Jonathan Kantrowitz

Following is commentary by Richard Kahlenberg, a Senior Fellow at The Century Foundation

In 2010, the education world was dominated by discussions of which states would win the “Race to the Top” competition for federal money, and which students would win the lottery to attend a charter school in the highly-touted documentary, “Waiting for Superman.” In Washington D.C., schools chancellor Michelle Rhee resigned after her boss, Mayor Adriane Fenty, was defeated in his bid for re-election, and Cathie Black replaced Joel Klein as chancellor of New York City Public Schools. Of all the big stories, two developments stand out as the best and worst in education in 2010:

The Worst: The Left Joins in on Teacher Union Bashing

Looking back on the year, the worst development in education was the dubious embrace of teacher union bashing, not just by the right wing but by those on the political left as well.

In March, the President of the United States stunned many observers when he weighed in on a local matter in support of the firing of every single teacher in a struggling high school in Central Falls, Rhode Island. As I pointed out (http://takingnote.tcf.org/2010/03/firing-teachers-in-rhode-island.html) at the time, the move was both unfair and unlikely to help students. The primary driver of failure at schools like Central Falls High is the concentration of poverty. A given student in a high poverty school is surrounded by peers who on average are less academically engaged; a parental community that is not in a position to be actively involved in the school to hold school officials accountable; and teachers, who, on average, teach to low expectations. Simply firing teachers might look “tough” but it doesn’t do anything to address the root problems that underlie low performance in high poverty schools.

Then, in the Fall, movie director Davis Guggenheim, a self described liberal, released his anti-union tirade, “Waiting for Superman,” that garnered glowing reviews (http://www.parade.com/celebrity/2010/12/personalities-of-the-year.html) from everyone from President Obama (who met with students in the film) to Oprah Winfrey. The central thesis of the movie was articulated by liberal Newsweek columnist Jonathan Alter, who appeared in the film to declare: “It’s very important to hold two contradictory ideas in your head at the same time. Teachers are great, a national treasure. Teachers’ unions are, generally speaking, a menace and an impediment to reform.” The dichotomy, I pointed out (http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=its_not_the_teachers_unions) in The American Prospect, is one that’s long been invoked by Republicans but as the late leader Albert Shanker (http://takingnote.tcf.org/2010/12/www.richardkahlenberg.com) asked, “Who started teacher unions? Who pays the dues that keep them going? Who elects the officers and determines union policies?” While teachers’ unions aren’t perfect, there is no evidence that non-unionized environments are superior (witness the mediocre performance of charter schools (http://tcf.org/publications/2010/10/charter-schools-that-work-economically-integrated-schools-with-teacher-voice) and schools in the American South, where unions are weak.) Conversely, top performing countries like Finland have very high teacher union density rates.

Nevertheless, in December, Michelle Rhee, undeterred by her implicit rejection by Washington D.C. voters in the city’s mayoral election, announced the creation of a new organization seeking to raise $1 billion to counter the influence of teachers and their unions, as if teacher organizations posed education’s central challenge.

Meanwhile, much of the education reform community ignored what is a true threat to education – the growing rise in economic segregation of American schools. In 2010, the U.S. Department of Education released an alarming report finding that the proportion of students who attend high poverty schools increased by 42 percent (http://takingnote.tcf.org/2010/05/the-ominous-increase-in-high-poverty-schools.html) between 2000 and 2008. We heard next to nothing on this critical issue from Obama, Guggenheim, Winfrey or Rhee.

The Best: Growing Support for Addressing Economic Segregation

If the issue of segregation was ignored by high flying national figures, however, the best news in 2010 was that at the local level, many citizens and education leaders fought back vigorously against growing segregation.

In Wake County (Raleigh), North Carolina, which has had a highly successful (http://tcf.org/publications/pdfs/pb618/districtprofiles.pdf) socioeconomic school integration plan in place for years, supporters repeatedly challenged a conservative school board’s attempts to re-segregate the public schools. In March, I gave a speech (http://www.wakeupwakecounty.com/cms/files/pdf/gsiwwhyitmatterswhoyourclassmatesare.pdf) at a conference organized by the Great Schools in Wake Coalition, as part of an effort to lay out the research on the importance of integrated schools. The conference was followed by protests from the NAACP, a lawsuit from civil rights lawyers, and a federal investigations into re-segregation. While the school board squabbles, the local Chamber of Commerce (hardly a radical organization), hired (http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/chamber-and-wep-asking-michael-alves-to-develop-student-assignment-plan) an esteemed education planner, Michael Alves, to come up with a proposal that will honor parental choice in schooling, manage explosive growth in the system, and preserve integrated schools.

Meanwhile, school officials in Jefferson County (Louisville) Kentucky, whose racial integration program was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2007, have devised a new integration plan that emphasizing socioeconomic status. Although some predicted that the new plan, though legal, would not withstand political attack this year, the good news was that in the November 2010 elections, board members supportive of integration were readily returned to office.

Nationally, momentum for socioeconomic integration grew, as the number of school districts pursuing socioeconomic integration plans reached an all time high of 80. As Alan Gottlieb noted in an article (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-gottlieb/mixing-it-up_b_621885.html) in the Huffington Post, 35 school districts from across the country attended The Century Foundation’s Consortium on Socioeconomic School Integration in June, in order to share ideas and approaches for reducing concentrations of school poverty.

Moreover, powerful new empirical support for socioeconomic integration came from a Century Foundation study (http://tcf.org/publications/2010/10/housing-policy-is-school-policy), released in October, finding that low-income students who had the opportunity to live in middle-class neighborhoods and attend middle-class schools in Montgomery County, Maryland performed far better, particularly in math, than students who attended higher poverty schools in the county, even though those schools had greater resources for smaller class size, extended learning time, and teacher development (http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2010/10/20/08kahlenberg_ep.h30.html). The report’s findings, which drew upon a randomly assigned group of students in public housing, received front page coverage in The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/14/AR2010101407577.html), and gave new momentum to the idea of trying to bring down barriers in public schools between rich and poor.

Starting on January 1, a number of important new benefits will go into effect under the Affordable Care Act passed by Congress earlier this year. As the new year begins, insurance companies will have to abide by new requirements on how premium dollars are spent, Medicare enrollees will get free preventive care and access to drug discounts, community health centers will receive more funding, and all hospitals will begin reporting certain patient infection rates.

Starting January 1, the Affordable Care Act will require:

More Premium Dollars Going to Medical Care: If you are covered by an individual or small group policy, your insurer must spend 80 percent of the premiums it collects on medical care or activities that improve the quality of care. For those covered by large group policies, insurers must spend an even higher amount — 85 percent. Beginning in 2012, insurers who fail to meet this “medical loss ratio” must provide policyholders with a rebate instead of pocketing those excessive premiums.

New Medicare Preventive Health Benefits: If you are covered by Medicare, you can get an annual wellness visit and a personalized prevention plan at no cost. Medicare beneficiaries will also be able to get immunizations and screenings for cancer and diabetes without co-pays.

Drug Discounts for Medicare Recipients: If you have Medicare prescription drug coverage (Part D), you will be eligible for a 50 percent discount on brand-name drugs and a 7 percent discount on generic drugs if you have a coverage gap (also know as the “donut hole”). These discounts will increase each year until the donut hole is completely eliminated by 2020.

Increased Funding for Community Health Centers: If you rely on Community Health Centers for free or low cost care, you’ll benefit from new federal funding to support these centers.

Hospitals Must Report Certain Patient Infections: Hospitals will now have to track and report to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Healthcare Safety Network when patients get central line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) in intensive care units. HHS plans to issue a public report on hospital-specific CLABSI infection rates later in the year. By requiring public reporting of infection rates, HHS aims to help patients learn more about their hospital’s infection control track record and put pressure on hospitals to improve their care.

Mr. L. apparently thinks one nod towards liberalism (DADT) in a sea of anti-gay marriage (DOMA), pro-Republican (McCain-Palin, McMahon) and other right-wing, war-mongering positions (Iran) is enough to qualify him for the Democratic nomination. Unfortunately, many inside the Beltway seem to be buying this. Here in Connecticut, however, the consensus is “no way in Hell.”

DSCC chair Patty Murray needs to know that any attempt to back Joe will mean DSCC loses all credibility, and support, here in Connecticut.

Without Social Security, research indicates that about half of women age 65 and older would be living in poverty. With the program in place, the poverty rate for women falls to 12 percent. These facts — paired with recommended future courses of action — are presented in the latest installment of the Public Policy & Aging Research Brief series from the National Academy on an Aging Society, the public policy branch of The Gerontological Society of America (GSA).

The new publication, “For Millions of Older Women, Social Security Is a Lifeline,” was funded by grant support from The Retirement Research Foundation and represents a current synthesis of knowledge about Social Security’s long-term impact on women’s financial security.

“Older women — especially those who are not married — rely heavily on Social Security, as this research brief makes clear,” said GSA Pubic Policy Committee Chair Sara Rix, PhD. “Relatively modest changes to restore solvency to the Social Security system would ensure that these women and the generations that follow them will be able to depend on their Social Security benefits well into the future.”

Excellent article in this month’s BusinessNewHaven – an interview with University of Connecticut economics professor Fred Cartensen, director of the Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis.

Here are some of the things he said:

Connecticut did not do as badly as many other states in the great recession. The reason it did not do worse than it did was because the state has been doing badly for 20 years. Connecticut has the worst job-creation in the country – worse than Michigan over a 20-year period…

Part of that is because Connecticut has perhaps the weakest (manufacturing) training programs in the country….

The way we are dealing with the employment situation is that people were leaving the state…

Connecticut is a low-tax state. according to Ernst & Young, which does a national analysis each year, we are the second- or third-lowest in the country (for) state and local (taxes). he Federal Reserve says we’re about 42nd on state and local taxes, comprehensive taxes, property taxes, sales tax, income, personal taxes…

Congressman Jim Himes (CT-4) and Fairfield First Selectman Ken Flatto announced today that the Fairfield Fire Department will receive $56,144 in federal funding to replace an aging sprinkler system at the Jennings Road firehouse. The award comes from the Assistance to Firefights Grants (AFG) program at the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

“Safeguarding emergency facilities is key to ensuring our first responders are equipped to respond to any situation at any time,” said Himes. “This funding will help keep our firefighters safe and protect the local investments we have made in public safety.”

AFG awards help fire departments enhance their ability to protect the public and fire service personnel from fire and related hazards. Himes worked with the Town of Fairfield to advocate for this funding, which will allow the town to replace a 41 year-old sprinkler system with state-of-the-art protection.

“Fairfield is thrilled to receive news of this grant to enable our fire house to have a new safe fire sprinkler system to prevent future risks and to ensure our emergency management capabilities are secure in all situations,” said Flatto.

Downtown

Ash Creek Saloon‎
2 Wilton Ave # 3 Norwalk, CT 06851-4540 (203) 847-7500

B.J. Ryans
57 Main St, Norwalk 203-866-7926

Brasitas
430 Main Avenue Norwalk, CT 06851 (203) 354-7329

Fat Cat Pie Company
9-11 Wall St Norwalk, CT 06850 (203) 523-0389

La Paella Tapas Wine Bar & Restaurant
44 Main St Norwalk, CT 06851 Tel: (203) 831-8636

Meigas Spanish Restaurant
10 Wall Street, Norwalk – (203) 866-8800

The Lime Restaurant
168 Main Street, Norwalk – (203) 846-9240

Speedy Pizza‎
75 Main Street Norwalk, CT 06851 (203) 840-9040

Tuscan Oven Trattoria Restaurant
544 Main Avenue Norwalk, CT, 06851 203-846-4600

Valencia Luncheria
172 Main Street, Norwalk – (203) 846-8009

South Norwalk

Ambrosia Bar & Grill‎
16 River Street Norwalk, CT 06850 (203) 853-0211

The Brewhouse Restaurant
13 Marshall Street, Norwalk – (203) 853-9110

Burger Bar
58 N Main St Norwalk, CT 06854 (203) 853-2037

Coromandel Indian Bistro
86 Washington St. Norwalk, CT 06854

Crossroads Pizza 3‎
68 North Main St Norwalk, CT 06854 (203) 855-7785

Famous Pizza House
23 North Main Street Norwalk, CT 06854 (203) 838-6100

The Gingerman‎
99 Washington St # 2 Norwalk, CT 06854 (203) 354-0163

Kazu Japanese Restaurant
64 N Main St Norwalk, CT 06854 (203) 866-7492

Los Molcajetes Mexican Rstrnt
211 Liberty Square, Norwalk (203) 831-9921

Match Restaurant
98 Washington St, Norwalk

O’Neills Pub & Restaurant
93 North Main Street, Norwalk (203) 838-0222

Osetra Oyster Bar and Fish House Restaurant
124 South Washington, Norwalk

Papaya Thai & Asian BBQ
24 Marshall St Norwalk, CT 06854 (203) 866-8424

Pasta Nostra Restaurant
116 Washington St. (bet. Main & Water Sts.) South Norwalk, CT 06854

Sono Seaport Seafood
100 Water St, Norwalk (203) 866-9083 ‎

Strada 18 Apizza E Vino
122 Washington St Norwalk, CT 06854 (203) 853-4546

East Norwalk

Harbor Lights
82 Seaview Ave, Norwalk

Norwalk Pizza & Pasta
236 East Avenue, Norwalk – (203) 854-9788

Tacos Mexico
82 Fort Point St Norwalk, CT 06855

Sunset Grille
52 Calf Pasture Beach Road, Norwalk (203) 866-4177 ‎

Post Road East

Los Cabos Mexican Restaurant
36 Westport Ave. Norwalk, CT 203-847-5711

West Norwalk

Bond Grill Hibachi
250 Westport Ave # 7 Norwalk, CT

Fiesta Limena Restaurant‎
330 Connecticut Ave # 3 Norwalk, CT 06854-1821 (203) 853-8600

Jordan’s Pizzeria & Restaurant 369 Westport Avenue, Norwalk – (203) 846-9557

Kashmir Indian Kitchen
388 Westport Ave Norwalk, CT 06851(203) 846-6634

Osteria Romana
250 Westport Ave. Norwalk, CT 06851.

Quattro Pazzi Restaurant
165 Fillow St # 1, Norwalk – (203) 855-1800

Rio Border Cafe‎
330 Connecticut Avenue # 9 Norwalk, CT 06854 (203) 855-9577

Rowleys Tavern‎
280 Connecticut Avenue Norwalk, CT 06854-1915 (203) 642-4599

Cranbury/ North/Northeast

Amerigo Restaurant
456 Main Ave Ste 2, Norwalk

Basso Cafe
124 New Canaan Ave, Norwalk, CT 203 354 6566

BlackStones Steakhouse‎
181 Main Street Norwalk, CT 06851 (203) 840-9020

Costa Brava Restaurant
120 New Canaan Ave Norwalk, CT (203) 849-5905

Dry Dock Cafe
215 Main St., Norwalk, CT 06851

Thai Spice‎
345 Main Avenue # 2 Norwalk, CT 06851 (203) 846-3533

Village Gourmet Chinese Restaurant
22 Chestnut Hill Rd Norwalk, CT 06851 (203) 849-8288

Wild Rice
370 Main Ave Norwalk 06851 (203) 849-1688

Rowayton

The Restaurant @ Rowayton Seafood‎
89 Rowayton Avenue Rowayton, CT 06853 (203) 866-4488

Rowayton Pizza
104 Rowayton Avenue Rowayton, CT 06853 (203) 853-7555

Here’s what she had to say last night:

“This legislation on the Democratic side of the ledger does create jobs. And the demand that creating jobs injects into the economy helps reduce the deficit. For example, unemployment insurance provisions that are in the legislation, economists across the board tell us, return more money to the economy than almost any initiative you can name. People spend that money quickly–these are people who are looking for work, people who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own. Their unemployment insurance is spent immediately, again, injecting demand into the economy, creating jobs.

“Low-income tax credit, refundable; child tax credit, refundable–all of this placed in the hands of working class people and working families in America, again spent immediately, injecting demand, creating jobs. The college tuition tax credit–very important for America’s working families and their children.

“So here we are with a bill on one side of the ledger that benefits 155 million Americans. We have tax cuts for the middle class across the board. Everybody gets that tax cut. But in order for the middle class to get that tax cut, the Republicans insist that those who make the top 2 percent in our country, that they get an extra tax cut–adding billions of dollars to the deficit and not creating any jobs.

“To add insult to injury, they have now added this estate tax provision. An estate tax provision, now mind you, the Democrats’ side of the ledge benefits 155 million Americans. In order for the President to get those terms accepted, the Republicans insisted that $23 billion in benefits go to 6,600 wealthiest families in America–6,600 families holding up tax cuts for 155 million Americans. Is that fair? Does that meet any test of fairness that we have? Again, this $23 billion not creating jobs. This $23 billion increasing the deficit by 8 percent in the next fiscal year.

“Think of what we could do with that $23 billion. We could triple our research in cancer and diabetes. I think that means something to all Americans, including those 6,600 wealthiest families. We could give a $7,000 raise to every public schoolteacher in America. We could create investing in new technology–780,000 jobs, 780,000 jobs. Instead we are giving a bonanza to 6,600 of the wealthiest people in America who really don’t need the help.

“It’s just amazing to hear our colleagues on other side of the aisle talk about deficit reduction when everything on their side of the ledger increases the deficit and does not create jobs–tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent, most egregious of all the estate tax provision that they have that benefits not 1 percent, not one half of 1 percent but one quarter of 1 percent of the American people. We have to borrow that money from China and send the bill to our children and our grandchildren. And that is not good policy. It does not have a favorable impact on the deficit. It does not create jobs. It does not grow our economy. It does not stimulate growth in our country.

“And so I hope that our colleagues will vote favorably for the Pomeroy amendment to bring some fairness and clarity to the estate tax issue. And on that, the 99.7 percent of all Americans are exempted. 99.7 percent of all Americans are exempted from paying estate taxes under Pomeroy. But we had to get that upper 3 percent in this legislation in order to benefit 155 million Americans. These figures have to be engraved in our being. 155 million–you can’t have that unless 6,600. I’ve said it over and over.

“And then on top of that, on the Democratic side of the ledger, we have the green initiative, 1603, that the Senate put in the bill. This is just a very positive provision for renewable energy, wind, solar, etc. But the Republicans said: ‘That’s the limit, we won’t accept any more.’ And so all of the initiatives for innovation that have been passed the last few years that should have been extended–we said no to innovation, we said no to the future, we said no to keeping America number one, for encouraging our competitiveness. So if we are talking about growth, we have to talk about investments in the future. If we are talking about being number one, we have to have an innovation agenda to do it. The Republicans said no to that. They only said yes to tax cuts for the wealthiest.

“And as Mr. Weiner said, we recognize success. We admire success. We all want to be part of it. God bless them for having the wealth that they have, whether it is inherited or earned. We recognize success and that wealth does to create jobs, etc. But we also want to reward work. We want to reward work. So in order to reward work in this legislation, we had to have a big payoff to the top one quarter percent of America’s wealthiest families.

“So I hope my colleagues as they review this–this is very difficult. Nobody wants taxes to go up for the middle class. In fact, everybody gets a tax cut in this. We just don’t see why we have to give an extra tax cut to the wealthiest and then an extra, extra estate tax benefit to the top one quarter percent. So as Members have to make their mind about this, I hope that they will vote for the Pomeroy amendment to this legislation. They will have to make their own decisions as to whether it is necessary to be held hostage to pay a king’s ransom in order to help the middle class. We absolutely cannot allow taxes to go up come January 1.

“The previous speaker said: ‘We have to look to how we were forced to this precarious ledge.’ Yes, let us look to how we were forced to this precarious ledge. This situation, the deep recession that we are in, President Obama was a job creator from day one with the Recovery Act and pulled us back from that recession. The financial crisis that they created, President Obama pulled us back from that. And oh by the way, remember the financial crisis? Remember the banks that all that money went to and they didn’t extend credit? Now those same people are giving out over $100 billion in Christmas bonuses. And these Republicans in this House of Representatives are saying, ‘We don’t want you to be taxed the proper extent on that $100 billion–more money given on bonuses on Wall Street.’ Think of it–over $100 billion. And we want to give them a free ride in terms of paying their fair share.

“So if it comes to creating jobs, growing the economy, reducing the deficit, investing growth and competiveness and innovation to keep America number one, I applaud President Obama for his side of the ledger. I am sorry that the price that has to be paid for it is so high at a time when everybody is preaching the gospel of deficit reduction, the Republicans come in with an increase in the deficit to the tune of over $100 billion for people in our country who need it the least. And again, where it does not create jobs.

“So Members will have to make up their mind as to how we go forward on the bill, but I hope that all of them in their consideration of it will vote for the Pomeroy amendment, which addresses the most egregious–with stiff competition, mind you, in this bill–the most egregious provision when it comes to fairness, reducing the deficit, and not creating jobs.

“I, again, commend the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, all of our colleagues who have had to explain, through all of the misrepresentations that have been made, about what this legislation is about. And again, I salute President Obama for getting in the bill what is in there. I am sorry that the price that has to be paid by our children and our grandchildren to the Chinese government to pay for the increase in the deficit that the Republicans insisted upon.”