Texas

Now Watch Republicans Hang Education "Reform" Around Democrats' Necks

Jeff Bryant — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 16:26:14 -0400

Coming in over the transom this week, the ever-vigilant bloggers at Education Week's Politics K-12 who were camped out at hearings for the House Education and the Workforce Committee tweeted out that Rep. Judy Biggert from Illinois, "a moderate Republican," is "worried" that the Obama administration's signature education policy, Race to the Top, "is taking money away from homeless kids."

The good Congresswoman had to pioneer into territory that Republicans rarely ever inhabit to come up with this one. But we are, after all, in an election season. Republicans are on the hunt for whatever they can use to damage President Obama in particular and Democrats in general. And there's growing evidence that the Obama administration's education policies will be a target of the right wing.

The Right Wing Revs Up Its Attack Machine
Indeed, at the Congressional hearing cited above, Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who was in attendance to defend his program's accomplishments, got "hammered" for "continuing to pump money into competitive programs" like Race to the Top. Since when are Republicans against competition?

Tellingly, reauthorization of the federal government's chief education policy, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), is at a complete and utter stalemate.

President Obama and Republican governors are clearly at odds on spending levels for education. And the budget proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan that just passed the House would likely produce "an 18 percent cut to education funding" curtailing the Democrat-controlled federal government's outlay for education.

The rallying cry among the right wing is to redefine "federal" -- including "federal teachers unions" -- as a pejorative. And Republican presidential candidates are openly condemning the federal government's role in education, largely based on broad dislike of No Child Left Behind -- which was enacted in a Republican administration.

Conservative Beltway think tank operatives such the American Enterprise Institute's Rick Hess have cast serious doubts about key Obama education initiatives, such as the Common Core State Standards, which Hess claimed to resemble "a federally-inspired, politicized project."

As Democratic Rep. George Miller recently lamented, again in the pages of Education Week, "We've never had education dragged into this vortex. Education has always been above it. Now we find ourselves sitting in a partisan firefight."

Actually, partisan differences over education policy are likely a good thing, as it may be a sign of the DC crowd turning its back on the flawed logic of adopting centrism for centrism's sake. But if this is a "firefight," it's unclear what the Democrats are packing.

Democrats Show Up At A "Firefight" With What . . ?
It doesn't help Democrats that most of what the Obama administration is pushing for education is producing some really negative press on the ground. Earlier this week, reporters with the Atlanta Journal and Constitution presented a series of articles documenting a nationwide cheating scandal that calls into question the federal government's follow-up of top-down mandates on school accountability.

The newspaper's investigation "analyzed test results for 69,000 public schools and found high concentrations of suspect math or reading scores in school systems from coast to coast." The reporters note that the suspect results are particularly prone to appear in schools that "are grappling with urban blight and poverty" -- the schools that "NCLB was supposed to fix." And they lay much of the blame for the cheating on "way too much pressure" being put on schools to comply with testing mandates.

Although the AJC's reporters' broad conclusion is somewhat questionable, their report -- and others similar to it -- is likely to increase negative perceptions toward federal education policies.

Secretary Duncan, for his part, continues to struggle to distance his program from the widely reviled NCLB. He maintains that Race to the Top and other approachesare not an extension of the Bush administration's now unpopular edicts. But starting a political argument by explaining what you "are not like" is hardly firm ground.

Teachers, for instance, are not persuaded of the Secretary's good intentions. There is increasing evidence that there is very little teacher support for Obama school reform strategies among teachers -- especially among experienced teachers.

Only 7 percent of teachers believe standardized tests that are being pushed by Sec. Duncan are essential to good education. Many teachers report having to spend inordinate amounts of time -- over half their classroom time in some places -- on preparing for and administering tests, and they're understandably resentful of more time taken away from real instruction.

Many assessment experts advise against over-reliance on these tests. And grassroots parent organizations are increasingly vocal in their opposition to too much testing in public schools.

The backlash against testing is undoubtedly growing. Parents and public education advocates have started numerous "opt out" movements and actions. And now school boards in over 190 districts across the state of Texas are speaking out against the over-emphasis on testing in public schools.

Compounding Test-Resentment
Another factor that makes the Obama administration's reliance on standardized tests increasingly unpopular is the insistence on evaluating teachers based on the scores -- one of the qualifications for receiving federal grant money. The score-based evaluations are wildly unreliable and are leading to more and more cases of good teachers being treated very badly.

Incidents of highly respected teachers labeled as "ineffective" are being reported in Washington, DC, New York City, and elsewhere.

Sometimes, even whole schools that are well liked and supported in their communities are being shut down due to some poor test results that can hardly be attributed to the school's practices.

Due to the growing resentment toward testing and its applications, and other factors, an annual survey of teachers, MetLife’s Survey of the American Teacher, recently found that teachers’ job satisfaction is the lowest it's been in 20 years.

No doubt, Republican politicians will not lose any sleep over the growing dissatisfaction among teachers and parents with the Obama administration's education policies. What they will do is use it as a club to beat Democratic candidates over the head about the failure of federal education policies.

Democrats Are Following A Republican Playbook
The Republican strategy is quite clear. This week, my colleague Richard (RJ) Eskow laid it out.

Eskow observed how the dynamic of the Republican attack machine works during election season. In his commentary at ourfuture.org, he explained how right-wing agitation related to the Supreme Court hearings on the individual insurance mandate takes the peculiar turn of conservatives "viciously attacking" ideas, like mandated health insurance, that were originally developed in "right-wing think tanks."

This is the exact same strategy right-wing Republicans (now the only kind) are using with education policy. Now that ideas for education policy that were conceived primarily by right wing think tanks -- standards, NCLB, high-stakes testing -- are frimly in place, thanks in part to the cooperation of Democrats, they are now the exact points Republicans are using to attack Democrats.

Of course, as Eskow explained, "that's what you get" for compromising with the Right. Democrats continue to hew their views to right-wing proposals based on the worship of "bipartisanship." And then they get attacked for supporting the very ideas proposed by conservatives.

It's no sure thing that education will be a prominent issue in the upcoming elections. It's usually not. But with popular perceptions of the economy improving, Republicans will be searching for new fodder to stoke the assault guns.

While the Obama administration has more resources on hand to weather the assault, down-ticket Democrats have to be more careful. The right thing is for liberals to "act like liberals again" and return to insistence on education policies that are grounded in the individual well-being of students rather than standards, and justice and fairness rather than a faulty accountability tied to inaccurate measures.

Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/jeffbcdm

Hutchison and Sessions Attempt to Kill Social Security

Josh Rosenblum — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:53:31 -0400

Retiring U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-No Shame, TX) today unveiled a plan to steal Social Security from Americans by cutting their benefits and lying to them about it. In a release and fact sheet with more holes than a piece of swiss cheese in front of Dick Cheney on a hunting trip, Hutchison claims not to cut any “core benefits” in Social Security, but cutting those benefits is exactly what she does, and she cuts them by at least 13% or more. She gave her bill the great, blatantly full of rodeo bull manure title of the Defend and Save Social Security Act. This bill wouldn’t save and defend Social Security in the least. Even the most casual observer can tell the bill would more aptly be named the Attempted Murder of Social Security Act.

Hutchison wrote a letter to Vice President Biden’s deficit commission too. In it she said “I am concerned that Social Security reform must be part of the debt ceiling.” Leaving the bad grammar in that sentence aside, Social Security hasn’t contributed one penny to the deficit since by law it cannot do so.

Rep. Xavier Becerra (CA-31), Vice Chair of the House Democratic Caucus and a champion for Social Security said “Social Security has never added a dime to the deficits but Senator Hutchison’s plan would force massive benefit cuts on retired Americans in an effort to reduce the deficits created by the unfunded Bush tax cuts, the unfunded wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the economic recession.”

Becerra’s office also said:

According to the Social Security Actuary, Senator Hutchison’s plan would result in the following:

No COLA this year
Cuts in COLA benefits in future years affecting current seniors: $408-$540 per year
Cuts in benefits by raising the retirement age: $2,000-$2,700 per year
Total cuts in future benefits per middle income worker: $2,400-$3,600 per year

Last week Pete Sessions, chairman of the Republican House campaign committee released a plan that would privatize Social Security, just a few years after the stock market collapsed, and just six years after fellow Texan President Bush released a privatization plan that sunk so gloriously it made the Titanic look like a tea party. Sessions’ privatization scheme is a gift to Wall Street’s greediest players, who he’s depending on to raise money for his candidates. His bill is called the Savings Account For Every American (SAFE) Act. The only thing safe about it would be a bet that it fails.

I once knew a Texan from El Paso whose demeanor was the same as Hutchison’s and Sessions on these bills. He smiled like a happy little kid when he spoke to anyone who might help him out. He’d talk about how he wanted to work hard, then go skip out on any promises he’d made. I finally realized that almost every time he showed that smile, he’d be lying right through it and didn’t care one bit. Sessions and Senator Hutchison are smiling that lying smile on Social Security. They’re talking about saving the program that in reality they want to kill dead. But thankfully their aim stinks and Americans know it.

Today Gallup put out a new poll in which 66% of Americans say they’re worried about not having enough money for retirement. So while the vast majority of Americans worry about having enough money to live out their golden years these two Washington politicians with Wall Street friends put out bills with great names that strip Americans of their retirement security. No wonder so many of us are worried.

108 miles southeast of Dallas is Anderson County, which has a life expectancy of 69.8 years for their men. 18 Texas counties have life expectancies of under 72 years for males. Most Americans are not living longer, and according to a study from the University of Washington “large swaths of the United States are showing decreasing or stagnating life expectancy.” So why introduce a bill that increases the retirement age for Social Security?

For the 2012 election cycle, every Republican running for office who takes a dime from the National Republican Campaign Committee (NRCC) that Sessions heads should be asked by voters and their opponents whether they support their campaign chief’s plan to privatize Social Security.

Most political candidates know that Americans don’t want Social Security privatized or benefits cut. But Republican and Democratic candidates must take the right position on these issues or face the wrath of the voters. So make sure to ask Republicans who take any money or advice from the NRCC if they support their campaign chief’s Wall Street plan to privatize Social Security and his Senator’s plan to take away our benefits. If the candidates don’t take a stand, that’s as good as saying they support privatizing Social Security and cutting our benefits.

If they’re going to kill Social Security, they’re going to have to get it by voters, not just by Wall Street, and they should know better than to think so poorly of all of us who don’t work on Wall Street.