Demcracy for USA and UFT Too

There's a national movement to thwart and override the insidious Electoral College. So far ten states have signed on. If enough states to make an electoral majority agree, it will go into effect. Once they hit 270 votes, these states will automatically pledge their electors to whoever wins the popular vote. Thus, the choice of the people will be President of the United States.

Now some may say this would favor the Democrats, who've been burned twice in sixteen years. But GW Bush came close to winning the national vote and losing the election term two. Our current President-elect believed that Romney had won the national vote and lost the election, and had a tweet storm over the awful injustice he'd felt that represented.

The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 7, 2012

In fact, in another he called for revolution. Alas, in 2016, after the same thing happened, he felt somewhat differently.

Just had a very open and successful presidential election. Now professional protesters, incited by the media, are protesting. Very unfair!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 11, 2016

You see how that works? Now I look at AFT President Randi Weingarten, who's looking at the popular vote rather than the Electoral College:

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote—and not by a narrow margin. Let’s not forget that in all the finger pointing. https://t.co/FTmERgUQ4n

— Randi Weingarten (@rweingarten) November 12, 2016

And with that, I see a lot of talk about something Randi and Leo Casey call a "circular firing squad." Essentially, this seems to mean that we are criticizing union leadership rather than Donald Trump. Randi called it, "the first thing all of you want to do." I'm curious who, "all of you" are, and why that's different from the blatantly stereotypical, "you people" remarks you hear every now and again.

This notwithstanding, I am bone weary of being told to sit down and shut up by union leadership. I've been hearing that from them since 2005, when I took exception to the contract that created the ATR. This is hardly the way we invite dialogue or involve members. To her credit, Randi offered to meet with us over this. I'm happy to do that, and hopefully it will happen.

Nonetheless, the proper response to dissenting voices in union is not shutting them down. It's ridiculous to surround yourself with loyalty oath signers and expect what they tell you is reflective of what membership thinks and feels.  They will say and act as told. I've had Unity members tell me it was good that the burden of proof was on teachers at 3020a, because that way they could own it. It's pretty outrageous that people paid to represent us would actively advocate for us being guilty until proven innocent. I've watched UFT employees tell chapter leaders how lucky they are not to have to live on a teacher salary. I've had members report getting very bad advice from UFT pension consultants, and seen no consequence for that.

But when you represent us based on loyalty rather than competence, that's the kind of thinking you promote. If Randi does indeed meet with us, we will advocate for representative democracy within the union. UFT has some pretty odd rules that shut out the voice of high school teachers and chapter leaders, just to name a few, and we have got precisely zero voice in NYSUT, NEA, and AFT.

We'll soon see if they want to do something about that, or if they'd rather continue with the same sort of rules that made Donald Trump President of the United States.

Leaving Hillarytown

Hillary Clinton opened her mouth the other day, and said she wouldn't keep open any school that wasn't better than average. She later clarified to say she meant good, rather than better than average. To me, that was not much of a distinction. I work in a good school, even by reformy standards, but I don't delude myself that it's because we are all super teachers. I'd say it's because we have super kids, and that any school with such kids can do well. Just ask Geoffrey Canada, who had to dismiss entire cohorts to make himself look good. Ask Eva Moskowitz, with her "got to go" list.

For anyone who hasn't noticed, there is a direct correlation between high poverty, high needs, and low test scores. Kids like the ones I serve are a drag on any school, because it turns out people who don't know English tend to score poorly on standardized tests in English. Perhaps one day someone will do a study and prove it, and we'll all be amazed. Until then, schools dominated by ELLs will be targeted. For example there was the one in Rhode Island, where they wanted to fire all the teachers. Obama and Duncan thought that was fantastic. (If I recall correctly, the teachers were ultimately kept on, but under diminished working conditions. Another victory for the reformies.)

Despite this explanation in Diane Ravitch's blog, and the convoluted story to which it links, I cannot rationalize this as Hillary having misspoken. While the feds don't directly close schools, they've had massive influence in school closings anyway. For Hillary to even utter such a sentence indicates to me that she has drunk deeply of the reformy Kool-Aid that says teachers and schools are to blame. She does  not seem to have read Ravitch or considered what this reformy movement is all about. It also kind of dashes my hopes that she will advocate for a rational teacher evaluation system. The fact that Eli Broad contributes to her gives me even more pause.

Every day I talk to great teachers whose morale is in the toilet, who casually mention what else they can do for a living, and others who drop hints that they will dump this gig and go work in Macy's or wherever the first moment they can afford it, or the day they're vested. This will have little effect on Hillary or her rich friends, who sidestep the nonsense they impose on public schools by paying to send their kids elsewhere. But you're not gonna see kids I teach at Dalton anytime soon.

I'm also troubled by the viciousness of her supporters. On Facebook I've seen people suggest that those of us reluctant to support her are massive idiots. When the first story about her quote surfaced it was on the Weekly Standard, and there were outraged ad hominem attacks even though the story simply offered the quote. Later there was video, and multiple sources, and crickets from those who attacked the conservative publication.

The irony here is that my vote, beyond the primary, is ultimately of very little importance. If Hillary grabs the nomination and has trouble in New York, she's a dead duck. Personally, I'm not at all keen on voting for candidates of any party who don't support public education. When Andrew Cuomo campaigned the first time for governor, he ran on a platform of going after unions. I voted Green both times Andy ran. And while Obama fooled me once, after he gave GW a third term in education I voted for Dr. Jill Stein, Green candidate, for President. I am not greatly swayed by arguments that Hillary sucks less than any GOP candidate, even though she may. She's still a horrorshow.

It would take a lot to get me to pull the lever for anyone who talks like that. Frankly, with Democrats like that, who needs Republicans?

Who's the Next Education President?

There's a lot of loose talk about what's ahead for our union leaders. Friends keep saying Randi Weingarten is eyeing a position in the Hillary Clinton cabinet, and Michael Mulgrew is next AFT President. At least part of that is a good bet, as every single UFT President has moved on to be AFT President. And Randi is certainly waving the Hillary flag, going so far as to be freaked out over the now pretty much irrelevant flap over DNC data.

Please Read-IA Starting Line on Bernie Sanders-DNC data battle-why wld Bernie's folks do this? https://t.co/XV81x1rmW5 via @demfromct

— Randi Weingarten (@rweingarten) December 19, 2015

I was a little taken aback by that, as I doubt Senator Sanders plays that way, and I told her so.

Don't know, but I read they fired the guy who did it. Why would Hillary take money from Eli Broad? @rweingarten @DemFromCT

— Arthur Goldstein (@TeacherArthurG) December 19, 2015

Randi has a response, of course.

@TeacherArthurG @DemFromCT -you mean the WSJ article report? Clinton has made clear she doesnt support charters supplanting public schools

— Randi Weingarten (@rweingarten) December 19, 2015

I'm uncomfortable with what Hillary has "made clear," as I value action a whole lot more than words. I frequently read tweets and columns from Randi about how people like Hillary and Obama have said this or that. Obama, in particular, has now outdone GW Bush as the most anti-public education President of all time. I also question why, if Hillary is not all that reformy, that Eli Broad would be sending her money. I don't think he does things like that just for fun. 

Would a victorious Hillary place a teacher union leader as Secretary of Education? While I have my issues with Randi, I'd certainly like her better than Arne Duncan, or the execrable John King. My sense is that Hillary would stab Randi in the back in a New York minute. I very much doubt she wants to read headlines in the tabloids and even the faux-liberal NY Times about how she'd sold out to the teacher unions.

But it's a tough time for Hillary supporters, what with Bernie Sanders, with a DNC that appears in the bag for Hillary, with virtually no media coverage, still outpolling her against every GOP candidate. Senator Sanders has not really keyed into educational issues the way I'd like, but I support his overall policies and will certainly vote for him in a primary.

Eight years ago I voted for Hillary against Obama in the NYS primary. I thought she was marginally less likely to be hostile to us than Obama. While Obama has been such a disappointment I was unable to vote for him a second time, I'm still only marginally hopeful that she would represent an improvement. The fact that Broad puts his money on her makes that hope even more marginal.

I hope Sanders can accomplish what Obama did eight years ago. American voters deserve a real choice, and while Hillary looks better than Donald Trump, that's really not something worth bragging about.