OlsonOnline

The dishonesty of Ron Saxton and his media backers

Not that it matters which Republican gets the gubernatorial primary endorsements - all three would make terrible governors- but a little honesty and more substance doesn't seem too much to ask of Portland's editorial writers. 

Take the Tribune's endorsement of Ron Saxton, for example.  The Trib writes that Saxton, as a school board member,  "... helped bring a more businesslike attitude to the problems of the Portland school district."  In reality, what Saxton "helped bring" to the district was Ben Canada.  And Steve Goldschmidt.   Getting rid of of the inept Canada and two of his cronies may have cost the district close to a million bucks, especially if you add in the severance pay for the recently fired Goldschmidt.

However it's defined, Saxton's "businesslike attitude" created major problems for the district, including public distrust of how the district managed its affairs.  God help us if Saxton imposes such a "businesslike attitude" on the state.   

David Sarasohn provides a more telling and accurate analysis of the Saxton candidacy in his column this morning.  In his mad dash to the extreme right, Saxton's campaign spots, on the state's "management" of resources, on education, and on the cost of prison meals,  have been wildly misleading, perhaps even outright... lies!    The ads have one thing in common -- you can't trust the government!  Let the private sector provide some solutions-- for roads, for payday loans, maybe even for schools. 

No wonder the Tribune endorsed Ron Saxton.

A Thousand Points of Light?

At least it roused me from the stupor inflicted by the oh-so-polite tedium of last night's school board meeting.

Doug Morgan's praise of the Jefferson cluster reconfiguration implementation as a "Thousand Points of Light" immediately caught my attention. His choice of words may have been inadvertent.  On the other hand, perhaps not. As a kind of Freudian slip, it may have provided a revealing glimpse into the mind of the man most likely to vote in favor of Vicki Phillips' school closures proposal come May 1.

Recall that the phrase was popularized in George H.W. Bush's inaugural address in 1989:

"I have spoken of a thousand points of light, of all the community organizations that are spread like stars throughout the Nation, doing good. ... The old ideas are new again because they are not old, they are timeless: duty, sacrifice, commitment, and a patriotism that finds its expression in taking part and pitching in."

The idea was resurrected in George W. Bush's 2002 State of the Union address:

"The Bush of the moment devoted much of his State of the Union's address's scant domestic-policy section to promoting a variation on Dad's old 'thousand-points-of-light' scheme. Young Bush is now busy touring the nation to sell this new vision of volunteerism as the cure for what ails America."

Morgan -a product of the Universtiy of Chicago, the institution which bequeathed us Milton Friedman's free market economics and Leo Strauss' neoconservatism (and the Iraq War)-  does not speak carelessly.  I believe he knew what he was saying.  He most certainly was aware of the origins and the implications of the phrase that sums up the Bush family philosophy on the limited role of government in promoting the general welfare.  That philosophy includes the government's role in the education of our children - it's best left to the private sector.

Let me speculate that Morgan was referring to private money from the Gates Foundation and, indirectly, from the Broad Foundation in funding the reforms at Jefferson.  Broad, which has trained school board members in "governance", has direct ties to the Bush Administration and has in fact worked to promote and implement features of the No Child Left Behind Act.

Closer to home, the Portland Schools Foundation with cooperation from the Portland chapter of Stand for Children has pretty much hand-picked the seven Portland School Board members currently in office.  PSF has close ties to the Portland business community which has been pushing the agenda of school closures and consolidation.  In other words, school "accountabilty and efficiency"  -the business model- is what matters most in local educational politics. 

Doug Morgan is all about accountability and efficiency.  Adequate government funding of our schools may well be of secondary importance.  In that sense, Morgan's use of a "Thousand Points of Light" is as revealing as George W. Bush's use of the term "crusade" to characterize the American invasion of Iraq.

School choice Kool-Aid at the Trib

Not to say that Betsy Richter is a card carrying member of the Libertarian Party, but her pro-school choice bias plays well with organizations like the Cascade Policy Institute, which is, of course, a libertarian think tank. 

Just look at the other story in today's Tribune for corroboration.  There we learn that Matt Wingard, "director of Cascade's school choice project", is organizing a big shindig to bring real choice to the Jefferson Cluster, something he says the district plan fails to do.  His featured guest is "Howard Fuller, chairman of the Black Alliance for Educational Options".  Fuller believes that black students should be free to choose any school to their liking.

Maybe Betsy isn't a libertarian.  Maybe she just plays one in the ongoing Tribune advocacy of libertarian ideas.  She's the focus of the feature on the debate over district policy, not Ruth Adkins or Rich Watson of the Neighborhood Schools Alliance. 

It probably helps that Betsy is pals with the Trib's other favorite blogger, Jack Bogdanski, who in turn is pals with Tribune columnist Phil Stanford, who not so coincidentally, in his column this morning, managed to mention Jack's choice for city council, libertarian Dave Lister, and libertarian charter school advocate, Rob Kremer, both regular columnists for the libertarian Brainstorm Northwest.

Betsy is wrong, by the way, in claiming that advocates for neighborhood schools employ a "divide and conquer strategy" by demonizing school choice parents.  In fact, the NSA has a "choice" parent on its steering committee.  It's the district's choice and open enrollment policies that are divisive, along with district's decision to nurture "small" focus options programs while taking the axe to traditional neighborhood schools and consolidating those left standing into mega- K-8 institutions.

Betsy is also way off base in playing the "poverty" card.  Like Bush's tax cuts, school choice "mainly" benefits the wealthy.  What I have argued -and I'm probably the most vociferous school choice opponent among NSA'ers- is that choice is a boon for "advantaged" families.  Betsy may not have a car, but by every other measure she fits into the "advantaged" demographic - well-educated, well-connected, computer savvy, and, most importantly, concerned about her children's education.  Overly concerned, some might say.   

I don't "have any skin in this game" either.  My kids are both in college (after going through their neighborhood schools.)  I'm merely a staunch advocate for public schools. I'm concerned about the deleterious impact of district policies on the community.  However, I invite you to read the critiques posted on the NSA website by those who do have kids in threatened schools, Garth Nisbet and Mike Miller, for example.

You may find their perspectives enlightening.

October surprise?

With Karl Rove back in charge of fending off the Democrats' November assault on the House and Senate, it's not at all "irreponsible" for Preemptive Karma to speculate on a probable "October Surprise", a Bush family "political signature".

But will the surprise come in the form of a mushroom cloud?  It's clearly a possibliity, writes San Francisco Chronicle columnist Mark Morford:

"Sound far-fetched? Don't think even Bush could be capable of using nukes to slap Iran? Perish the thought. All reports from underground White House sources  --  most notably by way of Sy Hersh's horrifying report in a recent New Yorker  --  indicate that Dubya and his remaining team of war-happy flying monkeys have been secretly laying out plans to attack Iran for months, possibly including the use of tactical nuclear weapons to get at those deep Iranian bunkers, all because Iran just celebrated its entrance into the world's 'nuclear club' by finally enriching some uranium  for the first time."

Nukes or not, we've violated Iran's sovereignty before -the 1953 Mossadegh overthrow- so what's one more illegal incursion?  Moreover, it's a time-honored American traditon to overthrow governments we don't agree with.  Particularly those with commodities we covet - like oil.

I personally don't believe that even George W. Bush is stupid enough to unleash a nuclear firestorm on Iran.  Nor is he likely to mount any sort of military attack.  We've used up our ammo, politically speaking, in Afghanistan and Iraq.

But dirty tricks?  With Rove in charge, and with the threat of Democratic investigations of Bush looming,  you can bet the mortgage on it.

Point- counterpoint on the making of a great city: Sten versus Nielsen

In her column this morning begging Portland not to throw away its professional sports franchises, Susan Nielsen channels the Trib's Dwight Jaynes. "Portlanders should fight for their city", she writes, meaning keeping the Blazers and chasing that elusive major league baseball franchise.  If they don't, Portland will annnounce "to the world that its not a player":

"Leaders in other cities fight for big-time sports franchises. They see hosting pro sports as part of creating a desirable place with an attractive economic profile."

Nielsen is wrong as usual.  There is no evidence that professional sports provide any economic benefit to their host cities.  In fact, the opposite is probably true.  Desirable?  How desirable is life in "major league" cities like Cleveland, Detroit, or Houston?  Anaheim anyone?  "Players" like those I can do without.

You want livablility?  Erik Sten provides the answer here.  In collaboration with Sam Adams, he's written two resolutions to commit the City of Portland to strengthening neighborhoods, schools, and urban diversity by providing the affordable housing necessary to attract families back into the city.  Notice that professional sports teams are nowhere on the list of factors that make a city a "desirable" place to live:

"...neighborhood livability, affordable housing opportunities, and strong schools are three of the main factors people consider when choosing a place to live and raise children... ."

As one who reads the sports section first thing each morning, I could care less if the Blazers left town.  I do care, however, about the threat to neighborhood schools, and the neighborhoods around them, from families leaving the city and the district.  Sten, as usual, attacks the problem head on.  That's what a "leader" is supposed to do.

It's ironic that Sten is the one providing the counterpoint to Nielsen's frivolous case for pro sports.  Nielsen is a member of the Oregonian's editorial board which this week endorsed Sten's opponent for city council, Ginny Burdick, the candidate of private money and downtown business. 

It's certain that Sten's proposals will be snidely dismissed by those who think the private sector alone should be responsible for how a city develops.  They'll label Sten's plan as another attempt at "social engineering".  How it differs from getting a city to build a ball park to attract a professional baseball franchise in order to make the city more "desirable" for potential residents is beyond me.

I guess it's just a matter of priorities.

Viva Casimira Rodriguez! She's NOT a lawyer.

Bolivians and democrats everywhere should celebrate the astonishing rise of indigenous Casimira Rodriguez from domestic slavery to Bolivian Minister of Justice in the government of Evo Morales, the first indigenous President of Bolivia.  It is fitting that a country with a majority indigenous population should be led by those who represent the concerns of the impoverished Indian peasantry.

But justice doesn't come easily in this world.  Bolivian lawyers -the 30,000 member National Association of Bolivian Lawyers- are demanding Rodriguez' resignation.  Why?  She's not a lawyer.

You can decide for yourself whether Casimira Rodriguez is qualified to run a government ministry, a position which in Bolivia has "historically been reserved for a minority light-skinned criollo elite."  I want to consider a more fundamental question:

Why do lawyers everywhere assume they're qualified by virtue of their law degrees  to hold public office?

Sure, legislators write laws.  But they also devise policy.  A lawyer can be hired to write the law, but representatives of the people are supposed to make public policy.  Are lawyers by virtue of their training representative of the people?  In Oregon, a law degree isn't even required for the elective office of judge.  Yet governing bodies, from school boards to state legislatures to the U.S. Congress, are filled with lawyers.

Take the case of lawyer Ron Saxton who is running against lawyer Kevin Mannix in the Republican primary for the privilege of taking on either lawyer Ted Kulongoski, lawyer Jim Hill, or lawyer Pete Sorenson in the November election for governor of Oregon.  Five of the six leading candidates in the guberbnatorial campaign are lawyers.  I find that odd, but all too common in politics. 

Saxton first tested the political waters as an elected member of the Portland School Board, where other lawyers- Mark Abrams and Karla Wenzel, to name just two- have also served.  I can't say that any of the three especially distinguished themselves through their service on the board. 

Conspiculously missing from the board in recent years are those with educational experience, people who have actually worked in the public schools. (Dilafruz Williams, a Professor of Education at PSU, may be an exception on the current board.) That places the board at a distinct disadvantage in dealing with the district administration, to whom it's left to propose educational policies which the board either ratifies or rejects.  I believe the board should have a hand in making policy, not mere policy rubber stamping.

But back to Bolivia.  Casimira Rodriguez' position as Minister of Justice would seem to require some legal background.  I say she can hire some lawyers from the National  Association of Bolivian Lawyers  for advice when she needs it.  Furthermore, her title in full is Minister of Justice and Human Rights.

Who better to administer justice with regard for human rights that one who knows first-hand the injustices suffered by the Bolivian people?

 

In the news: Saxton, Linn, and Victory Charter School

Let me start with the last since it relates to my post yesterday on niche schools.

Victory Charter School, the subject of a post I wrote a couple of years ago, has been shut down by the state, ironically for lousy achievement test scores in reading and math.  I say ironically because charters are small schools without the regulatory constraints of larger public schools.  Many of the latter do quite well on those tests in third and fifth grades, regardless of the socio-economic status of their students. Chief Joseph and Clarendon, both in North Portland, are good examples.

The greater irony, however, is that charters are by definition supposedly more adept, more nimble, if you will, at educating their students.  If you accept test scores as a legitimate measure of learning (a dubious proposition), research nationally has shown that charters actually "perform" no better than traditional public schools, and frequently worse. 

To me, the reason for that is clear.  As I wrote in my original post, charter schools are often founded by people who know little about education.  They bring  more enthusiasm  than expertise to the task of building successful schools.  And often their enthusiasm stems from theory and ideology rather than from experience with real students.   Thus the dismal performance of many charters.

**********************************

The profile on gubernatorial candidate Ron Saxton in today's Oregonian reminds readers that Saxton honed his political skills as a member, and eventual chair, of the Portland School Board.  It was during Saxton's board tenure that Portland Public Schools were given over to the inept and disastrous leadership of Ben Canada.  Getting rid of Superintendent Canada cost the district dearly, both financially and in public esteem.

But as bad as Canada was, the problems besetting public schools in Portland and throughout the state can be laid primarily at the feet of Don McIntire, author of Measure 5, and now an apparent political ally of Ron Saxton.  Early in his campaign, Saxton arranged a meeting with McIntire:

"Saxton talked at length about his desire for smaller, cheaper, more efficient government, in which private contractors would take over public programs, and state agencies would face elimination if they didn't meet his standards.

" 'I said, "If you start saying that in public, I'm going to have to be your friend," McIntire says. "And he did start saying it in public."

*****************************

In the blogs, Basic Rights Oregon has come out with a slick new endorsement site for selected candidates they see as supporting gay and lesbian rights.  The first face that pops up is that of Multnomah County Chair Diane Linn.  I have a problem with that endorsement, a problem which I explained in this post accusing BRO of historical revisionism.

A group called BRO Watch picked up that post and publicized it.

BRO Watch believes that an advocacy group like Basic Rights Oregon should support all candidates for public office who support gay civil rights, and they most certainly should not activley oppose potential allies like Ted Wheeler, Linn's opponent in the race for county chair.  Wheeler has proven himself, through word and deed, a genuine advocate of gay rights.

I don't know much about BRO Watch beyond what I see on its site.  But some have accused the site as a front for the Wheeler campaign.  I don't believe it.  I think their beef with BRO is both genuine and well-intended.

By the way, Ted Wheeler has my vote.

Double talk from the Trib

Erik Sten, a "political lifer", should be thrown out of office, says the Tribune's endorsement editorial this morning,  because he's running for a third term. 

Dan Saltzman, also seeking a third term, should be reelected because we need his "experience", something which his opponent, Amanda Fritz, apparently lacks. 

Yeah, I know there's more to the endorsement than that- Ginny Burdick is more "rational" than Sten, Saltzman is "steady and reasonable" - but what it comes down to is simply this: which candidates are more reliably pro-business?  The Trib's editorial board even found it necessary to apologize for Burdick's "undeniably liberal legislative record",  for godssake!  Who do these peope think their readers are?  This is Portland!

Notice that no mention was made of Saltzman's "cover the reservoirs" debacle, but the editorial was quick to dump responsilbility for the water bureau computer glitch on Sten, along with Voter Owned Elections and the "quixotic and doomed" attempt to make PGE  a truly public utility.

I feel almost sorry for Dave Lister, the Trib's obvious darling for his "fiscal conservatism and social libertarianism".  Had the Tribune's editorial board been willing to engage in staight talk, and had it been willing to show some journalistic spunk, it would have  endorsed the libertarian Lister and dispensed with the double talk. 

I'm sure that was it's intention, but somebody must have injected a dose of political pragmatism into the endorsement discussion.  Too bad, libertarians, wherever you may be. 

Niche schools proliferate while neighborhood schools languish

Here's some really interesting and useful data on schools and school enrollment from Nicole Breedlove in her letter to the Oregonian posted on the Neigborhood Schools Alliance website:

"An Oregonian editorial on Wednesday suggests Jefferson should be closed because it is the high school with the smallest number of students. This reasoning fails to recognize that the Jefferson attendance area actually has the largest number of high school students living within its boundaries:

Jefferson -     1950
Marshall -      1864
Wilson -        1697
Grant -         1622
Madison -     1524
Franklin -      1476
Roosevelt -   1395
Cleveland –   1379
Lincoln -       1323

"For years NCLB and PPS policies have encouraged students to transfer out of Jefferson."

It seems that I made that same argument a few months ago.

The PPS policies in question are open enrollment and school choice which together have enabled the stampede of kids out of not only Jefferson, but also the test score-maligned Marshall, Roosevelt, and Madison. 

Another frequent contributor to the NSA site,  PPS Parent cites the proliferation of charter, magnet, and focus option schools as a major factor in the depopulation of Portland's neighborhood schools:

"Last November, a Portland Public Schools board member noted with some concern, '13 charter school applications have come before the Portland School Board and so far nine were approved.' Moreover, magnet or special focus option programs have grown from nine schools in 1997/1998, to 31 listed in the 2005/2006 catalog. Although the board has been 'hesitant to open a school that would siphon off students,' we don’t need a consultant to explain why some neighborhood schools have experienced declining enrollment."

Note particularly the listed enrollment numbers of six of Portland's charters, all relatively small, but totaling 749 students, more than enough to fill up one of Vicki Phillips' reconfigured K-8 neighborhood schools.

This district is clearly on the road to a market-driven model of school choice.  But hopefully not far enough down that road to prevent us from reversing course and finding the route that leads to well-funded and well-staffed 'common' public neighborhood schools, the ones that benefit all kids.

Not just the fortunate few.

NCLB in the blogs!

It's good to hear fellow blogger Andrew Kaza speak out against No Child Left Behind, Bush's misbegotten school reform legislation that's heavy on achievement testing and light on just about anything of substance.  Except punishment for "poor" schools.

And by "poor", I don't mean academic performance, which is what the reading and math tests purport to measure.  Such tests are more likely to measure student privilege and wealth, which is what I said in my statement to the Portland School Board in January:

"District data seems to bear this out.  The poorer a school's students, the lower the test scores.  The wealthier the students, the higher the scores.  In other words, an inverse correlation exists between high rates of poverty and high test scores."

So I'm glad to see that I'm no longer the lone ranger on educational issues, and I'm especially thrilled to hear Andrew Kaza's demand for Bush to "get rid of his standardized tests", advice that would be useful for Portland as well. I'm sick of the inane and educationally ignorant babble about "performing" schools versus "nonperforming" schools as determined by student achievement test scores.

Here's a statement from Fair Test about improving NCLB:

"Among these concerns are: over-emphasizing standardized   testing, narrowing curriculum and instruction to focus on test   preparation rather than richer academic learning; over-identifying   schools in need of improvement; using sanctions that do not help   improve schools; inappropriately excluding low-scoring children   in order to boost test results; and inadequate funding. Overall, the law's emphasis needs to shift from applying sanctions for   failing to raise test scores to holding states and localities   accountable for making the systemic changes that improve student achievement."

I've said many times that NCLB, which originally called for vouchers, is all about setting impossible standards for public schools so that the whole public education ediface can be privatized.   I've also written that Oregon should withdraw from the federal Title I program in protest.  Federal money supplies about 8.8% of Portland's school budget, but it's money that comes with too many strings attached - like the testing requirement, which seems to be driving local educational policy decisions, even school closures.

So forget NCLB, as Kaza suggests.  Just send the money in lump sums to the states to help fund financially strapped public schools.  It's money that's sorely needed, especially here in Oregon.