[UPDATED] The "Page Amendment." Woo, woo! An empty vessel akin to a naked emperor where too many were touting the great clothing. What does the "Page" Amendment offer? Smoke. Mirrors. Get this "A Quality Education!" WTF is that? Define that term cogently, BS shelved, AND do that first or go away.
You want a Bentley? You pay for a Bentley. You want a Porsche? Yeah, there too.
With Chevy money, you get - are you surprised - A Chev.
Have you gone to BestBuy seeking a gaming laptop with a top end Nvidea card, wanting to pay five hundred? Other ways exist to waste time, but that's a good one to try.
So, universal public education is - universal. Some can pay upscale. Bill Gates and the Bezos children are Lakeside School muck-a-mucks. Then, there is Ballard HS, Franklin, what ever local site sits where you live. (If you don't live in Seattle, change the names. The story is the same.) Supported by public money, giving a public education.
No ##&$& voucher needed! Everybody pays. Everyone's children go, except those of folks who have the wealth to pay the taxes for universal public education AND to get their offspring the Porsche version while still paying the tax needed by everyone else. You demand everyone pay, even the childless, because democracy demands a level of universal adult understanding among those with a vote, and you get them there by educating them. Particularly so if the homefront inequalities - parental education levels, domestic harmony levels, and fiscal well being - are such that homeschooling would be a mess, not a success.
So some snake oil sales pitch comes along - every child has a right to "a quality education."
Great. Sure. Quality. That is better than schlock. You want a quality coffee brewer that does not fail one way or another after two and a half years. You want, for the kids, yours, the neighbors' a similar quality - one that lasts K - to - 12.
Good luck either way. However, there is a difference. A quality coffee brewer either brews decent coffee over time, or fails. Easy to tell. A quality education? Define it first, if you can, in words. What is it? And for Christsakes, define it before you promise that everybody gets one if they vote your way. Put the BS on a shelf.
You get a quality education if you give Socrates poison? Or, you get what you want and call it "quality?" There is a difference. Calling it don't make it so, as in -- Gee, that new Yugo you bought a few years back - solid quality.
Etc.
All this is a prelude to asking readers to seek out and read Steve Timmer's series of posts each from its own angle saying the Kashkari engineered sack of it sells better if called the Page sack of it, but - bottom line; same sack.
ALSO: Do note that each left.mn post Timmer has authored on the topic has a beginning sidebar of links to earlier parts of the full story.
Hence, alternatively, start at the most recent stuff, per simply opening up left.mn, and working the way back to earlier postings. Chrono order might arguably be better for some; whatever works for the individual reader is what's best for said reader.
If nothing else - Timmer's arguments and disclosures will help you disconnect from "Page is a good guy" and - not at all a strange thing - the amendment being named "The Page Amendment" and not named after its guiding engineer and benefactor, former Goldman Sachs and Bush White House giver of TARP money to banks, now Minneapolis Fed head, Neel Kashkari (who ran quite unsuccessfully for governor of California before gaining the local Fed-head paycheck).
Page is a good guy. Nobody doubts that.
Kashkari is a banker and Goldman Sachs alum. And an amendment bloviator hiding behind Aan Page's good will. (Having less of it in his own name and wise enough to see that.)
And yes, for readers who wonder, there is a stridency here that Timmer in his measured and sage writing and style avoids, while telling the full story over time and in multiple posts with a patience that is most admirable.
SO - Read it all.
____________UPDATE___________
Going outside of left.mn, there is an op-ed trifecta on the page amendment at Minnesota Reformer, in chrono order, here, here and here. The first item is written by Timmer, the second is a counterpoint by amendment advocates, and the third is an item by a litigation attorney involved in major constitutional-education-clause litigation effort going on now in Minnesota's courts. Moreover, Timmer's latest posting at left.mn offers further rebuttal of the counterpoint.
That is a spectrum of opinion that at a minumum readers who may be called in November to vote the question should study now.
In voting, informed error is possible; while uninformed error is a likelihood.
__________FURTHER UPDATE________
Are segregated charter schools a good thing?
Malcolm, before he went on haj would have said yes. The white devils hate us, so we withdraw into our own community, our own highly disciplined and vigilant community, to prosper in ways not allowed us, divided, by the devil. That is what Malcolm would have said before haj. After haj he was killed.
Again, read the three Minnesota Reformer items.
Then read the three "Strolling through the garden of logical fallacies" posts Timmer has published at left.mn, in chrono order, here, here and here.
Then, two key cases, one remanded to the trial court after a denied partial summary judgment motion, each speaks for itself. Skeen, online here. Cruz-Guzman, online here. Then think things over because the so-called "Page Amendment" may make it to the November ballot, and if uninformed you can be propagandized into a misjudgment. Learn facts. Not opinions. Form your own opinions grounded in facts.
It always is an amazing thing having to give that caution, but I sometimes have to tell myself exactly that, if first headed in a wrong direction. Thinking is good. But base it on facts.
NEXT TO LAST - A cautionary note. Several Cruz-Guzman published cases exist, showing the history of the litigation leading to the Minnesota Supreme Court's ruling that the case is justifiable, and not foreclosed under the "political question" doctrine. I.e., it is proper for the courts of Minnesota to hear a trial and decide issues arising in and after trial. The final page on that litigation is yet to be written. Anybody saying otherwise is either ignorant or intentionally misleading.
LAST - Timmer, in ending one of his three "strolling" posts, states -
On the effect of the Page Amendment on the judgment in Cruz-Guzman in the Supreme Court in 2018, Shulman writes this:
Finally, the statement that “the
Cruz-Guzman suit has no relation to the Page Amendment” is false. The
Page Amendment proposes to strip away the four key requirements of the
Education Clause — that the Legislature establish and fund general, uniform, thorough, and efficient
[emphasis added: the four words] public school systems — which are the
underpinnings of our claim that racial and SES segregation violate the
Education Clause.
Elimination of these requirements, as the
Page Amendment seeks to do, threatens to take us back to the bad old
days of “separate but equal.”
Those are interesting focal words - general, uniform, thorough, and efficient.
Why, aside from possible ill-motivation or ignorance, would anybody want to give up those four wise requirements of law under the existing Minnesota Constitution's Education Clause? Dump the existing law, to what purpose? What would come next, and how can such an uncertainty be cogently argued as improvement?
Improvement, in the best interests of students and public education, differs from "improvement" in the eyes of those promoting privatizing education but paying for that privatized thing from the public fisc.
Picking non-public education for a child is a decision any parent can make so long as willing to pay the separate fee and pay the uniform tax, just as childless persons pay that tax so that we collectively gain the societal benefit of an educated electorate. As the current Education Clause clearly states.
Gutting public education via theft of public money for those wanting private education for their offspring is awful policy. Those pushing that agenda have to be regarded as suspect. When aiming that way indirectly, out of ignorance, guile or spite, the approach should be thought of as more suspect than otherwise.
_________FURTHER UPDATE________
I received a second email
after putting myself on the Page Amendment's huckstering mailing list.
An email in the name of Nevada Littlewolf.
Do you think she
anguished hours over what to say, writing it herself, or was it simply
run-of-the-mill ginned up flakmail? It was titled -
Why doesn't Education Minnesota support quality public education for ALL?
Complete
with knocking Education Minnesota, giving me tracking links instead of
clean links, whining against MN House committee priorities, and giving
me a big "DONATE" at the end. Standard poli-flak in mood and temper.
With those people having Scott Walker's well-traveled flakster as their "communications director."
Kashkari, McFadden, and the K2 ad agency lady.
Heavy on GOP genetics. Two former GOP candidates who sought governor
status (Kashkari in California, McFadden in Minnesota) where each
failed, and the flak who ran Scott Walker's failed presidential effort.
Great bunch. Know how in failing.
They don't say "Charter
Schools" or "vouchers" but also, they never say wtf they mean by "a quality education"
while flogging that term to death in their propaganda.
Those three Republican operatives - they are trying to sell me something. Saying "quality" but, saying the word and saying what you mean in repeatedly using the word are separate things.
Quality steaks. Why would Education Minnesota oppose quality steaks?
_________FURTHER UPDATE_________
At least Trump disclosed to you the 2007 pricing of his quality steaks; Wikipedia noting -
Donald Trump registered "Trump Steaks" as a U.S. trademark in August 2006.[5] Trump Steaks were launched on May 8, 2007,[6] exclusively through The Sharper Image's catalog, stores, and website as part of a three-month trial period.[7] Later that month, Trump and some contestants from his reality television series The Apprentice attended an event at a Rockefeller Plaza Sharper Image store to promote the steaks.[8]
The meat was supplied by Buckhead Beef,[9] an Atlanta-based company[10] and subsidiary of Sysco.[9] Buckhead Beef also supplied meat to many of Trump's hotel-casino properties.[7] Burgers and sausages were also sold under the Trump Steaks name.[11] The steaks were USDA Angus certified[9] and came in four packages with prices ranging from $199 (with two bone-in rib-eyes, two filet mignons and 12 burgers),[12] $349, $499, and $999,[13] with the tagline of "The World's Greatest Steaks."[7][6] A Trump Steak Gift Card was also sold at a cost of $1,037.[11] Trump Steaks was featured in a May 2007 Saturday Night Live episode that mocked the brand.[9][14]
Page people seem to shun the questions, "What really are you selling? And, what will it cost?" Would you buy an automobile or dish washer without having any idea of the cost? They are selling a gimmick phrase, not a well thought out and fully disclosed product.
They are selling "Trust me." Worse, they are selling, "Trust Alan."
_________FURTHER UPDATE________
Disambiguation of what "quality education" is supposed to mean could mean teaching to the test. That is, biasing what teachers do to foster higher scores on standardized testing, on average and individually, which is a quite questionable way to run something as elastic as "education" and to say standardized testing is reliable when there are many arguments against it.
In January, MinnPost published an item which might be helpful in seeing that while the problem of racism and unequal economic opportunity - cliques running business their way - is the fundamental truth, word games will not fix it.
Feature this, from the Callaghan report, and decide whether it is saying "charter schools and vouchers" are at least the aim of some in pushing this thing -
A group of 22 legal and civil rights
scholars representing the Education Law Center has also said that the
language changes could endanger Minnesota case law supporting adequate
funding and desegregation.
“At first glance, this amended
language appears to preserve the fundamental right and the legislative
duty provided by the existing constitutional provision,” the group wrote in a letter to the Minnesota Legislature.
“However, the proposed text qualifies the state’s fundamental right
with the clause ‘as measured against uniform achievement standards set
forth by the state.’ As a result, the proposed amendment may encourage
courts to measure rights through the narrow lens of tested academic
achievement. The addition of several adjectives – ‘quality’ and
‘paramount’ – has no clear legal effect, as these terms have no
pre-established meaning in Minnesota law.”
Complicated politics
During a panel discussion earlier
this month before the Association of Metropolitan School Districts,
Chamberlain said the amendment could lead to the courts deciding
education policy and funding. “It’s not needed, it won’t change a thing
on the ground except cause a lot of problems,” the Lino Lakes Republican
said.
State Sen. Michelle Benson
Benson,
R-Ham Lake, said she had not initially supported the Page Amendment but
came on board with the condition that a provision related to private,
religious and home schools be added. “The duty of the state established
in this section does not infringe on the right of a parent to choose for
their child a private, religious or home school as an alternative to
public education,” reads the provision.
“We learned that more than anything,
parental control of education is going to be the key toward its
success,” Benson said. “And as we look at declining test scores in the
state of Minnesota, it’s time for a fundamental change.”
Might a mixup of "fundamental or paramount rights" segue into a push for vouchers for those schools Benson seems preoccupied with, since, already under existing law parents can choose private, religious or home schooling for their offspring, but not with that stuff funded with everybody's money.
Funds "following the student" into charter school alternatives is intrusion enough into uniform, general, effective public education being the legislature's duty. The Crabgrass opinion is charter school boosterism is too much an intrusion, but the law now stands as it does.
Benson seems to want to use Alan Page and the three Republicans involved in pushing Kashkari's agenda as her springboard into voucherism, and that needs to be snuffed.
Quickly and totally. And forever.
Vouchers need to be vigilantly opposed wherever they may directly or with guile be advocated. Timmer's "Trojan Horse" usage is particularly apt for any vehicle which might have vouchers as an ultimate intent. Removing the public part of public education would be the intended murder of public education as an aim and an achievement. Privatization can channel public money into already deep pockets, so deep pockets like it, but there are limits between decency and indecency. Or there should be.
________FURTHER UPDATE________
This post keeps growing. The problem of inner city school disparity with schools in the burbs is real, and something for which I feel there can be no honest dispute.
But, does the "Page" Amendment do anything, or propose any specific policy, program, or funding position. Is it just word play, "quality" being something everyone can emotionally relate to more than to "schlock." But - so what?
Education Minnesota, unionized teachers primarily if not entirely in public schools rather than in private or charter ventures, has posted recently - in 2021 less than a year ago:
Gov.
Tim Walz and the Minnesota Legislature approved an education budget
that includes the largest single increase in the per-pupil formula in 15
years, a meaningful step toward fully funding our public schools.
The Minnesota Senate passed the budget bill June 30 and the governor
signed it hours later. The Minnesota House voted on it June 26. It will
increase state funding for preschools through high schools by $554.9
million over the next two years.
The bump in state funding, along with one-time federal money for
pandemic recovery, should protect most schools from devastating budget
cuts and layoffs.
Public schools will see $462.9 million in new per-pupil aid over the
biennium—a 2.45 percent increase the first year and 2 percent in the
second.
Educators and parents successfully blocked attempts to include
private school vouchers in the deal. But Senate Republicans refused to
raise taxes on the wealthiest few and corporations to give students
smaller class sizes, more support services and greater access to mental
health resources.
[... details of included/excluded EdMN priorities]
“This budget contains the single largest increase in the per-pupil
funding in more than a decade, preserves thousands of pre-K seats and
makes a wise, strategic investment in increasing the number of
Minnesota’s teachers of color,” Education Minnesota President Denise
Specht said in a press release after the bill was passed. “We are
disappointed by the lack of certain equity provisions supported by
educators, but this budget is a meaningful step toward fully funding
public education.”
“This would not have happened without hundreds of educators sharing
their stories with legislators about what their students need to
succeed,” Specht said, adding that more than 700 educators met with over
100 lawmakers in the 2021 session as part of Education Minnesota’s
lobby day program. “Educators live the reality of underfunded schools
that have few resources to support student learning. Many shared their
fears about what would happen to public schools if hundreds of millions
of dollars were siphoned off into vouchers for private schools.”
Even though the education bill did not contain several of Education
Minnesota’s funding priorities, thankfully Gov. Walz included many of
them in his plans for spending $132 million in federal COVID-19 relief
funds. [...]
[...]
The higher education bill includes:
$100 million in new money for higher education.
No tuition freeze and a tuition increase cap of 3.5 percent.
$1 million for student teacher grants.
$2 million for underrepresented teachers of color grants.
$400,000 for the teacher shortage loan repayment program.
$3 million for aspiring teachers of color scholarships.
There’s also good news for student loan borrowers, essential workers
and early learning advocates. State lawmakers passed the following
legislation:
The Student Loan Borrowers Bill of Rights to help regulate loan
servicers and protect borrowers from unscrupulous practices that forces
many to pay millions of dollars in unnecessary interest.
The
Great Start for All Minnesota Children Task Force, which will look
at child care and early learning affordability for families and the
workforce challenges that exist. The governor’s Children’s Cabinet is
also directed to develop a report on how all early care and learning
programs could be consolidated into a single agency.
Senate Republicans had proposed just $152 million in new funding for
E-12 education at the beginning of the session, while House Democrats
and the governor wanted $722 million and $750 million in new dollars,
respectively.
The Legislature finished its regular session May 17 but came back in a
special session June 14 to finish the state’s two-year budget.
[italics emphasis added] The excerpt is extensive, but not exhaustive. Again, the link.
Worry over vouchers is real, having been mentioned twice by the educators.
Having no notion how to find Catholic school vs public school enrollment comparative numbers for Minnesota, the guess here, admittedly speculative, is that of the tuition-charging K-12 educational offering efforts, the Catholics are the lion's share.
Vouchers would favor that massive bloc, at the expense of the rest of Minnesotans.
And - sending offspring to religious indoctrination programs is a parental prerogative but one for which there is no justification to burden other taxpayers with; given that public school attendance is universally available; to Catholic, Lutheran, agnostic, or atheist parents; IT IS THERE, IT IS FUNDED, IT IS THE LEGISLATURE'S DUTY TO FUND PUBIC EDUCATION THAT IS UNIFORM, GENERAL, AND EFFECTIVE. THE DFL WISHED TO FURTHER FUND EDUCATING OUR FUTURE VOTING CITIZENS, THE REPUBLICANS DID THEIR USUAL FOOT-DRAGGING ARGUMENT FOR LESS SPENDING ON THAT CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY.
Moreover, childless taxpayers pay toward public education, with its Constitutionally stated goal and societal benefit of advancing the intelligence of the electorate; yet should they, the childless, be paying for somebody's will toward religious indoctrination, anywhere, in a nation where church and state are separate?
Given the voucher situation, and the size of the Catholic non-public lobby, Crabgrass has an abiding worry about indirect messing with public school funding, in the direction of vouchers; a worry not dissuaded by the Catholic heavy leadership of the ourchildren.com "team"- Notre Dame graduate Page, St. Thomas graduate McFadden, lawyer Cerisi, "Strategist & Communications Director, Kukowski, perhaps not Catholic, possibly so.
Add to that, in light of the quoted text above of the Republicans in the MN legislature being the underfunding advocates, the fact that Kashkari, McFadden, and Cerisi each having run for Governor (Cerisi being the lone Dem) with Kukowski's linkedin history being as a high-level Republican flak, such a fear is anything but ungrounded that a coalition with more than a single agenda may be in operation.
Republican underfunding intent in the legislature, if coupled with voucher bleeding of public education money possibly being aided by a Page Amendment passage; paints a dire picture for Public Education funding - which, to have to say it again, puts inner urban schools in predominantly black and low income areas at a funding disadvantage, whatever the education spending levels are.
There are no easy answers. The Page people painting a simplistic picture and abusing the vacuous term "quality education" with no mention of funding reality, is suspect.
While feeling trust toward Alan Page, there is not an unquestioning acceptance of the good will of Page rubbing off on others. Cerisi, okay. The flak and the two investment banker investment advisors, McFadden, and Kashkari - all three of them active Republican politician activists/advisors - they fail to generate a belief here that the Alan Page good will is transferable. I hope that Nevada LIttlewolf might be able to persuade me otherwise, should she wish to try.
I know a problem exists. I doubt the Page Amendment offers anything real beyond nice sounding words. I am willing to listen to cogent discussion. So far, ambiguous but nice-sounding rhetoric seems all the Amendment advocates offer. That while aiming to kick the props out from under established Education Clause law.
There is money on the table. I fear vouchers in sheep's clothing.
That
Counterpoint was short while vacuously using the word "quality"
twenty-eight times, as if repetition makes a truth. Strangely, the
Counterpoint was not authored by any ourchildren.com team leaders, or ourchildren.com partners.
It
was authored collectively by four (4) lawyers from the international
lawfirm, Greenberg Taurig (not otherwise identified online in any
ourchildren.com Page Amendment item Crabgrass research could find).
This firm:
click images to enlarge and read
BIG!
Moreover -
Pages
of interest, where NFMA is a specialist investment analyst trade group
focused upon the ins-and-outs of profitable municipal asset trading; and
BMAF is their Bostan affiliate.
"Failing to Make the Grade: Charter Schools in Distress,"
suggesting a seminar-presentation perspective on charter schools as an
NFMA investment vehicle of interest for the analysts' private equity or
other investor clients; with a Greenberg Taurig lawyer as a featured
NFMA panel speaker.
NFMA's Current Sponsors
list; with Greenberg Traurig a "Diamond Plus Sponsor." That law firm
has a focus on that investment niche, a Diamond Plus focus, although
from its size the law firm inevitably has multiple profit-centered foci.
But - charter schools under the microscope, not as a panacea for
distressed students or dissatisfied parents, but as an investment
vehicle from which money can be made.
What are they building in there?
There is this MN SF 1525 Senate bill
with no House cognate, and while it is uncertain to my limited mind
what is at stake, it looks as if it could be for vouchers dressed up in a
different terminology. That impression could be wrong, so readers
should check it out and reach their own conclusions. Bill sponsors:
ROCHESTER,
Minn. (KTTC) – Minnesota Senate Republicans are pushing to give parents
more rights in the classroom. Senate members proposed a “Parents’ Bill
of Rights” package Monday morning.
“Every
parent has the right to know what goes on with their child, in every
classroom, everyday,” (R) Sen. Michelle Benson of Ham Lake said.
The
legislation includes a total of five bills brought together by Sen.
Benson, (R) Sen. Justin Eichorn of Grand Rapids, (R) Sen. Paul Gazelka
of East Gull Lake and (R) Sen. Roger Chamberlain of Lino Lakes.
Senate
File 2909, or ‘Parents’ Rights’ states that schools must not withhold
information about their child’s wellbeing or education. It would also
require schools to notify families regularly of activities at school.
[...] Two bills focus
on transparency; the first is Senate File 2666 or ‘Classroom Syllabus
Disclosure.’ It would require teachers to share the entire year syllabus
with parents within two weeks of the start of the school year. Senate
File 2575 or ‘Parental Curriculum Review,’ would require to let parents
know of their right to “review instructional materials and seek
alternative instruction support to suit their child’s needs.”
The
next is Senate File2729 or ‘Anti-Doxxing,’ which is written by Sen.
Chamberlain. In this bill, parents would not be required to share their
home address to speak at a school board meeting.
Lastly,
Senate File 1525 or ‘Education Savings Accounts’ would give families
more flexibility to support individual needs in education and to enhance
their public education or look to alternative school choices. [See
above commentary, that bill unclear, but possibly vouchers in drag.]
[...] As
a former Rochester teacher, Sen. [Clara] Nelson sees some of these requirements
a bit daunting, like the release of an entire year syllabus.
“Not
knowing exactly what it is students needs, their prior knowledge, what
their learning gaps are,” she said. “I can see why it sounds appealing. I
would be cautious of it as well. but, at the same time, I think we
should do everything we can to involved parents in their child’s
education.”
Some DFL-ers aren’t as sure. Like (DFL) Rep. Tina Liebling of Rochester. She believes the plan pushes a different agenda.
“Minnesota
students are facing urgent challenges including significant disruptions
in learning due to the pandemic, a vast opportunity gap, inadequate
mental health support, and a lack of early learning opportunities,” Rep.
Liebling’s statement to KTTC read. “While our public schools are in
urgent need of greater investments to overcome these difficulties,
Senate Republicans are once again pushing private school vouchers,
cleverly branded as ‘school choice,’ and unworkable plans to micromanage
curriculum with the goal of dividing our communities for political
gain. House DFLers recognize the enormous needs students, educators, and
families are facing, and are focused on delivering resources to ensure
students can succeed in the classroom and have the social and emotional
wellbeing support they deserve.”
Copyright 2022 KTTC. All rights reserved.
[italics
added] There is money on the table. I fear vouchers in sheep's
clothing. I question big law firms lobbying the public for the Page
Amendment without saying whether it is pro bono work or paid; if paid by
whom; and whether there is a dog-wagged tail of an investment
opportunity agenda not expressly disclosed.
But what do I know?
_________FURTHER UPDATE_________
The GT firm has represented at least one school board, via issuing an opinion letter against the interest of some Florida charter schools.
So cut that big a thing some slack. They have a Wikipedia page.
Bottom line, they named themselves as actual author of the Counterpoint, not using an insider surrogate of ourchildren.com as a front.
On the other hand, their role in things could be made less murky.
Circumstantial information can always be a subject of speculation. They have broken no laws, apparently, regarding or relating to Page Amendment affairs.
They are just a curious 800 pound gorilla in the room that has not attracted attention so large a beast might.
Independent of them and the questions attendant to their not being listed as ourchildren.com partners; there is enough cause to oppose the Page Amendment on its face, so that might be best.
Because the problem of inequality is so clear, a hope would be either Amendment honchos make a cogent intelligent non-sloganeering presentation of advantage; else, why change something in the Constitution as old as statehood, with a body of existing judicial interpretation? Why change?
And - Money is on the table. I distrust vouchers. Where are things headed?
