November 12, 2014
Œ,fr Ißortlanh (Oh server
Page 9
Opinion articles do not necessarily represent the views o f the
Portland Observer. We welcome reader essays, photos and
story ideas. Submit to news@portlandobserver.com.
No Mandate for Right-wing Policies
We have to stand up
and fight
by
R obert L. B orosage
D ebacle. B loodbath.
Drubbing. Call it what you
will. For Democrats nation
ally, this was an ugly Elec
tion Day. But there’s no
mandate for right-wing poli
cies in its aftermath.
Arkansas voters chose to raise the mini
mum wage while electing a senator who
opposes doing so. Colorado voters are pro-
choice and elected a senator who isn’t. Vot
ers want action on climate change and gave
the Senate over to those who are in the
pocket of Big Oil
The most rational voters — given what’s
coming in Washington — were those in the
District of Columbia and Oregon, who chose
to make marijuana legal.
The 2014 mid-term elections were funda
mentally about frustration with a recovery
that most people haven’t enjoyed. The Re
publicans blamed this on President Barack
Obama and claimed Democrats were guilty
by association. That aroused the GOP base
as candidates played down their conserva
tive stances on reproductive choice and
went silent on marriage equality.
Democrats chose not to run nation
ally against Republican obstruction,
under the assumption that their broad
opposition to right-wing social posi
tions would mobilize their own base.
Senate Republican leader Mitch
McConnell of Kentucky, who drove
the Republican strategy to obstruct
every Obama initiative and then paint Obama
a failure, is now warbling the soothing tones
of bipartisan cooperation.
Any “cooperation” will, of course, be on
Republican terms. GOP leaders will invite
Obama to join in on “reforms” like reducing
corporate tax burdens, paring Social Secu
rity benefits, approving budgets that savage
the vulnerable and lard the Pentagon, and
cutting ruinous trade deals that undermine
American workers.
To pay for infrastructure, the Republican-
led Congress will champion the “repatria
tion” of the dough that corporations have
stashed abroad, handing those tax dodgers
a massive tax break and an incentive to avoid
even more taxes in the future.
This is the Wall Street “bipartisan” agenda
and it’s ready to go. Immigration and renew
able energy? You can bet they’re off the
table.
The White House faces a choice. Will it
lay out what the country needs? Will Presi
dent Obama make his case against those who
would take the country backward? Or will he
just provide political cover for global deals
that stack the deck even more for the power
ful and against the rest of us?
He shouldn ’ t be left to make that choice by
himself.
In the circular firing squad already blast
ing away, Democrats will blame these losses
on their own liberalism. Conventional wis
dom will urge them to move rightward and
cooperate with newborn “moderate” Repub
licans. They’ll be told that the way back to
power is to embrace “centrist” policies on
trade, tax reform, and entitlements.
But this election exposed the Democratic
establishment’s fallacies. Social issues alone,
which increasingly favor Democrats, can’t
spur victory. Sophisticated campaign tar
geting and get-out-the-vote operations can’t
substitute for the passion, clarity, and vision
that motivate the Democratic base to vote.
Democrats won’t win votes by adopting
a corporate agenda. They must drive an
agenda that will bring about an economy that
works for everyone.
There’s a populist majority waiting to be
forged. Millions will rally for full-employ
ment economics, for fairly taxing the rich and
corporations, investing in rebuilding the
country and educating all children, strength
ening retirement security, making college
affordable, lifting the minimum wage, taking
on the corruption of our politics by big
money, and transitioning to the new and
more sustainable energy options that will
create good-paying jobs.
Senator Elizabeth W arren o f M assa
chusetts has it right: V oters think the gov
ernm ent is corrupted and doesn’t work for
them. If our country is to deal with the real
challenges it faces — extrem e inequality
and econom ic decline for the m ajority,
catastrophic clim ate change for the whole
w orld, an oppressive war on working
people — we the people have to stand up
and fight.
Democrats will have to make it clear that
they’re ready to join in.
Robert Borosage is the co-director o f the
Campaign fo r America's Future, a center
fo r ideas and action that works to build an
enduring majority for progressive change.
Closer to the Finish Line on School Disparities
A giant step forward
for poor children
by
M arian W right E delman
With opportunity gaps wid
ening for poor children and
children of color, new guidance
from the Office for Civil Rights
in the U.S. Department of Edu
cation offers new hope and pro
tection from discrimination.
For the first time in 13 years, the depart
ment now makes clear that states, school
districts, and schools must make education
resources equally available to all students
without regard to race, color, or national
origin. It prohibits schools and school dis
tricts from discriminating in their allocation
of courses, academic programs and extracur
ricular activities, teachers and leaders, other
school personnel, school facilities, and tech
nology and instructional materials, and of
fers steps to level the playing field.
This is some of the unfinished business of
the Civil Rights movement and a giant step
forward for poor children, often children of
color, currently taught at higher rates by
inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field
teachers and provided far fewer resources
than their wealthier peers. Our responsibility
now is to ensure that children left behind
truly benefit from these protections. The
new guidance has real potential to address
many of the lingering disparities after Brown
v Board of Education.
Sixty years after that historic court deci
sion, the Department of Education has made
it clear that poor children and children of
color are still routinely denied access to their
fair share of strong teachers, decent schools,
and current textbooks. These actions
are not only immoral, but illegal under
the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The guidance states that wher
ever a state or district has seen fit to
provide any education resource like
a chem istry course, high-speed
internet access, or a school counse-
nation. The last time similar guidance was
issued by the Department of Education was
January 19,2001 as one of the last acts of the
Clinton Administration.
Catherine L Hamon, assistant secretary
for Civil Rights in the U.S. Department of
Education, said in her “Dear Colleague let
ter” to states, school districts, and schools:
“Students of color must not be consigned to
dilapidated, overcrowded school buildings
that lack essential educational facilities, such
as science laboratories, auditoriums, and
Students o f color must not be consigned to dilapidated,
overcrowded school buildings that lack essential educational
facilities, such as science laboratories, auditoriums, and
athletic fields, and that may not be able to support the
increasing infrastructure demands o f rapidly expanding
educational technologies while providing better facilities for
other students.
- Catherine L Hamon, assistant secretaryforCivil Rights in the U.S. Department of Education
lor, it must be provided equally. This has
been in the works for a very long time and was
inspired by the Equity and Excellence Com
mission, convened in 2010 to examine and
propose remedies to disparities in educa
tional opportunities and student achieve
ment.
Years of advocacy that preceded Brown
sought federal oversight of unfair distribu
tion of resources by schools, districts, and
states. But fairness must be a continuing
concern as separate and unequal continues
to pervade the education of children in our
athletic fields, and that may not be able to
support the increasing infrastructure de
mands of rapidly expanding educational tech
nologies while providing better facilities for
other students.”
While this language may sound like a
familiar argument from the desegregation
cases in the 1960s when “educational tech
nology” meant film strips and slide rules, this
new guidance recognizes that disparities
still exist today and demonstrates a height
ened commitment by the Administration to
eliminate discrimination “root and branch”
and protect students’ access to education.
If students of color in a school are
consigned to rem edial courses and are
denied a strong teacher or current text
books that could be discrim inatory. If
Advanced Placement courses are offered
only in schools with the lowest enrollm ent
o f black or Latino students, or if the only
district school without air conditioning is
the one most Latino students attend, or if
the math teacher assigned to English lan
guage learners is the only math teacher
without a m ajor or m inor in math, this may
be evidence o f discrim ination in the distri
bution o f educational resources.
The Civil Rights Act protects students
both from intentional discrimination and from
discrimination that rises from the disparate
impact of policies and procedures on stu
dent groups by race.
This new guidance is good and long over
due news for poor students and students of
color in education. The next step is ensuring
what is promised is delivered. Students, par
ents, educators and community members
who suspect children are receiving less than
their fair share should seek to learn more,
address problems they see, and file com
plaints with the Department of Education’s
Office for Civil Rights when disparities are
not addressed.
Monitoring of enforcement is essential if
the neediest children are to benefit. Every
child deserves a level playing field and a fair
chance to succeed.
Marian Wright Edelman is President of
the Children’s Defense Fund.