It looks like Lieutenant Governor Dan Forest wants to pick and choose his data. Forest rejected a report showing that charter schools in the state are disproportionally white and wealthy. That’s not what the light guv wanted to hear. He rejected the report as too negative and convinced the State Board of Education to refrain from sending the information to the legislature despite a January 15 deadline.
Forest is concerned about criticism charters might get from the press. His fears are well founded. The schools are far more segregated and the kids come from wealthier families than traditional public schools. That was a concern of critics when Republicans lifted the cap on charters in 2011. Now that their fears have come to pass, Forest wants to suppress the information or see if he can get a better spin on it.
The history of this fight stretches back to Brown v. The Board of Education. North Carolina put off integrating their schools for as long as possible. Most counties didn’t integrate until more than a dozen years after the ruling. When they did, segregation academies popped up all over the state. A few, mostly in cities, survived and adapted, allowing a few minorities and catering to predominately wealthy families while offering a handful of economically based scholarships. Most, though, faded out as lower middle class families had trouble shouldering the burden of paying for private education.
Republicans have been trying to subsidize private, largely segregated schools ever since. They pushed for vouchers for years, always making the argument that children shouldn’t be forced to attend failing schools. In reality, they were pandering to their base. The charter movement offered an opportunity, allowing parents to send their kids to publicly-funded schools that have fewer regulations than traditional public schools.
The original intent of charters was to allow for experimentation to identify successes that could then be adapted to traditional public schools. There’s certainly a place for charters in the public school system. However, the concept has been perverted to subsidize religious education and add to the re-segregation of traditional public schools.
That’s the data the Dan Forest doesn’t want us to see. He’s going to “run cover” to allow his cronies to tweak the information to get the results he wants. That’s not what research and reports are supposed to do. We should be entitled the facts, not the GOP spin on them.
Thomas Mills is the founder and publisher of PoliticsNC.com. Before beginning PoliticsNC, Thomas spent twenty years as a political and public affairs consultant. Learn more >
NCGOP Lt Gov. pull a report that contracts the NCGOP mythology. The current government of NC is NOT building a better school system; they are actively funding segregation as they defund public education.
The new president of the UNC-system is hiring a right-leaning consultant firm to provide “data” on the system. The funds for this report come from an anonymous donor.
The Republicans love to keep secrets. And these secrets are extremely damaging to the state of North Carolina, for many reasons. The UNC Board of Governors got exactly what they wanted – someone inspired by ideology to destroy the UNC-system.
This year we need to vote out all those in favor of keeping vital information secret from the public.
I agree to the extent this is not a traditional political issue. We don’t often hear of a demand so blatant and crass that it flies in the face of everything the institution of government is supposed to be.
I disagree about who is involved. It has everything to do with Republicans and Democrats. As the prevailing parties our system, it is they who are responsible for or for the lack of, telling us the damn truth without a spin. And both sides of the aisle should be screaming and decrying this.
I disagree with the metaphor about lead in the water. I know very well why I pay taxes. What I don’t know is and wonder why about, is how this mental midget politician denying, ignoring, or challenging the veracity of that report came to be elected to office in the first place. And you ignore that part about doing the right thing in the first place; not using lead based products in the construction of the water line. So rather than do what’s right, politicians do what’s expedient. Why? Because by the time it becomes a problem, it will be someone else’s problem. If you don’t have time and money to do it right, when you will you have the time and money to do it over?
I disagree with your support staff list for the professional politician. Political scientists don’t offer support; they pose questions and ponder the results. Analysts, pundits, activists all take the work of the scientist and proceed to use it in order to tell you (us) the story they want to tell. I do agree that the professional politician is a perpetual de facto problem.
I disagree about governmental integrity being the problem. Governments, like any other institution are made of people. It is the people that are for the most part entirely lacking in the moral objectivity to make the right decision, in spite of the ramifications to their careers or political future.
I agree with removing money and lobbying from the process. But you have to keep in mind that while we make decisions on the basis of majority, the majority isn’t always correct.
This article is about something that would normally take place behind closed doors, in a hushed whisper person to person. But apparently, Dan Forest is confident enough that he made his demand known to the extent that it became public knowledge; and he doesn’t seem to mind. I don’t care what his party is, it’s wrong, it’s contrary to democratic governance, and it only serves to confirm the accepted notion that people are sheep and only need to be spoon-fed a certain amount of information; just enough and positive enough to keep them coming back to the polls. As long as you have a photo ID.
My apology for stating the lead contamination was a metaphor. They don’t let me out much. Lead was banned from water pipes and system in June 1986. Furthermore, people complained about the water smelling and it was ignored by the State of Michigan. Being a true guardian and servant to the public, the thing that should have been done would be to take water samples and run a complete spectral analysis to determine why the water is smelly and discolored. Unless of course, as you state, it was already known and ignored.
But yes, I do have that underlying premise in mind. As a former public servant and having had control on how public dollars were spent, being a good steward, not only of the funds I was spending, but also of the trust placed in me to do my job as it was supposed to be done. But as an appointee, I could be fired. Politicians face no such sanction.
Convince enough voters, the politician can stay in office regardless of their conduct. Now it shouldn’t be that way, but there’s the way things are and the way things aught to be.
Anybody with any sense knows what is going on. It’s no secret that various members of the Republican party think that public education is a drain and a waste. And they want a way to privatize that system so, while they can’t stop it completely, they can shift the money to some of their benefactors so that they can profit. But they can’t do that without showing a broken system first. So they invent things like end of grade tests in order to quantify spending the money, If you can read, write, and do basic math and can sign your own name, then I’d say the education system worked to a certain extent, without the testing, wouldn’t you? I realize that is a gross generalization of what the educator does and what education is about. It will just need to suffice to illustrate the point that public education generally works without my expending 5,000 plus words on the varioius disciplines and topics within the public education system today.
The person’s integrity has nothing to do with their party affiliation; true, but has a lot to do with the way they think. Birds of a feather you know. Am I insinuating that Republicans are, by in large, devoid of any ethical motivation? No, I’m not. I am saying that a group (party) that places financial gain and greed over the welfare and safety of people has a general integrity deficit. Going back to your example from Flint. Water sources were changed in order to save money. Enough said. No doubt they were buying water from Detroit that was already treated as opposed to raw water being pumped in from the Flint River.
So the Department of Education’s report tells a story not favorable to Republican ideals. That’s too bad. Publish the report. I honestly don’t think it would have any bearing on Charter schools for the immediate future anyway. But because of who Dan Forest is, well, he just picks up the phone (metaphorically speaking; I don’t know if he called or not) and requests the report to be changed since it doesn’t tell the story he wants told. Boo hoo. Makes me wonder what else has been changed to mirror the status quo that we don’t know about.
Since this is the truth, and we here understand it, what other than screaming about it in front of TV cameras will change it? The newspapers with screaming headlines still change things. Everybody puts personal interest stories on the front pages anymore.
Lead poisoned kids in Flint, came through from Rachael Maddow on that equal time station for every perversity of thought or lives wasting as an entertainment for thirteen year old fascinated with horror.
I was looking at democracy in India there for awhile. Some corrupt politician there had the bad sense to go and show off for the crowd, who pulled him off the stage and beat him to death.
25 percent food insecurity in the Triad.
Gone is work for those might have had a job in High Point building furniture. Gone is tobacco, which meant the small farms could still be held by a family. What is the average farm in NC but 375 acres? Not so much in this day and age.
I saw in the LA times that the Feds legalized in the back pages of the finance bill, medical pot, which you appreciate only once you’re really spastic. Better to live with pain you don’t care about than have to keep ratcheting up the morphine and gabapenten.
When has anybody died from pot in a shooting gallery, or emergency room?
Never.
All economic theory started when the peasants were forced to use money.
Really the facts of the geographic blessings of NC, weather, mountains, ocean front, better rivers than you might think, and if anyone at all is poor in this state it is because William Petty, the economist decided since he didn’t like working, nobody would, and keeping people poor, compromised, was the way to enrich the ones with deeds
. Keynes had statistics. The rise of facts in economics is right recent.
Workers improve their quality of life with even books, that World Book Encyclopedia you remember that?
Sen sees that the ones dying during a famine can’t read. Phonetics actually works. I personally don’t appreciate the idea that there is a place for experiments in teaching. It simply isn’t that mysterious.
People who are poor and ignorant don’t just want to be that way. They are made that way from the get go because the people who hold the deeds don’t want them to know why they suffer so much.
Go stand in the kitchens and you will find the truth.
Wow, the left wing hate mongers are out in force on this thread. No need for civil discourse, just over-the-top vitriol for their political opponents. And then some liberal pundits wring their hands and wonder why American politics has gotten so divisive.
Deep down, in spite of it all I would have thought that, when you break it all down, you would be just as outraged as the rest of us over this particular debacle. An elected official cajoling, ordering, browbeating, coercing, unduly influencing, a government funded agency to change it’s official report to the public because he doesn’t like the verbiage. Talk about shooting the messenger; but no.
Now here you are, spewing your boilerplate rhetoric…again. Using the same condemning adjectives and condescending tone…again.
Is there anything that Republicans do that you can’t rationalize…other than trying to compromise with the other side of the aisle?
The issue of charter schools is a contentious political debate and there is some suspicion by those who support charter schools that the consultant’s report was biased. Having worked for a consulting firm and for both state and federal government, I know full well that research is often conducted to support whatever point of view the client, in this case DPI, wants to promote.
But most of the posters on this thread eschew rational political debate and resort to name calling and ascribe malevolent motives to those who disagree with their political positions. Here is a list are some of the slurs that liberals have posted in this thread against those of us with a different point of view: “Cowards, “racist,” “right wing nut causes,” “criminal,” “morally bankrupt,” “scary times” and your feeble attempt to rationalize the name calling by referring to my opinion as “spewing boilerplate rhetoric.”
If you believe that over-the-top vitriolic insults are appropriate content for political commentary rather than engaging in a civil debate on the issues, then there is no reason to continue our discussion.
That’s pretty good. Try to make this about the veracity of the report rather than the Lieutenant Governor trying to get it changed.
Regardless of who thinks what, Dan Forest made a request, in whatever language/tone you want to put to it (since none of us were there and actually heard or read the request) to change a report.
If you’re one of those who don’t happen to believe it, think it’s skewed, or doubt the conclusions, challenge it. It should be empirical. Disprove it. But you don’t ask for it to be re-written. Those that denounce or challenge the veracity of the report surely have the ability among them to use the same datasets used for the report and see if the conclusions posited are indeed relevant. I’m guessing it is without reading it. It’s hard to get wrong that you have x kids out of y total enrollment and parents with a income.
But Dan didn’t challenge the veracity of the report, did he? No, he simply didn’t like the story it told.
I would counsel that you find this detestable too Eb. Leave the partisan rhetoric at home this time. It would speak well of you.
It’s good to see you’ve gotten more substantive and not resorted to vitriolic insults, although “detestable” is somewhat over the top. And yet you want detractors to refrain from “partisan rhetoric”? What do think your posts are, objective discourse?
The report has not been kept secret nor has it been revised. Forest was obviously skeptical of the report’s emphasis on the negative with no acknowledgment of the positive impacts of Charter schools. In my view, he was taking pre-emptive action to counteract the report’s negative bias.
But of course, you think my view is “partisan rhetoric” while your’s is objective analysis. There is obviously a huge divide between conservatives and liberals on this and many other public policy issues. Dismissing contrary views as “partisan rhetoric” does not help bridge the gap.
And I’ve listed for you an act by an officer if this State and a member of the cabinet that defies logic to even comprehend, let alone the fact that it was actually made. And you’ve dodged, ducked, twisted, shuffled, feigned and re-directed time and again in order avoid the issue.
As far as vitriol being appropriate,I dunno, you tell me. You’re not above using it when it suits your specific need at the time. On the national stage, the Republican party candidates don’t vitriolically bashing each other over the head; it’s politics. But you’re only offended when folks express their frustrations here with the words they think best illustrates that frustration.
You bait and switch in order to ply your own self-righteous agenda. And then when you’re countered, cry foul and play victim. But beyond those things contemptable, I had held hope that you would, at least once show a glimmer of hope. That demanding a report be changed simply because a high ranking elected official didn’t like the way it was worded and the story it told. And then post that link with Lee Teague of the NC Charter Schools Association as a thinly veiled attempt to quantify your opinion and the actions of Dan Forest.
And of course, the NC Charter School Association doesn’t have a dog in this fight; noooooooooooooo.
The report ignored some crucial facts that, if fully and fairly presented, would tend to modify, if not refute, some of its findings. But the critics of the Charter program will have their views known as the report has received widespread coverage. And the report’s detractors will have their objections noted as WRAL and the N&O have given the Lt. Governor amply space and time to point out, in his view, the report’s deficiencies.
What I can’t abide is the name calling, insults and over-the-top reaction when a conservative presents views that challenge liberal conventional wisdom. This happens in the MSM, on university campuses and on this and other left leaning blogs.
Conservatives and liberals have different values and view public policy from different perspectives.You are not “right” and we are not ‘wrong” and vice versa. Why can’t you accept these inherent differences and debate the issues in a civil manner rather than ascribing malevolent motives to those with whom you disagree?
And that my good person, is precisely what should happen. The report stands as written. The Lieutenant Governor et al present their rebuttal of the issue and let the people decide for themselves. In other words, you don’t get to make your own facts or change the other guys’ argument.
I wouldn’t say necessarily that conservatives and progressives have different values. They have different views, but what we have in common is more than we sometimes care to realize or admit. They see things differently with regard to society, corporations, and government along with the respective roles of each. For instance, I think that the pursuit of money and financial gain to the point of endless greed is criminal or should be. The Bible and Christ talked of that as well and yet, Republicans seem to be the party of religion, although many progressive public policies with regard to our fellow man more closely mirror the teachings of Christ.
To be candid, if you can’t abide by it, then I would urge you not to engage in it. I don’t believe there is any conventional wisdom with regard to politics; only the ability to convince others, no matter how ridiculous or absurd. I have no qualms about being verbally abrasive as you can attest to. I believe in treating others as good as they’ll let me treat them. I can likewise write and debate in a civil manner. So I’ll take it, but don’t deceive yourself into thinking that I’ll keep taking it. Motives. That’s a tough one. From a common sense perspective, I like to use the duck test. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and talks like a duck; it’s a duck.
And honestly, in our latest exchange, did you hear me say once that the report published was right? No, I said asking for it to be changed was wrong. It was an ethically poor choice for the sitting LT Governor to make that request and it could validly cause one to question his character with regard to his ability to serve if he truly thought this was the right and proper course of action. So yes, every time one party sees a member of the opposition screw up, it’s a talking moment. It becomes a factor. Pile up enough of those factors and you become politically vulnerable.
I’m not right. In fact I’m wrong many times…a day. I accept too that none of us are infallible. But I won’t be lectured to either, not when I know that the policy or action being propagated is inherently wrong and contrary to what is best for the people. So, you want to convince me I’m wrong, ok. I give you leave. Don’t try it using skewed facts and statistics however; you’re not the only one lingering here with a graduate degree and vocabulary. Fair enough?
No, I don’t think your last response was particularly fair or profound. First, I said I can’t abide by the hate rhetoric, not politics in general. My initial post on this thread did not address the report or the Lt. Governor’s response. I was reacting to the vitriolic slurs from those who politically oppose the Lt. Governor and this Republican administration.
I will continue to express my political views on this and other blogs and point out hypocrisy, hyperbole and intolerance as I see it. But please note I am not engaging in personal insults or questioning your character or integrity because of our political differences.
It is my understanding that there will be some modification or addendum to the report when presented to the NCGA. But we do agree that both sides should have a fair chance to present their views on the report and on Charter schools in general and let public opinion influence the outcome of the debate.
A fair presentation of the critic’s side of the report was not presented in this blog or in press reports before Dan Forest took to the airways and wrote to the N&0. And BTW, I am confident that now that Charter public schools have become well established, they will enjoy widespread public support despite the opposition of the traditional education establishment.
And I would strongly disagree with you about progressives and conservatives having similar values. At the risk of oversimplifying the differences, it is my observation that progressives will invariably subscribe to collectivist solutions to political issues while conservatives are much more inclined to support solutions that promote individual initiative and responsibility.
And finally, while I should have referred to some the abrasive language on this thread as hate rhetoric rather than hate mongering, I doubt you can find any other abusive personal insults or character assassination from me aimed at other posters with whom I disagree. And I don’t agree with you that it is acceptable to use hate rhetoric due to political frustration or because others do it. I don’t believe pointing to others’ bad behavior justifies bad behavior on my part.
You’re certainly entitled to your own point of view. Doesn’t make you right or the keeper of manners or decorum, but you’re entitled to it.
Just as I am entitled to mine. So moot it be.
Interesting. “Detestable” crosses the boundary of intelligent discourse, but “…left wing hate mongers…” falls within the realm of decency, scholarship, and civil debate.
To that end, my commentary is just as objective as yours. If you had bothered to read my comments on the posts surrounding the myriad issues on this blog where I differ in opinion with my Democratic brethren on those respective matters, you would know that.
Once again however, you seek to change the topic and confound what this is actually about. And that is, LT Governor Dan Forest tried to get a report changed because he considered the message too negative. And yet again, instead of being incensed by this action, you seek to shine it up and peddle it like a used car salesman selling a clunker; guaranteed for fifty seconds or fifty feet, whichever comes first. No matter how slice it, spin it, twist it, bend it, or just plain make it up; it’s wrong.
We can disagree and become passionate about our convictions, to which and for which, I will hold steadfast; just like you. The difference between us, other than political persuasion, I recognize wrong as being wrong. I was just as adamant about Mike Easley and Bev Perdue’s derelictions as I am about this.
You may recognize it as being wrong, but you try to justify it as laudible and defend it when there is simply no excuse for it. Of course, I’m beginning to wonder why I should expect anything different.
But you go right ahead Eb. We’ll bat this ball back and forth just as long as you want to. What Dan Forest did will be just as wrong then as it was when Mr. Mills first posted this thread and go all the way back to when he made the request.
I listed for you actual examples of “hate mongering” used by liberals on this thread before I ever commented here. I then asked you if you thought that kind of vitriol was appropriate for political commentary as opposed to engaging in civil discourse on the issue. You never responded to my question, so I must assume you feel such name calling and other insults are appropriate.
I wasn’t even going to comment on this thread until I read the hateful rhetoric. Having made my point and received no assurance that you agree with me about the slurs, there is no further need to “bat this ball back and forth” with you.
As for our substantive disagreement on policy, I will leave you with another critique of the consultant’s report. Note there is no name calling or personal insults. Just substantive issues that I, and apparently the Lt. Governor, think are important.
http://jonesandblount.com/2016/01/08/lee-teague-state-board-of-ed-wants-to-get-it-right-on-the-charter-schools-report/
Disgusted I certainly don’t mind discussing anything with you. I’d enjoy the conversation.
Which is why I won’t let him/her waltz in and stir the pot then try and tap those horns down with a halo . We’re supposed to sit proper and steadfast while there have been various conservative pundits and posters that have come through dropping things like “Libtard” and yet, that’s supposed to be taken in stride. Keeping in mind of course that Republicans are the morally and intellectually superior (they think) group in our little political paradise. A central theme that oozes through in their thoughts, words, and deeds. You should see some of the cartoons and writings I get from my conservative friends (and I have a few). It makes the give and take in here sound like a Sunday School class.
Which is all Eb is here for in the first place. To stir the pot. There’s nothing really thought provoking nor any insightful analysis to what Eb proposes. You could get the same line of thought and logic from Megyn Kelly and have a much more pleasing image!
Yeah, the vocabulary is some sort of entitlement to an air of superiority I guess. I saw the vitae referenced a few times as well. Not to worry, that isn’t the only graduate degree holder floating around in here, I can guarantee that; there’s just no need to broadcast it in an effort to prop up something that’s been written.
Aw shucks, Troy. I was sure hoping I could be one of your “conservative friends.” And, BTW, the only time I mentioned my degree is when your new pal, D.g., posted that I wasn’t rigorous enough in my thinking to earn a graduate degree.
You’re wise to ignore D.g.’s advice, Troy. He use to be willing to debate with me, but apparently he concluded he was in over his head. Those “big words” like hypocrisy and intolerance must have struck a nerve.
I didn’t ignore Disgusted’s advice. He was trying to be helpful to me and no doubt reduce my frustration in trying to explain something to no avail.
I’m sorry, I find it dubious that you would want to be “friendly”. Now, it could be that
I concur Disgusted. Not counting the money, it was work; a lot of work on top of working a full time job and the requirements assorted with that; which were many.
However, it is what it is and we’ll continue on until the parameters change and we can do something differently.
“Forest rejected a report showing that charter schools in the state are disproportionally white and wealthy. ”
Of course he did. This is typical of the Republican party today. When the facts don’t match up to one’s rigid ideology simply reject the facts and find a way to create some of your own that do match up. It is among the many reasons the Republican party is the most intellectually and morally bankrupt institution in America.
Let’s see how he can turn a negative into a positive. Public Schools in NC are like slaves. Given the most difficult jobs, special Ed and behavior problems, English Language Learners with barely enough sustenance to stay alive.
It is more than just “pandering to their base” when Republican legislators endorse privatization of schools, jail cleaning, ___, ___…fill in the blanks. They may pick popular right wing nut job causes to push but an equally important motivation is to develop, enhance, and ultimately reward a new or growing CORPORATE DONOR BASE. Government run functions cannot donate to campaigns; privately run companies can. Even the not-for-profit entities that arise to run faux schools are generally that in name only.
I hope this tactic backfires. I hope the press hounds the powers that be for the information. Forest concerns me more than any other political figure in the state right (now that Hothead Bob Rucho is leaving). I try very hard to see all perspectives and try to understand where the GOP is coming from, but the right wing of the GOP, which is currently dominant in the party, lives in a fact-free universe where anything can be spun if you just try a little bit. Scary times.
Can a report like this be obtained through FOIA? Or can state governments withhold such information from the public lawfully and/or for as long as they wish?
To me, one of the greatest failings in America is that significant numbers of wealthy whites fled public education rather than “man-up” and help create an education system for all. Instead, significant portions of the white population acted like complete cowards – like those kids who would take their nice football and equipment home if you didn’t let them win. It lies at the heart of why we are still as racist a nation as we are today.
Here’s a link to the draft report. In addition to discussing the resegregation issue, it shows that only 9 of 146 charter schools are compliant in all three areas of the benchmark standards set by the state board for the academic, operational, and financial realms.
https://eboard.eboardsolutions.com/Meetings/Attachment.aspx?S=10399&AID=49268&MID=2224
Thank you.