Re: Miller in Oakland

[Peter Farruggio <pfarr@cal.berkeley.edu>]

Thanks for the report, Susan.  So, for the corporate Democrats the 
restoration of progressive taxation (tax the rich) is off the table, 
along with impeachment.  Those who'd like to get a flavor of how much 
of the vast wealth in the US is allowed to escape the revenue stream 
(funds for education and the rest of our infrastructure) should visit 
Citizens for Tax Justice
http://www.ctj.org/
Talk about next door to Miller's district, the thriving Port of 
Oakland and all its big business clients are raking in huge profits 
from the Pacific Rim trade, as is the Port of Long Beach in the Los 
Angeles Basin.  A fair tax policy would bring in billions each year, 
from them alone, needed for our schools.  Instead, the CA legislature 
is considering yet another "tax break" for the movie industry and 
other big players.
The liberal reformers who think that NCLB was well intentioned and 
just needs a little fix-up just don't get the big picture.  There are 
no unintended consequences in high stakes accountability.  Narrowed 
curricula, militarization of the low income classrooms, teacher 
bashing and union smashing, increased racial and class 
segregation.  That IS the corporate plan.  The CEOs and their 
politicians have achieved their goals with NCLB.  Miller seems not to 
have "remembered" about Nebraska's use of multiple and authentic 
assessments because he is pushing the business model of "growth" 
based on the same old standardized tests, which will INTENSIFY the 
deprofessionalization of teaching by providing a fair-sounding cover 
for merit pay and teacher firing.

The only way to "reach" these politicians is through strong grass 
roots organizing.  Make them fear their constituents.

Pete Farruggio



At 08:52 p.m. 25/07/2007, Susan Harman wrote:
> Last Friday (7/20) was an event called "From No Child Left Behind to 
> Every Child a Graduate", sponsored by the Alliance for Excellent 
> Education, Frisco Ed Fund, Stanford's School Reform Network 
> (Darling-Hammond), and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 
> Education Fund. WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE? They said their funders were liberals.
> The keynote speaker was George Miller. This was my second event with 
> him in less than a week. Ive reached a maximum level of frustration. 
> Ill try to calm down enough to report.
> 1. He opened by saying they had beat back in Congress the cuts in 
> education accounts.  However, they are still $56 billion behind what 
> was promised.
> 2. He supports the loan forgiveness program for teachers and other 
> civil servants.
> 3. He was pretty much entirely focused on "maintaining 
> accountability". But, he said that the top-down model is not 
> sustainable. (Hasn't he heard of Oakland, which is geographically 
> next door to his district, and which has suffered under state 
> control for 4 years? Or Vallejo, which is just the other side of his 
> district, also under state control?)
> 4. He touted New Orleans and Chicago as models!? Ive asked his 
> office what he means re Chicago. Waiting for a reply.
> 5. He said he was the "proud author of NCLB" and that "communities 
> and politicians are now accountable," but NCLB "hasn't worked in the 
> way it was intended." He hopes to become "the proud author of a 
> revised NCLB that works."
> 6. He said hes "become a convert" to "multiple indicators", but he 
> said there are no good models. Doug Christensen (Nebraska State Sup 
> of Ed) believes Linda Darling-Hammond (co-sponsor of the event) and 
> George Wood have told him about Nebraska, which has what is perhaps 
> the best model: all locally run. Christensen, Darling-Hammond, and 
> Wood plan to tell him again.
> 7. He will support a growth model, but said its premised on the 
> state having a student ID system so they can track individual kids. 
> No system, no growth model. And I read in the paper that CA has just 
> defunded its student ID system...
> 8. He and another speaker both mentioned the 2,000 high schools in 
> the US that are "dropout factories". They added that half of them 
> made AYP. Which tells us what?
> 9. He supports "performance pay" for both principals and teachers, 
> but didnt say what it will be based on. Lets all guess.
> 10. Jill Wynns (sp?), a Frisco school board member, asked him about 
> changing what counts as "proficient". (It is currently set at about 
> 80%.) He gave the Bush line about the reasonableness of expecting 
> all kids to perform at "grade level" (which, if it means anything at 
> all, means 50%). She pointed out that GL isnt the same as 
> Proficient. He shrugged and said "grade level, proficient, who cares 
> when theyre only scoring in the teens?" His lack of arithmetic 
> ability (50 = 80) may not matter if they go for a growth model, but 
> its pretty upsetting.
> 11. Somebody (Harvey?) asked from the floor how to get Silicon 
> Valley to pony up a little for education, and he said that wasnt in 
> his power. How about TAX THE RICH?
> 11. And just by the way, he claims impeachment is impossible, 
> because the Patriot Act gave Bush the power to do everything hes done. Really.
> Susan Harman, Harvey Smith
>
>
> Vote in the National Cheney Impeachment Poll
> http://www.usalone.com/blogvoices.php?Cheney%20Impeachment%3F
> Add this text to your own email and blog signatures! 
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Direct questions about the list to listmom@interversity.net