To think that WFP has any influence, when the governor whose social policy has been adequately to the left but whose economic policy has been pure voodoo supply side and tax cuts for the wealthy and public service cuts for the rest, currently is being snookered by the top of the ticket actively working against the WFP with his own alternative faux reform third party is delusional. Though it is unlikely to be anything but a coronation of King Cuomo to another term in office, thoughtful progressives or anyone that is concerned with integrity of our elected officials should withhold their vote from either of the major candidates and vote for a 3rd party this November. For those New York State voters that are left of the aisle Green Party candidate Howie Hawkins; for those on the right Libertarian Party candidate Michael McDermott.
Showing posts with label Bill De blasio. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill De blasio. Show all posts
Oct 22, 2014
DeBlasio: Kathy Hochul Is Progressive, Just Ignore Her Donations To Pro-Life Preacher And Her Bragging About How Conservative She Is
Kathy Hochul, former Congresswoman from the Buffalo area and first time candidate for public office without the endorsement of the New York State Conservative Party, is running for Lieutenant Governor with incumbent governor Andrew Cuomo. In the Democratic primary liberal lions (Rep. Jerry Nadler, Mayor DeBlasio, etc) circled the wagons around Hochul to protect her from the accurate claim that she is a conservative Democrat. The New York Observer yesterday reported that from her release of tax information she has made donations to a Texas evangelical preacher whom has had a long career of unambiguous hatred of abortions and has never been welcoming to birth control of any sort. As the highest female running on the Women's Equality Party ticket (the party name which is misnomer since 7 men are running on the ticket and only 3 women) this is embarrassing to say the least since raison d'etre of the party is to pass the tenth point of the 10 point Women Equality Agenda of unrestricted access to abortion as a legal right in New York State. Andrew Cuomo has been airing ads to encourage people to vote for him and Hochul on the WEP ballot line assuming that vast majority of the electorate will vote for him on the Democratic party line without prompting. Which begs the question, if Andrew Cuomo doesn't intend to vote for himself on the Working Families Party, nor respect the Deblasio negotiated deal that landed him the endorsement of the WFP why should anyone else? Why should a deal that was dismissed by the governor even before newspapers had a chance to put the story to print be honored by the activists and high info voters that typically vote WFP? Should the 142,000 voters that voted for Cuomo on the WFP line in 2010 return the favor in 2014 when there was not even lip service paid to keeping the commitments of the deal that delivered WFP line, and a clear path to an unobstructed general election, just to say "at least progressives have a seat at the table"?
To think that WFP has any influence, when the governor whose social policy has been adequately to the left but whose economic policy has been pure voodoo supply side and tax cuts for the wealthy and public service cuts for the rest, currently is being snookered by the top of the ticket actively working against the WFP with his own alternative faux reform third party is delusional. Though it is unlikely to be anything but a coronation of King Cuomo to another term in office, thoughtful progressives or anyone that is concerned with integrity of our elected officials should withhold their vote from either of the major candidates and vote for a 3rd party this November. For those New York State voters that are left of the aisle Green Party candidate Howie Hawkins; for those on the right Libertarian Party candidate Michael McDermott.
To think that WFP has any influence, when the governor whose social policy has been adequately to the left but whose economic policy has been pure voodoo supply side and tax cuts for the wealthy and public service cuts for the rest, currently is being snookered by the top of the ticket actively working against the WFP with his own alternative faux reform third party is delusional. Though it is unlikely to be anything but a coronation of King Cuomo to another term in office, thoughtful progressives or anyone that is concerned with integrity of our elected officials should withhold their vote from either of the major candidates and vote for a 3rd party this November. For those New York State voters that are left of the aisle Green Party candidate Howie Hawkins; for those on the right Libertarian Party candidate Michael McDermott.
Mar 11, 2014
Re: Charter schools are public schools
The following is a response to an opinion piece from NY Daily News regarding Harlem Success needing to be relocated.
"they are explicitly denied some funding streams, like facilities funding, made available to district schools" So the 9 out of 45 charter schools that are being relocated out of public schools were doing fundraising to pay $0 rent? What facilities funding do they need if charter schools aren't paying rent?
"They educate some of our most challenging students, the vast majority of them low-income, black and Latino. They are open to all applicants, with seats determined by random lottery." Charter schools get to filter out the most challenging students, those without family structure concerned enough to apply for the lottery.
"proof of what can happen when you smartly unleash innovation within a system that, thanks in no small part to a rigid teachers’ union contract," so the only means of succeeding is breaking the backs of unions? So the egalitarian and democratic need to have everyone educated regardless of ability to pay can't be delivered by employees as long as they have a say in their own workplace? Democracy is great, except in the workplace according to Josh Greenman.
The space that the charter schools were using as class rooms, you know the art, music, & other non-classrooms, they displaced public school children from their art and music facilities so there was significant draw back to students, just the ones that weren't in the charter schools. On second thought both are harmed by duplicating the bureaucracy of school administration and hampering art & music education of both segments of the student population.
What innovation can be transferred into the public schools system at-large? If charter schools were acting as they were intended to, as experimental educational policies that would benefit the greater school system, that previous question could be answered and the charter schools have self evident value to all students, currently they are not. When charter schools are used merely to undercut a unionized workforce, and educational benefits stem from culling students with family backgrounds that place value on education enough to enter the school lottery, then their raison d'etre is non-existent. Pointing out that there are outside funding sources for district schools just as there is for charter schools leaves me with the question: What is differentiating factor why donors contribute to charter schools instead of the public schools other than political philosophy? If someone is hellbent to privatize all functions of government, contributing to charter schools is an efficient means to get the camel's nose under the tent to an American expected government service. Charter schools should unionize, if they were creative in their contract maybe using project labor agreements (PLA) over the school year, and then deliver innovative educational solutions the so-called opponents of charter schools would either dissipate or have unfounded objections to charter schools. If in this hypothetical situation where charter schools tackle resolving both unionized workforce and policy solutions to our educational system, while receiving the same support from private sources, then my accusation that the charter school movement is entirely a stalking horse for plutocratic sycophants is unfounded; but in the case that a charter school can't raise funds for a democratic workplace then that would prove my accusation. And to avoid any benefit from prejudicing the student body of charter schools, NYC should implement a charter school draft of all non-special needs students so the students with families that do not speak English at home and are domicile and/or nutritionally insecure are included in the charter school experiment; since the leaders of these charter schools are run "remarkably well" despite being "complex and unique organizations", so I'm sure they can handled that I'm mean the public schools in large part also are meeting the state standards and their administrators are doing it for half the cost than Eva Moskowitz.
"they are explicitly denied some funding streams, like facilities funding, made available to district schools" So the 9 out of 45 charter schools that are being relocated out of public schools were doing fundraising to pay $0 rent? What facilities funding do they need if charter schools aren't paying rent?
"They educate some of our most challenging students, the vast majority of them low-income, black and Latino. They are open to all applicants, with seats determined by random lottery." Charter schools get to filter out the most challenging students, those without family structure concerned enough to apply for the lottery.
"proof of what can happen when you smartly unleash innovation within a system that, thanks in no small part to a rigid teachers’ union contract," so the only means of succeeding is breaking the backs of unions? So the egalitarian and democratic need to have everyone educated regardless of ability to pay can't be delivered by employees as long as they have a say in their own workplace? Democracy is great, except in the workplace according to Josh Greenman.
The space that the charter schools were using as class rooms, you know the art, music, & other non-classrooms, they displaced public school children from their art and music facilities so there was significant draw back to students, just the ones that weren't in the charter schools. On second thought both are harmed by duplicating the bureaucracy of school administration and hampering art & music education of both segments of the student population.
What innovation can be transferred into the public schools system at-large? If charter schools were acting as they were intended to, as experimental educational policies that would benefit the greater school system, that previous question could be answered and the charter schools have self evident value to all students, currently they are not. When charter schools are used merely to undercut a unionized workforce, and educational benefits stem from culling students with family backgrounds that place value on education enough to enter the school lottery, then their raison d'etre is non-existent. Pointing out that there are outside funding sources for district schools just as there is for charter schools leaves me with the question: What is differentiating factor why donors contribute to charter schools instead of the public schools other than political philosophy? If someone is hellbent to privatize all functions of government, contributing to charter schools is an efficient means to get the camel's nose under the tent to an American expected government service. Charter schools should unionize, if they were creative in their contract maybe using project labor agreements (PLA) over the school year, and then deliver innovative educational solutions the so-called opponents of charter schools would either dissipate or have unfounded objections to charter schools. If in this hypothetical situation where charter schools tackle resolving both unionized workforce and policy solutions to our educational system, while receiving the same support from private sources, then my accusation that the charter school movement is entirely a stalking horse for plutocratic sycophants is unfounded; but in the case that a charter school can't raise funds for a democratic workplace then that would prove my accusation. And to avoid any benefit from prejudicing the student body of charter schools, NYC should implement a charter school draft of all non-special needs students so the students with families that do not speak English at home and are domicile and/or nutritionally insecure are included in the charter school experiment; since the leaders of these charter schools are run "remarkably well" despite being "complex and unique organizations", so I'm sure they can handled that I'm mean the public schools in large part also are meeting the state standards and their administrators are doing it for half the cost than Eva Moskowitz.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)