations funded by the likes of Eli Broad, The Gates Foundation, The Waltons, or the LA Chamber of Commerce? Why should parents, teachers, and communities have to compete with businessmen to teach children in the first place?

We'll be handing over facilities paid for by taxpayers to unaccountable private non-profits. If LAUSD seems obtuse and unresponsive, try calling Green Dot, Alliance, or Brightstar about anything. They're corporations for goodness sakes. Their top executives aren't educators, they're businessmen. At least with traditional public schools, there's a sense of community and people are allowed on campuses. These CMOs treat public property as, well, their corporate property.

Another major problem with Barr, Duncan, and Gingrich's model is the loss of community schools. This is addressed by those familiar with the aftermath of Arne Duncan's dismantling of public schools in CPS. Barr's CMO admission typically involve lotteries, steep requirements, and other bars of entry to assure inflated APIs are typically an anathema to local children being able to attend. Since these 50 new schools were supposed to be for overflow of existing neighborhood schools, we can see where that's going. For more on how the Barr/Duncan/Gingrich model destroys community schools see: Arne Duncan and the Chicago Success Story: Myth or Reality?

Despite the huge amount of damning evidence it contains, the Green Dot document, "Green Dot Public Schools & Los Angeles Parents Union" is still available from right wing think tank AISR.

The document dates from when Ryan Smith was the head of LAPU (now Parent Revolution). Ryan Smith left Green Dot to work for Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's Partnership for Los Angeles Schools with fellow former Green Dot executive Marshal Tuck. Yes, Green Dot is that politically connected and flush with Eli Broad's cash that it was able to position two former executives as Director of Family and Community Engagement and Chief Executive Officer respectively in the Mayor's project -- and no Howard Blume wont be writing about that anytime soon.

The document also comes from the same period when Steve Barr was still the CEO of Green Dot, before he was replaced by even more ruthless Marco Petruzzi. More on that soon.


[1] http://www.parentrevolution.org/index.php/schools/entry/emerson_middle_school/#comment-15657623

[2] http://www.annenberginstitute.org/pdf/EKF08_GreenDot.pdf

[3] http://www.parentrevolution.org/pages/about_us
For privatization cheerleaders, you could also try emailing baustin@parentsunion.org and tell Ben your his biggest fan, just like the fawning sycophants from Inner City Sellout, er, I mean Struggle told Ms. Yolie Flores Aguilar at the July 14, 2009 Board meeting.

On Parent Revolution (née LAPU) Pretending to Distance Themselves from Green Dot

A Town Hall Meeting Closed to the Townspeople

This is my original submission of the piece that ran in Los Angeles Daily News after their editing and a title change to Why school choice plan is a bad idea for our district. Although the Daily News strongly endorsed the privatization plan, at least they had the integrity to publish dissenting views.

CSU Professor R. Shaffer had several people, myself included, submit Op-Eds to the Los Angeles Times just to see if they'd print any dissenting views. Especially considering the vast amount of ink the Times dedicated to cheerleading the resolution and school privatization in general. In an act of utter intellectual and journalistic dishonesty they rejected all of them (Diane Ravitch's piece notwithstanding, as it was a general Op-Ed without a direct connection to Los Angeles or the resolution). In a discourse between Prof. Shaffer and LA Times Editorial Pages Editor Jim Newton, Newton stated:

"We just want an honest campaign for it [the resolution]"

That isn't what they did! Far from it! Their servile, obsequious, Green Dot cheerleading went to the extent that even writers not on their education staff, like Steve Lopez, began writing privatization propaganda. Moreover, considering all the lavish lunches the Los Angeles Times education staff including Messrs. Blume and Song have enjoyed with the CMO elite, their objectivity is beyond suspect, they come off as shills for Eli Broad's nefarious designs for public education.

A Town Hall Meeting Closed to the Townspeople

How can you have an education "town hall" where the townsfolk aren't invited? Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Green Dot Corporation's Ben Austin staged two such events last week touting LAUSD Vice President Yolie Flores-Aguilar's school privatization resolution, which is up for vote on August 25. Locking out those most concerned with the content of those meetings--parents, educators, and the community--is a harbinger of how public education may look should the resolution pass. In fact, the closed meetings stand as metaphors for how the majority of Charter Management Organizations (CMO) work: undemocratic, top down, run by non-educators, and unaccountable to the communities where they operate.

Noting widespread public opposition to Flores-Aguilar's resolution, particularly at town halls featuring LAUSD Superintendent Cortines, the Mayor and his Green Dot allies made sure their Boyle Heights and Venice meetings were town halls in name only. The first was held midday Tuesday. The Garfield Town Hall was hosted at Catholic Charities, instead of Garfield, notably because Garfield's parents, teachers, and community have vehemently opposed Green Dot's ongoing hostile take-over attempts for over a year. The community was locked outside while parents bused in from other locations comprised the audience.

Those locked out were told they would have been admitted had they called to RSVP. Obtaining the phone number to RSVP for the Venice event, many people called to RSVP. The number was paid Green Dot organizer Shirley Ford’s voicemail, but none of us were ever called back. Wednesday saw Austin and the Mayor host a second closed meeting in Venice.

Despite the fact that he’s a former Deputy Mayor, many people are unaware of who Ben Austin is. Austin poses as a concerned parent from an impacted community bravely fighting for school reform in public settings. Instead, Austin holds two six figure positions and lives in Beverly Hills. Austin’s day job is an Assistant City Attorney, his second job is Executive Director of Parent Revolution (née Los Angeles Parents Union). Surprisingly, this seeming conflict of interest goes unabated, despite his financial interest in passage of Flores-Aguilar's resolution.

Parent Revolution is an astroturf group founded by, share an office building with, and are funded primarily by Green Dot. Parent Revolution supplied the audience at these town halls, an audience vetted for its allegiance with the Mayor, Flores-Aguilar, and Austin's corporate charter school choice resolution.

Mayor Villaraigosa claims his town halls were closed for fear of disruption. It's far more likely the Mayor and Austin were afraid parents, educators, and community members would inevitably ask inconvenient questions:

• Why doesn't the so called School Choice Resolution allow School Site Councils and communities to choose the operator of new schools?



• Why isn't Animo Watts' 494 API, 42nd worst in Los Angeles County ever mentioned when Green Dot is lauded as vastly outperforming public schools?



• Why is Green Dot held up the best college preparation model when it has five schools in the lowest 35 average SAT scores in the County?



• Why a rush to push this resolution through, why not more debate?

There's a reason the Stanford Study, the disastrous aftermath of Secretary of Education Arne Duncan's same policies in Chicago, and other serious questions regarding school privatization aren't being addressed. They're the same reasons why the Mayor's meetings locked the community out. While supporters of Flores-Aguilar's resolution claim it's "for the kids," an examination of facts, conflicts of interest, nefarious benefactors, opportunism, and political maneuvering shows they're doing it "for the cronies."

Students, parents, communities, and tax payers deserve better.

Robert D. Skeels is a technical writer and activist in Los Angeles

A Town Hall Meeting Closed to the Townspeople

Upcoming Social Justice Events

Marcha for Reforma Migratoria - March for Immigration Reform!
Stand up against increasingly stricter enforcement policies

Corner of Olympic and Broadway
Saturday, September 5, 2009 @ 11:00am - 1:00pm
S Broadway & W Olympic Blvd Los Angeles, CA 90015

Los Trabajadores de Overhill Farms, American Apparel, Farmers Johns y otros llaman a todas las organizaciones de Derechos Humanos e Immigrantes y otras a Demandar que Presidente Obama Pare las multas a Patrones y verificacion de documentos que resultan en despidos masivos.

The workers of Overhill Farms, American Apparel, Farmers Johns and others are calling to all the organizations of Human Rights and Immigrantes and others to Demand Obama to Stop Sanctions to employers, and employee verification due to the mass firing of people.

SOCIALISM
What It Is And Why We Need It

USC Leavey Library Auditorium
Wednesday, September 9, 2009 @ 7:00pm - 8:30pm
651 West 35th Street, Los Angeles, CA 90007

The word "socialism" has returned to the mainstream of American political debate. But there are widespread misconceptions of what socialism is-and what it isn't.

Republicans fret that the U.S. is fast becoming a socialist country-with government spending on bank bailouts and Barack Obama's proposed health care reform.

But the genuine tradition of "socialism from below" means something more than state intervention in the economy. Socialism is really about the struggle to oppose discrimination in all its forms and to put the needs of working people before corporate profits.

Come to this meeting to discuss the idea of socialism-and socialist strategies for changing the world.

Upcoming Social Justice Events

Ánimo Watts II

Non-educators Broad, Barr, Petruzi and Austin know all about failing schools: Animo Watts #2 Charter High

Academic Performance Index (API) 494
No Child Left Behind (AYP) Missed seven of 12 federal targets for 2008

http://www.greendot.org/watts2/home

http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/DQReports.asp?CDSType=S&CDSCode=19647330111625

http://notebook.lausd.net/portal/page?_pageid=33,54194&_dad=ptl&_schema=PTL_EP&school_code=8822

Revolutionary!

By the way, all the information Green Dot Corporation would never want you to see is available at:

http://projects.latimes.com/schools/
http://www.cde.ca.gov/index.asp

So simple, even a District 5 Board representative could use them.

Ánimo Watts II

Corporations 1, Communities 0, six members cave to Eli Broad's privatization agenda

Corporations 1, Communities 0, six members cave to Eli Broad's privatization agenda.

Many thanks to those who tried to add as many community friendly amendments that they could. At least one of our elected officials weren't bought off by Gates and Broad's millions.

Thank you Marguerite P. LaMotte for you impassioned and principled stand for public education. You're courage won't be forgotten!

Corporations 1, Communities 0, six members cave to Eli Broad's privatization agenda

Garfield HS Parents, Students, and Community Confront LAUSD VP Flores-Aguilar

There was palpable anger in the air at Garfield High School when parents, students, and community confronted LAUSD Vice President Yolie Flores Aguilar over her Corporate Charter School Choice Resolution. Ms. Flores Aguilar vacillated between a condescending tone toward people she felt didn't understand she was "helping them," and melodrama when anyone really cornered her on her lies and misinformation. It's safe to say she'd have a career in acting if she ever quits her day job of political opportunism and corporate servility. Ms. Flores Aguilar denied her resolution had anything to do with privatization and charters at least a half a dozen times throughout the meeting. Considering GHS has been a target of a Green Dot hostile take over for roughly a year, its no surprise Flores Aguilar avoided the using the charter word in front of the crowd of roughly 320 people at all costs. The event was organized by parents and community activists including Carlos Montes, a GHS alumni himself.

Sadly Vice President Flores Aguilar repeatedly lied about her resolution when she kept insisting the community would get to choose the type of school they wanted. She didn't mention that while community input is solicited under her resolution, in the end the community doesn't make the choice at all. Arne Duncan's community meetings in Chicago also solicited input community, and then promptly ignored it.

Several current and former students really took the LAUSD Vice President to task, and she was visibly shaken by her inability to explain to her constituents why she was taking actions contrary to their wishes. A high point was when a GHS graduate from the class of 1997, who went on to graduate from Yale, asked Flores Aguilar point blank how dare she ignore the improvements at Garfield. The entire crowd stood in unison and applauded his inspired speech!

Given Garfield's history, it's no wonder they have an admirable culture of resistance. We need to carry their spirit against privatization throughout the district. We need to defend all our schools against Green Dot and other CMOs. We need to self organize and put forth our vision of education and resist the corporate vision embodied by Gingrich/Petruzi/Barr/Duncan. Could you imagine the East Los Angeles Walkouts at a campus run with Green Dot's pepper spray happy security thugs?

After Vice President Flores Aguilar's somewhat arrogant final remarks, the parents began chanting "delay the vote! delay the vote!" It's doubtful she listened, but it was a poignant way to finish the meeting.

Garfield HS Parents, Students, and Community Confront LAUSD VP Flores-Aguilar

D-day plus one to save public schools

Tonight there are two important events. On the west-side there's:

Emerson Advocates
Monday, August 24, 2009
6:30 - 7:30pm
Emerson Middle School
Emerson Middle School Library (room 109)
1650 Selby Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024

On the east-side:

Garfield Unites
Monday, August 24, 2009
6:00pm
Garfield High School
Garfield High School Cafeteria
5101 E. Sixth St, Los Angeles 90022

The queen of privatization herself will be there explaining why she thinks corporations know how to run schools better than educators.

We've explored the incredible situation of Ben Austin's multiple conflicts of interest before. But when I've discussed the very close connection he has with the Mayor, many people dismissed it as hyperbole. For all those who maintain Austin and Mayor Villaraigosa co-hosting the Green Dot astroturf town halls was merely a marriage of convenience, how do you explain Austin getting to post his privatization propaganda on the Mayor's exclusive official blog?

There's a great new blog called Garfield Unites. While self organizing or parents, teachers, and communities is just beginning to happen in other Green Dot takeover targets, GHS (like Crenshaw) has a long history of fighting the forces of neoliberal privatization.

Howard Blume and Jason Song <3 <HEART> <3 Steve Barr, or Why school choice plan is a bad idea for our district

I was exhausted when I wrote this during the previous weekend's education conference, so it isn't my best prose. Also, the Daily News edited a few things including the original title (A Town Hall Meeting Closed to the Townspeople) and removed a Green Dot staffer's name, but all in all it's good to see one local paper publish a dissenting view against privatization. Although the Daily News strongly endorses the privatization plan, at least they had the integrity to publish dissenting views.

Meanwhile, the Green Dot sycophants at the LA Times keep churning out gushing, servile, pro-corporate Editorials and Op-Ed in favor of corporate charter school choice. They haven't printed a single piece against it. Diane Ravitch's generalized piece on charters doesn't count. At the request of Prof. R. Shaffer, I submitted my Op-Ed to the LA Times criticizing the Mayor and Austin for their closed meetings. It was turned down immediately since the Los Angeles Times apparently has a no criticism of Green Dot policy.

As for my Daily News Op-Ed, it drew a host of comments from white supremacists, union bashers, and other tools of reaction are there for everyone to see. One comment did take me to task about the title versus the content of the article. That makes sense, but I wasn't the one who retitled it. They asked for a reasoned argument against Flores-Aguilar's plan, to which I posted my own comment reproduced here:

I think an important point to make about Flores-Aguilar's plan is that there's really only one organization with massive outside funding and a bevy of professional grant writers to present seemingly the best plans on paper in order to garner a lion's share of the 50 schools. While everyone is saying other organizations like UTLA or community groups can submit plans, how do they compete against organizations funded by the likes of Eli Broad, The Gates Foundation, The Waltons, or the LA Chamber of Commerce? Why should parents, teachers, and communities have to compete with businessmen to teach children in the first place?

We'll be handing over facilities paid for by taxpayers to unaccountable private non-profits. If LAUSD seems obtuse and unresponsive, try calling Green Dot, Alliance, or Brightstar about anything. They're corporations for goodness sakes. Their top executives aren't educators, they're businessmen. At least with traditional public schools, there's a sense of community and people are allowed on campuses. These CMOs treat public property as, well, their corporate property.

Another major problem with Barr, Duncan, and Gingrich's model is the loss of community schools. This is addressed by those familiar with the aftermath of Arne Duncan's dismantling of public schools in CPS. Barr's CMO admission typically involve lotteries, steep requirements, and other bars of entry to assure inflated APIs are typically an anathema to local children being able to attend. Since these 50 new schools were supposed to be for overflow of existing neighborhood schools, we can see where that's going. For more on how the Barr/Duncan/Gingrich model destroys community schools see: Arne Duncan and the Chicago Success Story: Myth or Reality?

D-day plus one to save public schools

The Famous GHS "web of corruption flyers" exposing LAUSD-Green Dot collaborators

Garfield High School parents parents were passing these out while the community was locked out of the Villaraigosa/Austin town hall in which corporate lackeys announced their plans for Garfield's future. Obtaining a copy, I set about scanning them at once. They aren't too clear, but they're readable nonetheless.

Despite my years of research into Green Dot's nefarious connections, I didn't know some of these disgusting facts. Who knew Inner City Struggle's Maria Brenes was married to Luis Sanchez --Monica Garcia's Chief of Staff? While I could add some more items to this web of malfeasance, it's still excellent research on their part.

Click on the images to see the full size versions. The English version is on the left, y tambien en Español a la derrecha.

The Famous GHS "web of corruption flyers" exposing LAUSD-Green Dot collaborators

GHS Parents Oppose School Grab by Private Charters

Garfield High School Parents Oppose School Grab by Private Charters: Press Conference
August 21, 2009, 3:15pm

What: Press Conference: Parents of GHS Oppose School Grab by Private Charters
When: Friday, August 21, 2009, 3:15 PM
Where: Garfield High School 5101 E. Sixth St. LA 90022 In front of main building.
 
Mothers and students from Garfield HS, in ELA will hold a press conference and protest to show their opposition to the LAUSD move to bid out, over 50 new schools. The angry GHS Mothers and students oppose the move to privatize their school and the newly built schools. GHS community will present their plans to mobilize and oppose the resolution of LAUSD Board member, Yolie Flores, that calls for outsourcing 50 schools. A vote on this is set for the Tuesday, Augusts 25, at LAUSD Board meeting.
 
Speakers and interviews with parent leaders Eduwiges Chavez, GHS parent volunteer,  Celina Martinez, GHS President Title I Committee, Teresa Robles, GHS Parent Representative District 5, Veronica Ramirez, GHS Parliamentarian Title I Committee, and student leader Mary Lopez, will speak on their opposition to what they see as a move to privatize public schools.
 
GHS parents demand public education, more and better parent participation in local school decisions, and governance, especially immigrant families, and changes to improve education and school conditions.
 
The event is endorsed by Mothers of Garfield HS, GHS Varsity Football Team, GHS Basketball Team, GHS Title I Committee, Community Service Organization and supported by hundreds of parents, students, teachers, and community members.

Contact: Carlos Montes (213) 712-0370 or Eduwiges Chavez 323-895-0532

GHS Parents Oppose School Grab by Private Charters

Aurora Ponce receives scholarship & speaks - courtesy of Cuts Hurt Kids

Aurora Ponce receives scholarship & speaks - courtesy of Cuts Hurt Kids

Professor Shaffer's Open Letter to Howard Blume on the Austin/Villaraigosa Love Fest

Professor Ralph E. Shaffer was kind enough to give me permission to reprint his open letter to Los Angeles Times staffer (and Steve Barr sycophant) Howard Blume over his fluff piece: Villaraigosa advocates letting outside operators bid for control of L.A. Unified schools

Were I not nearly blind I would have driven the 25 or so miles to last night's pro-Flores Aguilar plan rally featuring the mayor and Green Dot's hired shill Ben Austin. But according to paragraph 15 of your article - that was almost to the end of your piece - I would have been locked out because I oppose the raid by privateers who want to feast on public schools.

Did you not watch any TV at all yesterday before you went to that one-sided so-called "town hall" meeting? Were you totally unaware that in several genuine town hall meetings held by Senators and Representatives in various states, and yes, even one held by the president, anti-health care reform citizens were /NOT/ locked out?

Howard, if I had been writing the story the lead paragraph and the headline would have been about the dictatorial efforts of Austin and the pro-charter crowd to prevent the asking of responsible, telling questions that would have made the privatization plan look like the money-grubbing, political advancement plan that it really is.

How could you, as a responsible educational reporter, have tucked the lockout away in a spot near the end of your piece? That was inexcusable.

Moreover, you emphasized the union and Duffy as representing the opposition. Stop using the UTLA as a bogeyman. The real opposition to the plan comes not from the union but from concerned educators who know what will happen when Green Dot takes over the job that the LAUSD board is supposed to do. Did you not read the Diane Ravitch op-ed in your own paper yesterday morning? She said more eloquently than the rest of us what we have been trying to tell the LAUSD board for over a year.

Tell us, Howard, what is the "progress" at Locke that you so gratuitously slipped into your article.? Is there any progress other than safety? Discipline, you say? Are the undisciplined kids from last year still at the school? Were they the same kids who created the unsafe problem?

Please write another story, Howard, one in which you tell it like it really is regarding charters and those who truly represent the opposition to the surrender of our schools to private operators. Stop making it a "union" thing. That's exactly what the mayor and Ben Austin want you to do because it plays on a stereotype that is popular with a large segment of the public. And it makes you a shill like Ben Austin.

Ralph E Shaffer
Professor Emeritus, History
Cal Poly Pomona

Professor Shaffer's Open Letter to Howard Blume on the Austin/Villaraigosa Love Fest

The TAX POEM viral email: debunking reactionary libertarian mythology

I first saw the so called "Tax Poem" in 2007. I've been receiving it in chain emails from people at least once a month ever since. I've received it three times in the last two weeks alone. While certainly clever to some degree, it is completely false, packed with historical errors, outright lies, and reactionary ideas. The following is what I wrote in response to the anonymous tax poem author in 2007. Feel free to send my fact filled response to anyone who has ever sent you the viral tax poem email.

Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table
[ ...snipped for brevity... ]
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the  most prosperous in the world.
We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.
What in the hell happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'
And I still have to 'press 1' for English !?!
I hope this goes around THE USA at least 100 times!! YOU can help it get there!!!!
GO AHEAD - - - BE AN AMERICAN!

Leaving the reactionary cum libertarian first portion on taxes alone for now, let's look at what 1907 really looked like...

>> 100 years ago, and our nation was the  most prosperous in the world.

Maybe it was for the Robber Barons. For the rest of us the turn of that century saw a continuation of the brutal working conditions from the industrialization period in the 1800's. Child labor was rampant [1], working conditions were horribly unsafe with no regulations whatsoever [2], there was no minimum wage, and workers often labored 10-15 hours a day [3]. Back in these "good ol' prosperous days," employers had private armed and/or government troops shoot and kill workers that had the audacity to ask for safe working conditions, reasonable hours, or something approaching a living wage [4].

1907 was a year after Upton Sinclair exposed the horrific working conditions endured by American workers in his landmark work "The Jungle." More than exposing employers' exploitation of wage slaves, Sinclair's book showed how little regard business has for public health. "The Jungle" played a major role in the passage of the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act.

In 1907 San Francisco, reeling from the aftermath of the 1906 quake, had nearly 220,000 homeless with little or no access to government help. Irish, Scandinavian, German and Italian immigrants were to endure the same vicious racism and discrimination we see heaped on Latinos and Arabs today. American workers suffering through all this 'prosperity' the email author refers to didn't have to do so for long. Life expectancy in 1907 was only 47 years [5].

The decade including 1907 saw the power and ruthlessness of trusts founded by robber barons so unchecked and overreaching, Republican Theodore Roosevelt was compelled to go on a 'trust-busting' mission to try and rein in monopoly capital enough to provide some semblance of fairness in American society. Perhaps the email author was confining his discussion to the Rockefellers, Carnegies, and Morgans when he described "the most prosperous [nation] in the world." For the average working American 1907 was anything but prosperous -- it was full of oppression, brutality, and poverty.

>> We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world,

An astute reader would recall there was no national debt in 1999 either. As for the email author's middle class statement, unqualified as it is, this often just refers to broad sections of the working class with a small strata of professionals and petty bourgeoisie thrown in to muddle the actual class picture. I think we have painted an accurate depiction of what conditions were like for the 1907 working American above.

>> and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

The statement is so sexist and misogynistic on its face, the author should have just added "barefoot and pregnant" while he was at it. Maybe Mommy Rockefeller could have afforded to stay at home with the kids in the 1900's. However, most working class women worked, worked long and arduous hours, and worked for much less than their male counterparts. See my notes [2-3] above for what conditions were like for working class women during the first decade of the 1900's. Of course, that hasn't changed much. In 2007 women still only earn 77 cents on the dollar for the same jobs compared to men. They still endure constant sexism and objectification in the workplace as well.

>> What happened? Can you say politicians!

Any analysis that leaves out WHO politicians serve is mere rhetorical treachery. A wise man once wrote "The executive of the modern State is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie." Understand that, and you understand the real heart of the matter.

>> And you still have to "press 1" for English!

One can only imagine the racist and reactionary aims behind the author's addition of that last line.

NOTES
[1] Child labor wasn't outlawed until the passage of the FLSA in 1938. Also read about Mother Jones 1903 "Children's Crusade," fight to limit child labor to 55 hours a week.

[2] Those abhorring workplace safety laws would be well served reading about the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire. I'd be interested to hear someone argue against regulations that would have prevented locking hundreds of young women in a potential tinderbox.

[3] Taking the above Triangle Shirtwaist workers as an example; these women were compelled to work 14 hour shifts for a $1.50 a week (about $30 a week in today's dollars) -- some prosperity!

[4] See the 1902 Anthracite Coal Strike, the 1903 Colorado Labor Wars, and the 1904 Dunnville Massacre.

The TAX POEM viral email: debunking reactionary libertarian mythology

Community Organizer Laurence Tan on Privatization

Laurence Tan was kind enough to give me permission to reprint his view on school privatization, and how it impacts communities of color and poverty like Watts. Green Dot's Animo Watts has an API of 494, one of the lowest in Los Angeles County.

"That's what my HS UCLA group was TALKIN' about at City Hall last friday. 8 out of the 9! new charters opening up by 2010-2011 are in WATTS area alone!!! leading them to claim that LAUSD has given up reform in one of the most disenfranchised/marginalized areas of the CITY by washing its hands away and allowing private corporations take over with their capitalist and exclusionary business models!!! WTFreak?!? Aug 25th is an important date because School board votes on charter decisions... we CAN NOT have a repeat of CHICAGO RENAISSANCE 2010!!! Watts youth, and youth all around deserve better!"

Community Organizer Laurence Tan on Privatization

Report Green Dot's Ben Austin on the City Ethics Commission Complaint Form Online

Today's closed faux "Garfield Town Hall" hosted at Catholic Charities (notably because Garfield's parents and teachers oppose Green Dot's hostile take over attempts) was the final straw. The fact that parents, teachers, and community members are being excluded from the process demonstratively illustrates the lack of democracy and accountability by CMOs. Both Mr. Austin and the Mayor should have had the courage to face all the people they are trying to disenfranchise. Our tax dollars shouldn't be used to privatize schools and devastate our communities!

Report Ben Austin at: Los Angeles City Ethics Commission - Complaint Form

Name and Title of Person Involved: Ben Austin, Assistant City Attorney
City Department Involved: City Attorney
Name and Contact Information of Witnesses: You can use my name and email

Here's what I wrote:

I am of the understanding that Assistant City Attorney Ben Austin has special arrangements with the City Ethics Commission to work part time for Steve Barr and Marco Petruzi's Green Dot Corporation lobbying arm, Parent Revolution (née LAPU). It has come to my attention that Mr. Austin is now working FULL TIME for Green Dot/Parent Revolution.

Mr. Austin is possibly violating City of Los Angeles Code of Ethics rules number VII and IX by working at a second job full time. Furthermore, as a city employee, Mr. Austin has fostered close connection with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Mr. Austin has used this relationship to recruit the Mayor into co-hosting closed "town hall" meetings in which they are promoting LAUSD VP Yolie Flores-Aguilar's corporate charter choice resolution. Mr. Austin stands to gain financially from this arrangement as the resolution would effectively award Green Dot more campuses. This is a very precarious situation, bordering on a clear conflict of interest, and might find Mr. Austin in violation of rules IV, II and I.

I am encouraging the City Ethics Commission to investigate this immediately.

In case people aren't aware of Mr. Austin's potential conflict of interest status:
Ben Austin: The Six Figure Salary Man - Green Dot

Shame on You Mayor Villaraigosa!
Call or write the Mayor's office and ask why he is campaigning alongside Ben Austin, a city employee, who also works with a private firm which stands to gain fincially through his job with Green Dot by passage of LAUSD VP Flore-Augilar's resolution on August 25, 2009.

200 North Spring Street, Room 303
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Phone: (213) 978-0600

Report Green Dot's Ben Austin on the City Ethics Commission Complaint Form Online

Green Dot Corporation's first foray for Yolie Flores Aguilar's Charter Give Away

LAUSD Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines, at the behest of Green Dot Corporation and their billionaire benefactors, opened the first of their public relations meetings to dismantle public schools last night at Griffith Middle School. Attendees mentioned that while LAUSD officials feigned neutrality, they were clearly in support of LAUSD VP Flores Aguilar's Corporate Charter School Choice Resolution.

The very good news is that the vast majority of the 200 some odd parents and community members at the "Town Hall" were unequivocally against privatization. In fact, when Cortines mentioned the Chicago model, there were people able to point out the failure of Arne Duncan's tenure there. They were also astute enough to know holding community meetings, but then ignoring their input was Arne Duncan's modus operandi.

Here's an incredible account from one of the attendees:

parents and students were wearing red t-shirts that read: "Protect our schools and community. Students + Parents + Teachers = Education. Don't Privatize Education!" and carried hand-made signs with similar slogans.

Initial written reports include one by 4LAKids Report from the First of the Districtwide Community Meetings: RE - BOARD RESOLUTION ON PUBLIC SCHOOL CHOICE

We can be sure the LA Times will be writing gushing cult of Steve Barr pieces tomorrow in response to this town hall. Especially since the Beverly Hills Barrister Ben Austin, and his BFF&E Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa are sharing the stage for a few legs of the privatization dog and pony show over the next few days.

LAUSD Board Member Marguerite LaMotte is currently the only member committed to protecting our children and communities from the onslaught of privatization demonstrated through her firm and principled opposition to this terrible resolution. We need to convince Board members Tamar Galatzan, Steve Zimmer, and Nury Martinez not to sell our kids' futures to the highest bidder and lowest common denominator. Write, call, encourage others to write and call, and then write and call again. Tell LAUSD board members to VOTE NO on Vice President Yolie Flores Aguilar's Corporate Charter School Choice Resolution on August 25, 2009. We want public schools, not corporate schools!

* Photo Credit and © 2009: Jose del Barrio.

Green Dot Corporation's first foray for Yolie Flores Aguilar's Charter Give Away

Resist the School Privatization Tour Staring Ben Austin and his assistants the Mayor and LAUSD Superintendent

Check here for the latest schedule, some have been moved or rescheduled.

Please show up to counter the privatization propaganda tour. Green Dot has employed the help of LAUSD Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to help sell their corporate snake oil. Everyone's favorite well heeled astroturf executive, Ben Austin, has orchestrated this public relations coup in order to further deceive communities regarding corporate charters, and to provide political cover to LAUSD board members who will vote to dismantle public education on August 25, 2009.

Arm yourself, organizations, and communities with facts about why privatization isn't right for our city and be ready to let these politicians know we want to keep the public in public schools. Bring signs and flyers opposing LAUSD Vice President's Corporate School Choice Resolution. Placards and signs with messages like PRIVATIZATION = SEGREGATION are to the point. Be sure to let people know that LAUSD Board Member Marguerite LaMotte deserves the progressive community's support because of her principled stand against corporatization and privatization. If you're a teacher, please contact PEAC/UTLA for instructions. CSEA, SIEU99, and many other unions should mobilize as well.

Monday, August 10 @ 6:00-7:00pm
With LAUSD Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines
Griffith Middle School
4765 E. Fourth Street, Los Angeles, CA 90022

Tuesday, August 11 @ 11:00am-1:00pm
With Green Dot Corporation's Ben Austin and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa
Garfield Town Hall
Catholic Charities (notably because Garfield's parents and teachers oppose Green Dot's hostile take over attempts)
1307 Warren Street Los Angeles CA 90033

Tuesday, August 11 @ 6:00-7:00pm
With LAUSD Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines
Maywood Academy High School
6125 Pine Avenue Maywood, CA 90270

Wednesday, August 12 @ 5:00-7:00pm
With Green Dot Corporation's Ben Austin and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa
Venice Town Hall
2232 Lincoln Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90291

Wednesday, August 12 @ 6:00-7:00pm
With LAUSD Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines
Sepulveda Middle School
15330 Plummer Street North Hills, CA 91343

Thursday, August 13 @ 6:00-7:00pm
With LAUSD Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines
Central City Neighborhood Partners
501 S. Bixel Street Los Angeles, CA 90017

Monday, August 17 @ 6:00-7:00pm
With LAUSD Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines
Hamilton High School
2955 S. Robertson Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90034

Wednesday, August 19 @ 6:00-7:00pm
With LAUSD Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines
Gardena High School
1301 W. 182nd Street Gardena, CA 90248

Thursday, August 20 @ 6:00-7:00pm
With LAUSD Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines
Jordan High School
2265 E. 103rd St. Los Angeles, CA 90002

[1] http://tinypaste.com/d2262
[2] http://4lakidsnews.blogspot.com/2009/08/districtwide-community-meetings-re.html
[3] http://bit.ly/aZNFp

Resist the School Privatization Tour Staring Ben Austin and his assistants the Mayor and LAUSD Superintendent