Monday, January 19, 2009

The Long, Lame Goodbye

Maureen Dowd with a scathing (and accurate) summary of who we're bidding good riddance to:

As Barack Obama got to town, one of the first things he did was seek the counsel of past presidents, including George Bush senior.

As W. was leaving town, one of the last things he did was explain why he never sought the counsel of his father on issues that his father knew intimately, like Iraq and Saddam.

When Brit Hume did a joint interview last week with Bush father and son, dubbed “41st guy” and “43rd guy” by W., the Fox anchor asked whether it was true that “there wasn’t a lot of give and take” between them, except on family matters.

“See,” the Oedipally oddball W. replied, “the interesting thing is that a president has got plenty of advisers, but what a president never has is someone who gave him unconditional love.”

He talks about his father, the commander in chief who went to war with Saddam before he did, like a puppy. “You rarely have people,” he said, “who can pick up the phone and say, ‘I love you, son,’ or, ‘Hang in there, son.’ ”

Maybe he wouldn’t have needed so many Hang-in-there-sons if he had actually consulted his dad before he ignorantly and fraudulently rammed into the Middle East.

-----------------
January 18, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist

The Long, Lame Goodbye

WASHINGTON

As Barack Obama got to town, one of the first things he did was seek the counsel of past presidents, including George Bush senior.

Inaugural Celebration Concert

A friend's comments on the Inaugural Celebration Concert yesterday:
I watched the concert as I cleaned and made dinner, though I got choked up a few times.  The actors reading quotes and tributes to America's great principles and Lincoln, the Roosevelts, and Kennedy were alternately stirring and flat.
 
But the musical performances, though not always musically great, were very moving.

Bruce Springsteen doing "The Rising" (with a gospel choir, fantastic), and at the end with Pete Seeger and Seeger's grandson doing "This Land is My Land".  Amazing to think all of what Seeger has seen in this country.
 
Beyoncé singing "America The Beautiful"
John Mellencamp doing "Pink Houses" with the big choir, also very moving when you think about the ambivalence in the song, the way Mellencamp cites some of the Everyman ironies of life here but embraces it all anyway.

Mary J Blige doing "Lean on Me" - yes, Bill Withers, the Obama of music?

Betty LaVette doing "A Change is Gonna Come".... And Jon Bon Jovi ?!?!?!? doing somewhat tortured duet with her. She still kept it wonderful.
Garth Brooks: "Shout" = so-so. "american pie" = better. Never loved his music, but infectiously fun fellow.

U2 – doing Pride, and City of Blinding Lights — wasn't the best musically, Bono's voice didn't quite his his old highs, but was still beautiful.
Bono took a moment to shout that the dream of "In the name of love!" included Israelis and, pointedly, Palestinians. A nice gesture, just to acknowledge what's gone on, and say their name from that stage (the Lincoln Memorail) is meaningful, without being divisive or making it too political.  Somehow I was hoping for some other rock star moment from him to signify the moment but the words and music were enough.

James Taylor  ("Shower the people you love with love") and Stevie Wonder ("Higher Ground") were probably the best musically, both had guest singers. Shakira was a strange choice for Stevie, and she didn't fit in well vocally. But he is so solid it didn't matter.

I was never the bggest James Taylor fan, but it's a beautiful song and worked beautifully with the guest singers (John Legend...).

You can skip the Marisa Tomei intro, but this is a gorgeous moment. Watch it in 'high quality'
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=james+taylor+inaugural&search_type=&aq=f
Here are some other links I found on YouTube to performances at the concert:

Thursday, January 15, 2009

Great humor from The Daily Show

Y'know, after a lot of therapy (not really -- but maybe I should have!), I'd stopped thinking about the soon-to-be-departed-worst-President-ever.  He's going to disappear into well-deserved obscurity on Tuesday (as Palin already has) and what's the point of sitting around hating him for doing so much damage to this country -- and the world?  The damage is done, everyone knows he's responsible (with a big assist from Cheney and a handful of other cronies) and thank goodness there will FINALLY be a capable, smart, good man in charge who will start to heal the damage that's been done.
 
But after watching clips from Bush's press conference on The Daily Show on Tuesday, I got furious all over: www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/index.jhtml?episodeId=215901.  He's not just trying to spin history -- he's totally off-his-rocker, delusional!  Here are some quotes:
"[Iraq] not having weapons of mass destruction was a significant disappointment...Abu Ghraib was a huge disappointment...I've thought long and hard about Katrina.  Could I have done something differently, like land Air Force One in New Orleans or Baton Rouge?  The problem with that is that law enforcement would have been pulled away from the mission and then your questions, I suspect, would have been, 'How can you possibly have flown Air Force One into Baton Rouge and police officers who were needed to expedite traffic out of New Orleans were taken off the task to look after you.'" 
 
Jon Stewart's comment: "You have no idea why people are mad at you about Katrina, do you?  You thought it was the plane landing/flyover?  You're like the guy whose wife comes home and catches you banging her sister and you think she's mad at your for not telling her you were coming home early."  LOL!
You gotta watch this starting at 9:10, where the press conference becomes "just plain weird".
 
Also, while you're at it, the first five minutes of Monday's Daily Show is a hoot, contrasting Obama's and Bush's vastly contrasting styles at press conferences: www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/index.jhtml?episodeId=215333

He's Leaving. Really.

Gail Collins with a nice good riddance column:

The White House has promised that in his final address, the president will be joined by a small group of everyday American heroes, which means that the only person on stage with a history of failing to perform well in moments of stress will be the main speaker.

Bush is going to devote some of his time to defending his record, although there has been quite a bit of that already. Over the last few weeks we have learned that he thinks the Katrina response worked out rather well except for one unfortunate photo-op, and that he regards the fact that we invaded another country on the basis of false information as a “disappointment.” Since Bush also referred to the disappointments of his White House tenure as “a minor irritant” it’s perhaps best to think of the weapons of mass destruction debacle as a pimple on the administration’s otherwise rosy complexion...

...History does suggest that Bush performs best in venues like this one, in which he has a long lead time and virtually no actual role in preparing the words he is about to say. But still, what could he possibly tell the country that would change anybody’s opinion about the last eight years?

“My fellow Americans, before I leave you next week I want you to know that ...

A) “Although things have gone very wrong, I take comfort in the realization that Dick Cheney was actually in control from the get-go. Honest, I never even knew half the people in the cabinet.”

B) “Laura and I have come to realize that all things considered, retirement to a mansion in Texas is just totally inappropriate. And so we take our leave to begin a new life as missionaries at a small rescue station in the Gobi desert ...”

C) “Surprise! This has all actually been a bad dream. It’s really still November of 2000 and tomorrow Al Gore is going to be elected president.”

Otherwise, the best possible approach for a farewell address might be for Bush to follow his father’s lead and just not give one.

----------------------
January 15, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist

He’s Leaving. Really.

Tonight President George W. Bush bids adieu to the American people.

Excitement mounts.

The man has been saying goodbye for so long, he’s come to resemble one of those reconstituted rock bands that have been on a farewell tour since 1982. We had exit interviews by the carload and then a final press conference on Monday, in which he reminisced about his arrival on the national stage in 2000. “Just seemed like yesterday,” he said.

I think I speak for the entire nation when I say that the way this transition has been dragging on, even yesterday does not seem like yesterday. And the last time George W. Bush did not factor into our lives feels like around 1066.

So far, the Bush farewell appearances have not drawn a lot of rave reviews. (Most striking, perhaps, was a critique of that final press conference from Ted Anthony of The Associated Press: “It all felt strangely intimate and, occasionally, uncomfortable, in the manner of seeing a plumber wearing jeans that ride too low.”) A Gallup poll did find that his approval rating had risen slightly since they began, but this was probably due to enthusiasm for the part about his going away.

How to turn Obama's success into gains for black boys

An outstanding editorial in the USA Today last week about how to turn Obama's success into gains for black boys, which mentions both KIPP as well as one of the REACH schools, Frederick Douglass Academy:

Learn from successful schools

Few African-African boys have access to elite private schools such as Washington's Sidwell Friends, where the Obama girls started classes Monday. But several inner-city schools are showing impressive results. At the Key Academy in Washington, D.C., a charter that is part of the successful KIPP group, black boys arrive in fifth grade reading two grades behind the girls. By seventh grade, they pull even. Their success is related to a persistent focus on literacy skills, even in science and math classes.

At New York's Frederick Douglass Academy, a regular public school where two-thirds of the students qualify for the free lunch program, students take courses that rival the rigor of anything offered in the best suburban schools, and nearly all go on to college.

Nice plugs for Arne Duncan and NCLB as well:

Obama has signaled that he intends to be more than a role model. His biggest education issue, ramping up the federal role in offering high-quality preschools, could have a huge impact on black boys, especially if he launches research into making preschools work as well for boys as they do for girls.

The president-elect's promise to double funding for effective charter schools such as KIPP mirrors reform efforts in Chicago, where his choice to become the federal Education secretary, Arne Duncan, served as schools chief for the past seven years.

Most important, Obama has resisted calls from the teachers' unions to dismantle President Bush's No Child Left Behind school-reform law. Whatever the law's shortcomings, No Child's relentless emphasis on data forces school districts to come clean about the poor job they have done with black boys.

----------------------

How to turn Obama's success into gains for black boys

USA Today editorial, 1/6/09

You can see the message on brick wall murals in inner cities: Yes we can. You can hear it in the music of Black Eyed Peas' frontman will.i.am: Yes we can.

The Confidence Surplus

David Brooks a week ago on Obama's stimulus plan.  Re. the last line, he'll be a great president:
 
The Confidence Surplus
Published: January 8, 2009

Christina Romer is Barack Obama’s choice to lead his Council of Economic Advisers. In 1994, Romer and her husband, David, wrote an essay entitled “What Ends Recessions?” In the first paragraph, the Romers noted that “economists seem strangely unsure about what to tell policy makers to do to end recessions.”

The Romers surveyed the recessions of the previous 50 years to try to reach some conclusions about what works. “Our central conclusion is that monetary policy alone is a sufficiently powerful and flexible tool to end recessions,” they wrote. Automatic spending policies like unemployment insurance have sometimes helped. Discretionary policies, like tax cuts and stimulus plans, have not been of much use. As they put it: “Discretionary fiscal policy, in contrast, does not appear to have had an important role in generating recoveries.”

The Romers briefly described how different administrations responded to recessions. All the administrations, Democratic and Republican, resisted large-scale fiscal stimulus plans. They didn’t believe they could time a stimulus correctly. They didn’t trust Congress to pass the bills quickly or cleanly. They decided they shouldn’t be making policy in what Kennedy administration economists called “an atmosphere of haste and panic brought on by recession.”

The Romers’ essay exemplifies the economic doctrine that reigned up until a few months ago: fiscal stimulus plans that try to time a recession are dangerous, unproven and unnecessary.

That doctrine has suddenly vanished. But not because we suddenly know how to create effective stimulus plans. Last year, the Congress passed a $165 billion plan that seems to have done almost nothing for the economy. The doctrine has vanished because this recession is deeper than the others and we’ve run out of other stuff to do.

Today there is wide support for fiscal stimulus. It’s just that there is no historical experience to tell us how to do it, and there is no agreement on how to make it work. The economists’ prescriptions are all over the map.

Obama is compelled to jump into unchartered territory, with no compass or guide. He could have chosen to spend the big money that is apparently required in cautious ways. He could have chosen to pick out a few easily implemented policies that could be enacted in a way that is targeted, temporary and timely. He could have chosen to merely cut the payroll tax, boost aid to the states and do infrastructure projects.

But the Obama presidency is going to be defined by his audacious self-confidence. In Thursday’s speech, he vowed to do everything at once. He vowed to throw the big things into the stimulus soup — tax cuts, state aid, road and bridge repair — but also the rest of the pantry. He proposes broadband projects, special education programs, a new power grid, new scientific research, teacher training projects and new libraries.

This will be the most complex piece of legislation in American history, and as if the policy content wasn’t complicated enough, Obama also promised to pass it via Immaculate Conception — through a new legislative process that will transform politics. The process, he said, will be totally transparent. There will be no earmarks, no special-interest pleading. In a direct rebuttal to Federalist No. 10, he called on lawmakers to put aside their parochial concerns and pass the measure in weeks.

And as if that isn’t enough, he promised next month to make repairing Social Security and Medicare a “central part” of his budget. “I’m not out to increase the size of government long-term,” he told John Harwood of The Times.

This is daring and impressive stuff. Obama’s team has clearly thought through every piece of this plan. There’s no plank that’s obviously wasteful or that reeks of special-interest pleading. The tax cut is big and bipartisan. Obama is properly worried about runaway deficits, but he’s spending money on things one would want to do anyway. This is not an attempt to use the crisis to build a European-style welfare state.

The problem is overload. Four months ago, no one knew how to put together a stimulus package. Now Obama wants to use it to rush through instant special-ed programs and pre-Ks. Repairing the power grid means clearing complex regulatory hurdles. How is he going to do that in time to employ workers in May?

His staff will be searching for the White House restrooms, and they will have to make billion-dollar decisions by the hour. He is asking Congress to behave and submit in a way it never has. He has picked policies that are phenomenally hard to implement, let alone in weeks. The conventional advice for presidents is: focus your energies on a few big things. Obama just blew the doors off that one.

Maybe Obama can pull this off, but I have my worries. By this time next year, he’ll either be a great president or a broken one.

Tuesday, January 06, 2009

A Cook County Political Tale In Three Acts

Quite a remarkable story:
You may think today's story is about the crooked Illinois governor
selling Obama's Senate seat. What you don't know is how the Bush Justice
Dept. probably steered Obama away from disaster even before taking
office. Here's how the pieces of the puzzle fit, based on the known
facts as well as those alleged in the Criminal Complaint, my knowledge
of federal criminal case management and protocols, and some deductive
reasoning.
-------------------
A Cook County Political Tale In Three Acts
 
This written by Dan Westerbeck, retired lawyer from Chicago , former
quarterback at Ohio State U, and all around good guy.

Since most of you do not understand the " Chicago way" of doing things
and come from places that are, relatively speaking, governed by
elections, you may need an interpreter for news from Chicago , especially
about Cook County politics. That's why I'm here.

Ex-Detainee of U.S. Describes a 6-Year Ordeal

Stories like this, which Dick Cheney is defending to this day, are a complete disgrace and make me ashamed for my country (watch the video at www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/world/asia/06iqbal.html if you have any question whether Mr. Iqbal is telling the truth).  And anyone who thinks this was an unusual case, please let me know, as I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you...  Obama can't close Guantanamo fast enough...
When Muhammad Saad Iqbal arrived home here in August after more than six years in American custody, including five at the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, he had difficulty walking, his left ear was severely infected, and he was dependent on a cocktail of antibiotics and antidepressants.

In November, a Pakistani surgeon operated on his ear, physical therapists were working on lower back problems and a psychiatrist was trying to wean him off the drugs he carried around in a white, plastic shopping bag.

The maladies, said Mr. Iqbal, 31, a professional reader of the Koran, are the result of a gantlet of torture, imprisonment and interrogation for which his Washington lawyer plans to sue the United States government.

The coming administration of President-elect Barack Obama is weighing whether to close the Guantánamo prison, which many critics have called an extralegal system of detention and abuse.

But the full stories of individual detainees like Mr. Iqbal are only now emerging after years in which they were shuttled around the globe under the Bush administration's system of extraordinary rendition, which used foreign countries to interrogate and detain terrorism suspects in sites beyond the reach of American courts.

Mr. Iqbal was never convicted of any crime, or even charged with one. He was quietly released from Guantánamo with a routine explanation that he was no longer considered an enemy combatant, part of an effort by the Bush administration to reduce the prison's population.

"I feel ashamed what the Americans did to me in this period," Mr. Iqbal said, speaking for the first time at length about his ordeal during several hours of interviews with The New York Times, including one from his hospital bed in Lahore.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Ex-Detainee of U.S. Describes a 6-Year Ordeal

Published: January 5, 2009

LAHORE, Pakistan — When Muhammad Saad Iqbal arrived home here in August after more than six years in American custody, including five at the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, he had difficulty walking, his left ear was severely infected, and he was dependent on a cocktail of antibiotics and antidepressants.

The Year in Review

Dave Barry with a HILARIOUS summary of 2008 -- here are the excerpts about the campaign:

JANUARY . . .

which begins, as it does every four years, with presidential contenders swarming into Iowa and expressing sincerely feigned interest in corn. The Iowa caucuses produce two surprises:

  • On the Republican side, the winner is Mike Huckabee, folksy former governor of Arkansas, or possibly Oklahoma, who vows to remain in the race until he gets a commentator gig with Fox. His win deals a severe blow to Mitt Romney and his bid to become the first president of the android persuasion. Not competing in Iowa are Rudy Giuliani, whose strategy is to stay out of the race until he is mathematically eliminated, and John McCain, who entered the caucus date incorrectly into his 1996 Palm Pilot.

  • On the Democratic side, the surprise winner is Barack Obama, who is running for president on a long and impressive record of running for president. A mesmerizing speaker, Obama electrifies voters with his exciting new ideas for change, although people have trouble remembering exactly what these ideas are because they are so darned mesmerized. Some people become so excited that they actually pass out. These are members of the press corps.

    Obama's victory comes at the expense of former front-runner Hillary Clinton, who fails to ignite voter passion despite a rip-snorter of a stump speech in which she recites, without notes, all 17 points of her plan to streamline tuition-loan applications.

    The instant the caucuses are over, the contenders drop Iowa like a rancid frankfurter and jet to other states to express concern about whatever people there care about.

    Meanwhile, George W. Bush, who is still, technically, the president, visits the Middle East and finds things over there just as confusing as ever.

    FEBRUARY . . .

    The battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton heats up as the two engage in a series of increasingly hostile debates, including one in which Secret Service agents have to tackle a large, angry, red-faced man who bursts from the audience shouting incoherently. This turns out to be Bill Clinton, who is swiftly dispatched by his wife's campaign to work his magic on voters in the crucial Guam caucuses.

    On the Republican side, John McCain emerges as the clear front-runner when Mitt Romney drops out of the race, citing "motherboard issues."

    MARCH . . .

    In politics, Barack Obama addresses the issue of why, in his 20 years of membership in Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, he failed to notice that the pastor, Jeremiah Wright, is a racist lunatic. In a major televised address widely hailed for its brilliance, Obama explains that . . . Okay, nobody really remembers what the actual explanation was. But everybody agrees it was mesmerizing.

    Obama's opponent, Hillary Clinton, gets into a controversy of her own when she claims that, as first lady, she landed in Bosnia "under sniper fire." News outlets quickly locate archive video showing that she was in fact greeted with a welcoming ceremony featuring an 8-year-old girl reading a poem. Clinton's campaign releases a statement pointing out that it was "a pretty long poem."

    On the Republican side, John McCain wraps up the nomination and embarks on a series of strategic naps.

    APRIL . . .

    tensions run high in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary, which all the experts agree is extremely crucial. Barack Obama gets into trouble with rural voters for saying that rural Americans are "bitter" and "cling to guns or religion." Responding to charges that this statement is elitist, Obama responds: "You are getting sleepy. Very sleepy."

    Seeking to capitalize on Obama's gaffe, Hillary Clinton starts channeling Annie Oakley, tossing down shots of whiskey and talking about her love of guns and hunting. After one particularly long day on the trail, she grabs a Secret Service agent's pistol and attempts to shoot a deer; instead she wounds a reporter, thereby sealing her victory in the Pennsylvania primary, which turns out to not actually be all that crucial because the Democratic race keeps right on going with no sign of ending in the current decade.

    On the Republican side, John McCain gets wind of something called the "Internet" and orders his staff to give him a summary of it on index cards.

    MAY . . .

    In presidential politics, the increasingly bitter fight for the Democratic nomination intensifies when Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton hold a televised debate, moderated by PBS anchor Jim Lehrer, which consists entirely of spitting.

    On the Republican side, John McCain, preparing for the fall campaign, purchases a new necktie.

    JUNE . . .

    Barack Obama finally claims the bitterly contested Democratic nomination when Hillary Clinton, behind on delegates and in debt to the tune of $25 million, including $9 million for hairspray alone, suspends her campaign and declares that she has "no hard feelings" and will do "whatever it takes" to help Obama get elected, "even though he is scum." Bill Clinton, at his wife's side, nods vigorously but is unable to speak because of the restraining device. A gracious John McCain tells the press that he "looks forward to a spirited debate with Sen. Mondale." Before he can take questions, he is informed by his aides that he has an important meeting.

    In other campaign-related news, Chicago developer Tony Rezko, a former Obama associate and fundraiser, is convicted on corruption charges, but media representatives realize that this is not an issue after Obama explains that it is not an issue.

    President George W. Bush takes one last official trip to Europe to meet with European leaders. Unfortunately, they are not home.

    JULY . . .

    Barack Obama, having secured North and South America, flies to Germany without using an airplane and gives a major speech -- speaking English and German simultaneously -- to 200,000 mesmerized Germans, who immediately elect him chancellor, prompting France to surrender.

    Meanwhile, John McCain, at a strategy session at a golf resort, tells his top aides to prepare a list of potential running mates, stressing that he wants somebody "who is completely, brutally honest." Unfortunately, because of noise from a lawnmower, the aides think McCain said he wants somebody "who has competed in a beauty contest." This will lead to trouble down the road.

    AUGUST . . .

    Barack Obama, continuing to shake up the establishment, selects as his running mate Joe Biden, a tireless fighter for change since he was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 1849. The Democratic Party gathers in Denver to formally nominate Obama, who descends from his Fortress of Solitude to mesmerize the adoring crowd with an acceptance speech objectively described by the New York Times as "comparable to the Gettysburg Address, only way better."

    Meanwhile, John McCain, still searching for the perfect running mate, tells his top aides in a conference call that he wants "someone who is capable of filling my shoes." Unfortunately, he is speaking into the wrong end of his cellphone, and his aides think he said "someone who is capable of killing a moose." Shortly thereafter, McCain stuns the world, and possibly himself, by selecting Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, a no-nonsense hockey mom with roughly 114 children named after random nouns such as "Hamper."

    SEPTEMBER . . .

    the Republican convention gets off to a tentative start in St. Paul, Minn., when President Bush and Vice President Cheney are unable to attend, partly because of Hurricane Gustav, and partly because the organizers told them that the convention was in Atlanta. The mood improves when Sarah Palin dazzles the delegates with her winning smile, detailed knowledge of what is on the teleprompter and spot-on imitation of Tina Fey. The next night, John McCain, formally accepting the nomination, pledges to run "a totally incoherent campaign." None of this is reported in the media because the entire press corps is in Wasilla, Alaska, investigating rumors that Palin once dated a yeti.

    But the presidential campaign is soon overshadowed by the troubled economy. The federal government is finally forced to take over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac after they are caught selling crack at a middle school. But that is not enough, as major financial institutions, having lost hundreds of billions of dollars thanks to years of engaging in practices ranging from questionable to moronic, begin failing, which gives the federal government an idea: Why not give these institutions more hundreds of billions of dollars, generously provided by taxpayers?

    This plan is discussed and debated in urgent meetings in Washington attended by the president, the Cabinet, congressional leaders, Sen. Obama, Sen. McCain and all other concerned parties except the actual taxpayers, who are not invited because they are, with all due respect, way too stupid to understand high finance. The taxpayers are repeatedly assured, however, that unless they fork over $700 billion, the economy will go right down the toilet. And so it comes to pass that in . . .

    OCTOBER . . .

    The economy dominates the presidential campaign, with the focal point being "Joe the Plumber," an Ohio resident who asks Barack Obama a mildly confrontational question about tax policy and within hours is more famous than the Dalai Lama. He draws intense scrutiny from the news media, which, using investigative reporters borrowed from the Palin-yeti beat, determine that "Joe the Plumber" is in fact (1) not named Joe, (2) not a plumber, (3) a citizen of Belgium and, biologically, (4) a woman.

    In the presidential debates, John McCain, looking and sounding increasingly like the late Walter Brennan, cites Joe the Plumber a record 847 times while charging that Obama's tax policies amount to socialism. Obama, ahead of McCain by double digits in the polls and several hundred million dollars in money, skips the debates so he can work on his inaugural address. The New York Times declares his performance "masterful."

    NOVEMBER . . .

    Barack Obama, in a historic triumph, is elected the nation's first black president since the second season of "24," setting off an ecstatically joyful and boisterous all-night celebration that at times threatens to spill out of the New York Times newsroom. Obama, following through on his promise to bring change to Washington, quickly begins assembling an administration consisting of a diverse group of renegade outsiders, ranging all the way from lawyers who attended Ivy League schools and then worked in the Clinton administration to lawyers who attended entirely different Ivy league schools and then worked in the Clinton administration, to Hillary Clinton.

    DECEMBER . . .

    President-elect Obama, continuing to bring change in the form of fresh-faced Washington outsiders, announces that his secretary of state will be Hillary Clinton. The position of secretary of defense, currently held by Bush appointee Robert Gates, will be filled by Bush appointee Robert Gates. Responding to rumors that he also plans to retain Dick Cheney, Obama insists that he has tried to ask the vice president to leave, "but nobody knows where he is."

    In other political news, federal authorities arrest Democratic Illinois Gov. Rod "Rod" Blagojevich after wiretaps reveal that he was . . . okay, that he was being the governor of Illinois. Everybody is very, very shocked. Meanwhile, the recount in the extremely tight Minnesota Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken is thrown into disarray with the discovery that more than 13,000 of the ballots were cast by residents of Palm Beach County, Fla.

    ...The point is, if you have any money left, you should spend it soon.

    And happy New Year.

  • -------------------

    The Year in Review

    By Dave Barry
    Sunday, December 28, 2008; W10

    www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/19/AR2008121901343.html

    How weird a year was it? Here's how weird:

  • O.J. actually got convicted of something.

  • Gasoline hit $4 a gallon -- and those were the good times.

  • On several occasions, "Saturday Night Live" was funny.

  • There were a few days there in October when you could not completely rule out the possibility that the next Treasury secretary would be Joe the Plumber.

  • Finally, and most weirdly, for the first time in history, the voters elected a president who -- despite the skeptics who said such a thing would never happen in the United States-- was neither a Bush nor a Clinton.

    Of course, not all the events of 2008 were weird. Some were depressing. The only U.S. industries that had a good year were campaign consultants and foreclosure lawyers. Everybody else got financially whacked. So, we can be grateful that 2008 is almost over. But before we leave it behind, let's take a few minutes to look back and see if we can find some small nuggets of amusement. Why not? We paid for it, starting with . . .

  • Tuesday, December 16, 2008

    Democrats for Education Reform Statement on Selection of Arne Duncan to Head Department of Education

    Here's DFER's press release on the Duncan appointment:
    "In spite of decades of talk about education reform, the system remains broken," said Joe Williams, executive director of DFER. "The Obama administration, with Arne Duncan at the head of the Department of Education, will lead the charge of breaking the existing ideological and political gridlock to promote new, innovative and experimental ideas in education."
     
    DFER believes Duncan represents the very best choice for the Secretary of Education with his long history of commitment to improving public education in the United States. As CEO of Chicago Public Schools since 2001, Duncan has demonstrated that he understands that improving educational opportunities for children is a critical investment in our nation's future. Under Duncan's leadership, Chicago has been at the forefront of school restructuring and improving teacher quality. During his seven year tenure Chicago Public Schools have demonstrated sustained improvements in student achievement, graduation rates and college-going rates.

    ---------------------------

    Democrats for Education Reform Statement on Selection of Arne Duncan to Head Department of Education

    DFER recommended Duncan to the Obama administration in their Education Transition Memo as a way to send a strong signal that education reform will be a priority for the administration
    Last update: 7:43 p.m. EST Dec. 15, 2008
    NEW YORK, Dec 15, 2008 /PRNewswire
    www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/12-15-2008/0004942402&EDATE
     
    In response to the widely reported selection of Arne Duncan to head the U.S. Department of Education in President-elect Obama's administration, Democrats for Education Reform (DFER) championed the selection and urged the incoming secretary to make good on the promises Obama made while campaigning for the presidency. DFER was an early advocate of the selection of Duncan in the Education Transition Memo they released on November 11, because of his commitment to education reform ideas and his experience implementing reform in the Chicago Public Schools.
     
    "In spite of decades of talk about education reform, the system remains broken," said Joe Williams, executive director of DFER. "The Obama administration, with Arne Duncan at the head of the Department of Education, will lead the charge of breaking the existing ideological and political gridlock to promote new, innovative and experimental ideas in education."
     
    DFER believes Duncan represents the very best choice for the Secretary of Education with his long history of commitment to improving public education in the United States. As CEO of Chicago Public Schools since 2001, Duncan has demonstrated that he understands that improving educational opportunities for children is a critical investment in our nation's future. Under Duncan's leadership, Chicago has been at the forefront of school restructuring and improving teacher quality. During his seven year tenure Chicago Public Schools have demonstrated sustained improvements in student achievement, graduation rates and college-going rates.
     
    "During the long fight for the presidency Barack Obama made clear that education will be a central focus of his administration," Williams continued. "In his speech in Grant Park in Chicago on election night President-elect Obama listed education in his top five priorities for his term in office. He has promised to increase funding for charter schools, create a system for rewarding excellent teachers, and expand pre-K -- all issues that DFER has campaigned rigorously in favor of."
     
    DFER supports Democratic candidates committed to progressive ideas like greater mayoral accountability for schools; adjustments in teacher licensing requirements; changes to teacher compensation to reward our best educators; and a renewed focus on early childhood education (in particular, linking early childhood education with charter schools, which usually do not include Pre-K).
     
    About Democrats for Education Reform (DFER)
    Democrats for Education Reform (DFER) is a political action committee whose mission is to encourage a more productive dialogue within the Democratic Party on the need to fundamentally reform American public education. DFER was founded in June of 2007 by a group of Democratic contributors and education reformers who were frustrated that the Democratic Party appeared to be unfairly resistant to positive change in schools. http://www.dfer.org/

    Nobody Better Than Arne Duncan

    A nice shout-out for Duncan from the authors of Freakonomics (www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0061234001/tilsoncapitalpar) on the NYT blog:
    December 16, 2008, 10:01 am

    Nobody Better Than Arne Duncan

    http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/16/nobody-better-than-arne-duncan

    Arne Duncan is expected to be announced as the next secretary of education later today. Freakonomics readers will remember Arne as the hero of our chapter on teacher cheating. He was head of the Chicago Public Schools when Brian Jacob and I were investigating how teachers and administrators were doctoring standardized test sheets.

    With seemingly nothing to gain and much to lose, Arne embraced our results, even allowing us to do audit testing to confirm our hypotheses. Eventually, a handful of teachers were fired.

    Since then, I’ve interacted with Arne a few times, and in a variety of settings. I always walk away dazzled. He is smart as hell and his commitment to the kids is remarkable. If you wanted to start from scratch and build a public servant, Arne would be the end product.

    About five years ago, I joked with him that he was not even 40 years old and he had the second-best job in education. He had nowhere to go but down, since the only better job would be secretary of education.

    For all his accomplishments improving schools, perhaps even more remarkable are his accomplishments on the basketball court: he and his buddies have won the national Hoop It Up Three-On-Three basketball championship on multiple occasions.

    Press coverage of Duncan appointment, mentioning Democrats for Education Reform

    The press coverage of the Duncan pick has been AMAZING -- the front page of the NY Times, etc. -- and DFER has been mentioned prominently in many of them.  Here's a summary:
     

    Joe Williams, executive director of Democrats for Education Reform, said last week that his group would be delighted to see Mr. Klein or Ms. Rhee appointed, but had sent to the transition team a memorandum recommending Mr. Duncan.

    “He is the kind of guy who can work with all sorts of people with different viewpoints, and we like his work in Chicago with charter schools,” Mr. Williams said.

    Duncan is embraced by the teachers unions, who have been concerned about high-stakes testing and worry about merit pay being tied to test scores, as well as reformers, who favor charter schools and tougher standards.

    Duncan partnered with the Chicago Teachers Union to develop a performance-pay plan for the city's teachers, while also supporting charter schools. Democrats for Education Reform wrote in a policy paper that Duncan "has credibility with various factions in the education policy debate and would allow President Obama to avoid publicly choosing sides in that debate."

    "Duncan is someone we believe can work with everyone, and that's going to be an important part of setting a new tone to get things done in the new administration, instead of treading water," said Joe Williams, executive director the New York-based Democrats for Education Reform.

    Joe Williams, executive director of Democrats for Education Reform, a political action committee that advocated for Mr. Duncan to be selected as Education secretary, said he had been a proponent of charter schools, or public schools operated by outside organizations, as well as merit pay for teachers -- both controversial topics among teachers' unions.

    Duncan, head of the Chicago school system since 2001, is generally well-regarded in the education community, and he has won praise for an emphasis on teacher quality and focus on graduation rates. Duncan favors keeping, but significantly revising, President Bush's 2001 No Child Left Behind law (PL 107-110).

    He won praise from Democrats for Education Reform, a New York-based political action committee, which endorsed Duncan for the post.

    "Duncan has credibility with various factions in the education policy debate and would allow President Obama to avoid publicly choosing sides in that debate in his most high-profile education nomination," the memo read.

    -------------------------------------------------

    Chicago Schools Chief Is Obama’s Education Pick

    Published: December 15, 2008

    Arne Duncan, the Chicago schools superintendent known for taking tough steps to improve schools while maintaining respectful relations with teachers and their unions, is President-elect Barack Obama’s choice as secretary of education, Democratic officials said Monday.

    Comment on Duncan by Angus Davis

    My friend Angus Davis, who's spearheading education reform in Rhode Island, sent this email to his fellow Regents, which nice summarizes how great Duncan is:
    From: Angus Davis <angus.davis@gmail.com>
    Date: Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 5:22 PM
    Subject: Obama to Name Arne Duncan US Secretary of Education Tomorrow


    Fellow Regents,

    Some excellent news for education reform -- President-Elect Obama will tomorrow morning name Arne Duncan his pick for US Secretary of Education.  During his time in Chicago's public school system, Duncan has been a strong advocate for meaningful reform.

    Duncan is midway through implementing his mayor-backed Renaissance 2010 plan to create 100 new schools (many of them charters); he describes himself as a "portfolio manager" of both district- and charter-operated public schools. Low-performing schools have been closed and reopened with new staff and revamped curriculum. As he explains, "We've been able to do things - for example, close schools for academic failure. It is hugely difficult, it's hugely controversial and it's absolutely the right thing to do. That simply does not happen in other cities, because of a lack of political will."  In a hearing this summer before Congress, he
    testified, "We are one of the few districts in the country that literally shut down underperforming schools and replaced the entire school staff."  The turnaround strategy has resulted in doubled or tripled student performance in many of these schools, he testified: "Same children, same families, same socio-economic challenges, same neighborhood, same school building... Different teachers, new leadership and a new educational approach, and the results are dramatic.  As Chancellor Klein said, it puts the lie to any myths of what poor children can or cannot do."

    Duncan espouses accountability and data-driven decision making (indeed, the announcement tomorrow will be at Dodge Renaissance Academy, where they publish their recent math and reading scores with pride on their
    home page).  He opposes social promotion, which he describes as a "shameless practice."

    He shuns the "blame the parent / blame the kid" mentality, testifying in a July 2008 hearing: "I worked in the inner-city community for some time and saw that parents, despite whatever lack of education they had, they were extraordinarily interested in their children's education and in wanting something better.  So before we blame parents I think we need to really be self-critical and look in the mirror first."


    Duncan is a forceful advocate for charter schools; in May his office issued a press release touting a RAND/Mathematica study showing 8th graders in Chicago charters were more likely to graduate high school and to attend college than traditional district-run schools.  In the release, Duncan said: "We're very pleased to hear how well our charter school students are prepared for their future, but we aren't surprised by these results. We work hard to make sure all of our schools are among the many high-quality educational options for parents looking for the right fit for their children."  The report also found that Chicago charters do not "skim the cream."  The sub-headline of the release from his office: "Charter schools are one of many high-quality, diverse educational options, says Duncan."

    Duncan favors a merit-based pay system to reward excellent teachers for performance and has begun to roll out such a program in Chicago with the support of union leadership.  Like DC, only teachers who want the system get it -- in Chicago, a school that wants to adopt pay-for-performance must get 75% of the teachers to vote for it.  He says, "In our world, talent matters tremendously, and nothing is more important than geting the best and brightest adults working with our children every single day."  He hired 171 new principals this fall.  He has attracted many new teachers, getting 10 resumes for every available slot, improving the quality of the applicant pool. 

    He embraces Obama's call for an "army of new teachers."  In Chicago, he secured TFA's newest regional training site, and hired 330 TFA corps members this fall alone (these are in addition to the 250 TFA alumni still teaching in Chicago and the 25 TFA alumni currently working as principals in the city).  In welcoming the newest corps members this fall, he said, "We are thrilled that Teach For America serves as a channel for this idealism, as well as a pipeline that brings outstanding teachers and leaders into the district." 

    He supports No Child Left Behind, calling its focus on accountability "a huge step in the right direction," and supports a move that tracks growth or "value-added" in a given school year rather than a one-time snapshot (i.e. Stanford 10 in September and June to measure the growth in achievement, rather than a one-time snapshot).

    When I spoke with Duncan several weeks ago on the phone to get his advice and counsel on our search for a new commissioner, he seemed genuinely excited about our position and he spent a half hour giving me specific feedback on who our committee should consider recruiting for the post.  I'm glad Rhode Island is on his radar and I will definitely call him back after the dust settles in the 2009 to ask for his help and perhaps including Rhode Island on his tour of states that are advancing the cause of education reform in his first year in office.

    Best,
    -angus

    60 Minutes

    I thought the 60 Minutes segment I was on came out well -- a link to the video and transcript is at: www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/12/12/60minutes/main4666112.shtml
     
    Our slide presentation on the mortgage crisis – the causes, current situation and what the future holds – is posted at www.valueinvestingcongress.com (on the right side under "T2 Partners").  In addition, 11 video clips of me presenting these slides is at: www.ValueInvestingTV.com.

    Monday, December 15, 2008

    The Year That Was

    Jay Greene, author of the great book, Education Myths (www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/074254978X/tilsoncapitalpar), listed the rise of education reform in the Democratic Party, "largely thanks to the efforts of Democrats for Education Reform", as one of the "5 most important developments during 2008 that contributed to reform of K-12 education":

    Reform ideas, including choice, merit pay, curbing teacher tenure, and promoting alternative certification, are gaining mainstream acceptance in the Democratic Party largely thanks to the efforts of Democrats for Education Reform.  An important indication of this political shift was an event at the Democratic National Convention organized by the Democrats for Education Reform at which an audience of about 500 cheered speakers denouncing the teacher unions and embracing reform ideas. The Democratic supporters of reform largely (but not exclusively) consist of urban minority leaders, including Michelle Rhee, Joel Klein, Adrian Fenty, Cory Booker, Kevin Chavous, Al Sharpton, and Marion Bary.  Go ahead and make all the Sharpton and Bary jokes you like, but this (mostly) minority defection of urban Democrats from union orthodoxy is like a political earthquake that will have important implications for future reform politics.  And it’s true that some conservatives have begun backtracking on reform ideas, including Sol Stern, Diane Ravitch, and depending on the day of the week, Checker Finn and Mike Petrilli.  But if the reform movement has traded some conservatives for the new generation of minority Democratic leadership, I think we’ve come out ahead.

    Greene has a sad but true conclusion about the "the 5 most important developments during 2008 that hindered reform of K-12 education":
    And finally the most disappointing development of 2008 is that we spent another half trillion dollars on public education without significantly altering the dysfunctional system that fails to teach a quarter of 8th grade students to read at a basic level or get them to graduate from high school.  Results for minority students are significantly worse.  The economic bailout may be a $700 billion enterprise, but the public school system spends almost that much each and every year.  Every year that we spend that money without fundamentally altering how we operate public education is another fortune wasted and another year lost for millions of students.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Year That Was
     
    Jay Greene's blog

    It’s getting to be that time when people make lists of good and bad things that happened during the preceding year.  Here’s mine from an interview with Michael F. Shaughnessy of EducationNews.org:

    What were the 5 most important developments during 2008 that contributed to reform of K-12 education?

     1)     Barack Obama strongly endorsed the idea that expanding choice and competition is an important part of improving public schools.  He limited his support to expanding choice and competition through the introduction of more charter schools, but the theory is not fundamentally different than doing the same with vouchers.  Whether Obama follows through on this campaign position or not, it is now clear that it is considered politically desirable among both Democrats and Republicans to support choice and competition.  Holdouts from this view, including the teacher unions on the left and curriculum-focused reformers on the right, are being increasingly marginalized.

    2)     Sarah Palin, in her only major policy speech, pushed the idea of special education vouchers.  Like Obama embracing choice and competition, Palin embracing special ed vouchers is a symbol of the political attractiveness of the policy.  Special ed voucher programs already exist in Florida, Georgia, Ohio, Utah, and Arizona (pending the resolution of a court case).  I’d expect the idea to spread to several more states in the next four years regardless of Sarah Palin’s political prospects.

    3)     Reform ideas, including choice, merit pay, curbing teacher tenure, and promoting alternative certification, are gaining mainstream acceptance in the Democratic Party largely thanks to the efforts of Democrats for Education Reform.  An important indication of this political shift was an event at the Democratic National Convention organized by the Democrats for Education Reform at which an audience of about 500 cheered speakers denouncing the teacher unions and embracing reform ideas. The Democratic supporters of reform largely (but not exclusively) consist of urban minority leaders, including Michelle Rhee, Joel Klein, Adrian Fenty, Cory Booker, Kevin Chavous, Al Sharpton, and Marion Bary.  Go ahead and make all the Sharpton and Bary jokes you like, but this (mostly) minority defection of urban Democrats from union orthodoxy is like a political earthquake that will have important implications for future reform politics.  And it’s true that some conservatives have begun backtracking on reform ideas, including Sol Stern, Diane Ravitch, and depending on the day of the week, Checker Finn and Mike Petrilli.  But if the reform movement has traded some conservatives for the new generation of minority Democratic leadership, I think we’ve come out ahead.

    4)     We saw a string of new or expanded school choice programs in 2008.  Georgia adopted a universal tax-credit supported voucher program.  Louisiana adopted a voucher program for New Orleans as well as a personal tax deduction for private school tuition.  Florida expanded and decreased burdensome regulation on its tax-credit supported voucher program.  And Utah increased and secured a source of funding for its special ed voucher program.  For a movement declared dead more times than Generalissimo Francisco Franco, school choice continues to grow.

    5)     I’ll take the privilege of the final development to brag about the launch of the new doctoral program in education policy in the Department of Education Reform at the University of Arkansas.  It may not have been among the 5 most important developments in the whole country, but it was a big development in my little world.  With the first cohort of students starting in the Fall of 2009 (supported by a pool of generous fellowships) and a collection of outstanding faculty, we have the potential to significantly increase the number of reform-oriented researchers in academia, think-tanks, and foundations.

    What were the 5 most important developments during 2008 that hindered reform of K-12 education?

    1)     The reform movement lost two great champions this year with the passing of John Brandl and J. Patrick Rooney.  Brandl, who had been the Democratic leader of Minnesota’s state senate and Dean of the University of Minnesota’s Hubert Humphrey School of Public Policy, contributed significantly to the argument that choice was not only efficient, but also enhanced opportunities for the disadvantaged.  He helped create the state’s pioneering charter school law and other choice programs.  Brandl also served as mentor to many of today’s leading choice researchers.  Rooney, who had always been active in the civil rights movement, personally sponsored scholarships for disadvantaged students to attend private schools.  His privately financed program became a model for publicly funded voucher and tax-credit supported scholarship programs.

    2)     In 2008 we saw a number of “implementation” problems undermine otherwise promising reform initiatives.  For example, Georgia adoption a social promotion policy that required students to pass a test or follow a formal exemption policy to be promoted in certain grades.  My research with Marcus Winters on a similar policy in Florida suggested that it would improve student achievement.   But in several districts around Georgia more than 90% of students were promoted without passing the test and without following the formal exemption procedure.  They simply disregarded the law on a large scale with no consequences for any district or school employee.  Another promising idea undermined by implementation was Reading First. There is a lot of rigorous science to support a phonics-based reading approach, but getting public schools to do it well is a completely different matter.  Implementation also appears to have done-in a promising teacher mentoring program.  I could go on, but the point is that there is no shortage of clever reform practices out there.  The problem is that without addressing the lack of proper incentives in the public education system to improve, we regularly see these clever practices fall flat. We need incentive-based reforms along with reform of educational practices.

    3)     Earlier this year an Arizona court struck down voucher programs for students with disabilities and students in foster care on the grounds that the state constitution forbids aid to private schools.  This month defenders of the program argued on appeal to the state Supreme Court that the program aids students, not schools.  And the state already sends disabled students to private schools when it is determined that the public schools are unable to provide adequate services.  That practice may also be in jeopardy, even though it is actually required by federal law (IDEA).  Who knows how this will all be resolved, since courts can adopt any interpretation they like, reasonable or unreasonable.  But court action has prevented these beneficial programs from operating and threatens to kill them.

    4)     A Florida court struck down the ability of a state commission to approve charter schools.  If upheld by the (notorious) Florida Supreme Court, only school districts could approve charters and existing charters approved by the state commission may have to be closed.  Giving districts the exclusive power to grant charters essentially allows the districts to decide with whom they will have to compete.  It’s like giving McDonalds the exclusive power to approve the opening of all new restaurants.  The state Supreme Court used the same narrow interpretation of clauses in the state constitution to strike down the Opportunity Scholarship voucher program, so the prospects for a vibrant and competitive charter sector in Florida are not good.

    5)     And finally the most disappointing development of 2008 is that we spent another half trillion dollars on public education without significantly altering the dysfunctional system that fails to teach a quarter of 8th grade students to read at a basic level or get them to graduate from high school.  Results for minority students are significantly worse.  The economic bailout may be a $700 billion enterprise, but the public school system spends almost that much each and every year.  Every year that we spend that money without fundamentally altering how we operate public education is another fortune wasted and another year lost for millions of students.

     

    Obama Picks Arne Duncan for Education Post

    The rumor I heard was right: NPR, the Chicago Tribune and the NY Times blog (see below) are all reporting that Obama has picked Arne Duncan to be Secretary of Education (plus there's a press conference tomorrow). 
     
    This is AMAZING news and genuine school reformers should be celebrating!!!  I predict that Duncan, with Obama's support, is going to be transformational and make a huge difference in the lives of millions of American children.
     
    My main concern at this point is who Obama picks as Duncan's #2.  Here is what I sent out about this 10 days ago:

    Deputy Secretary of Education

    The Deputy Secretary of Education is a powerful and important position, so in addition to picking a strong Secretary, Obama also needs to choose an equally strong, reform-oriented #2.  From what I hear, while Linda Darling-Hammond has no chance of being Secretary, but there might be a natural inclination by the Obama team to throw her (and the unions) a bone by making her Deputy Secretary, which would be a disaster.  Do NOT underestimate her: she’s influential, clever and (while she does her best to hide it) an enemy of genuine reform, so she could totally undermine whomever is Secretary.  Let’s be realistic – she’s likely get some position in the DOE, but it must not be the powerful #2 position.  (For more on LDH, see the article below and my thoughts on her at: http://edreform.blogspot.com/2007/12/obamas-disappointing-choice-of-linda.html)

     

    Instead of LDH, there are many other superstars who would be great #2’s such as the following four people (listed in alphabetical order; full bios are at the end of this email):

     

    n     Michael Lomax, the President and CEO of the United Negro College Fund.  He’s been a teacher, elected official and university president, and serves on the national boards of KIPP and Teach for America, among others.  

     

    n     Ted Mitchell, the CEO of the NewSchools Venture Fund.  He was formerly the President of Occidental College (coincidentally, where Obama attended before transferring to Columbia).

     

    n     Andrew Rotherham, the co-founder and co-director of Education Sector, an independent national education policy think tank. He is a member of the Virginia Board of Education, launched the Progressive Policy Institute's 21st Century Schools Project, and served at The White House as Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy during the Clinton administration, where he managed education policy activities at the White House and advised President Clinton on a wide range of education issues.

     

    n     Jon Schnur, the founder and Chief Executive Officer of New Leaders for New Schools, who is currently on a leave of absence to advise Obama on education issues.  He was a policy advisor on K-12 education in president Bill Clinton's administration for seven years, serving as White House Associate Director for Educational Policy, Vice President Gore's Senior Policy Advisor on education, and Special Assistant to U.S. Secretary of Education Richard Riley.

     

    Obviously only one of these guys can get the #2 position, but all of them should be offered other senior positions in the DOE, as it’s critical that genuine reformers are in key staff positions throughout the DOE.

    In addition to being happy for my country and its children, I'm personally breathing a sigh of relief because I stuck my neck out in saying very publicly (see my blog post, below) years ago that Obama:
    A) Understood the crisis in American K-12 public education and, deep in his core, was committed to addressing it;
     
    B) Knew that the old union-driven nostrums of spending more money to hire more teachers to reduce class size wouldn't work;
     
    C) Embraced most of the new approches that DO work: high standards and expectations, accountability, differential pay for teachers, removing ineffective teachers, fostering the growth of high-quality charter schools, etc.; and
     
    D) Was willing to spend political capital and take political risks on this issue. 
    We haven't answered all of these questions definitively -- C) and D) will take time to see -- but Duncan's appointment (and other things Obama has said and done) I think put to rest many of the worries in the education reform community -- believe me, I heard them! -- about whether Obama was one of us.
    -------------------------
    December 15, 2008, 5:30 pm

    Obama Picks Arne Duncan for Education Post

    President-elect Barack Obama will name Arne Duncan, the superintendent of schools in Chicago, to be his Secretary of Education, a senior Democratic official and a second person close to the decision said.

    Mr. Duncan is a Harvard graduate whose friendship with Mr. Obama began on the basketball court and flowered into frequent discussions of education policy.

    He has seven years’ experience as chief executive of the Chicago Public Schools, the nation’s third-largest school district, where he has earned a solid reputation for confronting pressing issues in public education, like how to raise teacher quality, how to transform weak schools and when to shutter those that are irredeemably failing.

    Word of the selection comes as Mr. Obama’s transition team said Monday that he would make an important announcement on Tuesday morning at the Dodge Renaissance Academy, an elementary school that Mr. Duncan and Mr. Obama visited together in October 2005.

    -----------------------
    This is what I initially posted on my blog (www.tilsonfunds.com/Personal/Obama/Obamadetails.htm) two years ago (updated a tiny bit since then) about Obama and education reform:

    School Reform

    Obama recently gave a speech (posted here) in which he compellingly laid out the crisis in our public schools and, critically, was the most specific and the most bold he's been to date about what he would do about it as President.  He really pushed the reform agenda and, in doing so, courageously took on the most powerful interest group in the Democratic Party, the teachers unions.  Click here to read my blog post about this.

    I think this is an issue he feels very strongly about because he’s black and our school system is failing black children to an especially alarming degree.  I’ve posted a few pages from each of Obama’s two books in which he talks about this issue (Obamaonschoolreform-book1 and Obamaonschoolreform-book2).  Here is an excerpt from Dreams from My Father:

    “I decided it was time to take on public schools.

    “It seemed like a natural issue for us.  Segregation wasn’t much of an issue anymore; whites had all but abandoned the system.  Neither was overcrowding, at least in black neighborhood high schools; only half the incoming students bothered to stick around for graduation.  Otherwise, Chicago’s public schools remained in a state of perpetual crisis – annual budget shortfalls in the hundreds of millions; shortages of textbooks and toilet paper; a teachers’ union that went out on strike at least once every two years; a bloated bureaucracy and an indifferent state legislature.  The more I learned about the system, the most convinced I became that school reform was the only possible solution for the plight of the young men I saw on the street; that without stable families, with no prospects for blue-collar work that could support a family of their own, education was their last best hope.  And so in April, in between working on other issues, I developed an action plan for the organization and started peddling it to my leadership.

    “The response was underwhelming.

    “Some of it was a problem of self-interest, constituencies misaligned.  Older church members told me they had already raised their children; younger parents, like Angela and Mary, sent their children to Catholic schools.  The biggest source of resistance was rarely talked about, though – namely, the uncomfortable fact that every one of our churches was filled with teachers, principals, and district superintendents.  Few of these educators sent their own children to public schools; they knew too much for that.  But they would defend the status quo with the same skill and vigor as their white counterparts of two decades before.  There wasn’t enough money to do the job right, they told me (which was certainly true).  Efforts at reform – decentralization, say, or cutbacks in the bureaucracy – were part of a white effort to wrest back control (not so true).  As for the students, well, they were impossible.  Lazy.  Unruly.  Slow.  Not the children’s fault, maybe, but certainly not the schools’.  There may not be any back kids, Barack, but there sure are a lot of bad parents.

    “In my mind, these conversations came to serve as a symbol of the unspoken settlement we had made since the 1960s, a settlement that allowed half of our children to advance even as the other half fell further behind.  More than that, the conversations made me angry; and so despite lukewarm support from our board, Johnnie and I decided to go ahead and visit some of the area schools, hoping to drum up a constituency beyond the young parents of Altgeld.”

    Uncertainty on Obama Education Plans

    I’m quoted in an article in today’s NY Times about whom Obama might pick as the next Secretary of Education:

     

    One former Teach for America official who has been outspoken is Whitney Tilson, a New York mutual fund manager.

     

    In a recent blog entry, Mr. Tilson said of Dr. Darling-Hammond, “She’s influential, clever and (while she does her best to hide it) an enemy of genuine reform.”

     

    Mr. Tilson is on the board of Democrats for Education Reform, a political action committee based in New York.

     

    The group sent the Obama transition team a 43-page memorandum shortly after the election with policy advice and a “wish list” of candidates for secretary that included Mr. Duncan; Wendy Kopp, founder of Teach for America; and Jon Schnur, who started a nonprofit group, New Leaders for New Schools, that trains principals for urban schools, said Joe Williams, the executive director of Democrats for Education Reform.

     

    Mr. Williams said his group also liked Mr. Klein and Ms. Rhee. “We’d be thrilled,” he said, “if either one were named secretary.”

     
    ------------------------
    December 14, 2008

    Uncertainty on Obama Education Plans

    As President-elect Barack Obama prepares to announce his choice for education secretary, there is mystery not only about the person he will choose, but also about the approach to overhauling the nation’s schools that his selection will reflect.

    Despite an 18-month campaign for president and many debates, there remains uncertainty about what Mr. Obama believes is the best way to improve education.

    Will he side with those who want to abolish teacher tenure and otherwise curb the power of teachers’ unions? Or with those who want to rewrite the main federal law on elementary and secondary education, the No Child Left Behind Act, and who say the best strategy is to help teachers become more qualified?

    The debate has sometimes been nasty.

    Education Attacks on Darling-Hammond Don't Fit Obama's Post-Partisanship

    This Huffington Post article by John Affeldt defends LDH and claims that I and others opposing her selection for the #1 or #2 position at the DOE are engaged in "a well-choreographed crusade", "old school divisive politics", "in-fighting and the backstabbing", etc. 

    Darling-Hammond has spent 30 years pushing for a radical restructuring of public schools and the systems that serve them so that all students will have high-quality teachers and rich learning opportunities, not just well-off, predominantly white kids. To call her a defender of the status quo is like calling Lincoln a defender of slavery because he wasn't as absolute in opposition as were some on his team of rivals. The provocative rhetoric would also miss the fact that Lincoln, at the end of the day, alone possessed the unifying wisdom and skills to steer the nation to its most radical of reforms.

    The partisans may be congratulating themselves on a well-choreographed crusade, but one has to wonder: what campaign were they watching win the Presidency? From the kick-off in Springfield, Barack Obama styled himself not just a little on Lincoln: rising above old school divisive politics; exchanging thoughts in respectful debate; taking the best ideas and humbly but boldly moving forward, building consensus along the way. By drawing so heavily from the old playbook, the hard-chargers may have just charged off the cliff--virtually ensuring Obama will be less receptive to their pleas.

    Beyond the discordant tactics, much of the substance of their agenda similarly misapprehends the Obama style and vision.

    Affeldt's article is well articulated -- but is nonsense.  He is confusing bitter, personal attacks with spirited arguments about who would provide the best leadership and has the best ideas to reform a system we all agree is broken so that every child in America gets at least a solid education.  This isn't personal -- I don't doubt for a moment that LDH cares deeply about kids and wants to do what's best for them.  And I don't even think her ideas are bad -- it's that they're so LIMITED!  She fails to appreciate that it's THE SYSTEM that's the problem and needs to be reformed and also fails to even acknowledge that there are WAY too many ineffective teachers who simply need to find other careers -- and that no amount of better training can change this.  She also doesn't understand that the power of Teach for America (and a handful of similar programs) is not just the direct outcomes (students learn more in TFA teachers' classrooms), but also that TFA is a remarkable recruiter of talent into a sector sorely lacking it.  It's NOT a coincidence that KIPP and nearly every important education reform organization was founded by or disproportionately staffed by TFA alums.  I could go on, but you get the idea...
     
    In summary, if all of the reforms she proposes were adopted, I don't think it would move the needle much to chance educational outcomes -- but everyone would feel good about the pseudo-reforms and real reform would be derailed.  THAT'S why she and her ideas are so dangerous!
     
    For more on this, see what I posted on my blog a year ago: http://edreform.blogspot.com/2007/12/obamas-disappointing-choice-of-linda.html 
    ---------------------------------------------

    Education Attacks on Darling-Hammond Don't Fit Obama's Post-Partisanship

    A slickly-coordinated string of editorials and columns in the New York Times, the Washington Post, The New Republic, the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times and elsewhere has poured forth recently, all decrying the possible appointment of Stanford University Professor Linda Darling-Hammond as Secretary of Education. Obviously responding to the same talking points, the pieces paint Darling-Hammond a status quo, incrementalist and anoint a new group of pro-merit pay/pro-testing/pro-charter school advocates as the hard-charging "reformers."

    Friday, December 05, 2008

    My thoughts on Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Education; A Job for a Reformer; Who Will He Choose?; How dangerous is Linda Darling-Hammond, Obama's old-school, pro-union education guru?

    Dear fellow Obama supporters,

     

    I know I send out so many emails that nobody can possibly keep up with all of them, but if you read one email from me this year, make it this one.

     

    I'm writing to share my thoughts on whom I hope President-elect Obama will pick to be Secretary of Education and, almost as importantly, whom he picks (and doesn't pick!) to be the Deputy Secretary, as well as three articles from the Washington Post, the New York Times and The New Republic that I think capture an extremely exciting and historic shift that's occuring. 

     

    If you agree with me and are in a position to call someone on the Obama team, please do so THIS WEEKEND, as I suspect the decisions regarding the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Education will be made within a matter of days.

     

    Overall, I remain optimistic that Obama will deliver on his promise to shake up the unacceptable status quo in our public schools (especially those serving low-income, minority students), but at the same time I'm concerned that he might be tempted to make compromises I don't think he has to make.

     

    Secretary of Education

    Obama's choice of Secretary of Education will be the single most important decision he will make in this arena, and I feel strongly that he should choose either Joel Klein or Arne Duncan.  Both would be great, but I personally favor Klein because the work of education reform is so hard and I've witnessed up close his willingness to fight the really hard battles.  Since I've never met Duncan and follow the reforms he's initiated in Chicago less closely, I cannot have the same confidence in him as I'd have in someone whom I've come to know as well as Klein.  I should note that in this preference I am speaking only for myself; other education reformers whom I respect and work closely with think very highly of Duncan and are optimistic that he would forcefully advocate for a reform agenda. 

     

    The real questions that I'd want to ask about any potential Secretary of Education candidate include:

     

    1) Is he/she a true reformer – a "disrupter" rather than an "incrementalist", to quote Rep. George Miller?;

     

    2) Does he/she have the skills, experience and connections to maximize the chances of actually bringing about meaningful change?; and

     

    3) Does he/she have the strength, courage, passion and willingness to run through walls and suffer endless slings and arrows to always do what's right for kids?

     

    I can say with 100% certainty that the answer to each of these questions for Klein is an emphatic YES.  Based on what I've read and heard about Duncan, the answers are likely yes as well – but not quite to the same degree, with the same amount of certainty.  When it comes to helping millions of children who today are suffering in failing schools, I want certainty!

     

    So why do I think Obama is more likely to pick Duncan than Klein?  In part because they're both from Chicago and I understand that Duncan has very strong, long-standing relationships with both Barack and Michelle (and, as an added bonus, Rahm Emanuel).  Given that the new administration will be focused primarily on the economy, Iraq, health care, etc., the importance of these relationships shouldn't be underestimated.  Thus, for the same reason I favor Klein in part because I know him much better, Obama might favor Duncan.

     

    But, sadly, there's another important factor as well: politics.  If Obama picked Klein, the teacher union bosses will weep, gnash their teeth and get their knickers in a twist because Klein has been so strong in always pushing for what's best for kids, regardless of whether that threatens the interests of adults (who are, of course, accustomed to having their way).  Obama's team would certainly prefer not to get the nation's largest and most powerful interest group riled up in the early days of the new administration, so for this reason I think he's likely to pick a less controversial reformer. 

     

    If Obama does, in fact, choose Duncanreformers should still be celebrating because he's likely be a very good Secretary of Education – but I still hold out hope that he'll pick Klein.  If I had five minutes on the phone with him, here would be my argument:

     

    1) You should pick the person who is most likely to bring about the greatest reform in the shortest time – PERIOD! 

     

    2) Among possible candidates, Duncan and Klein stand out.  Klein has the experience, relationships and track record, both in NYC and Washington, that are unrivaled by any other candidate.  He's run the largest school system in the country – 2% of all U.S. public school students are in NYC – for the past 6½ years and has transformed it – so much so that the city won the coveted Broad Prize last year.  He has deep experience in Washington, was the CEO of Bertelsmann and, most importantly, no-one cares more – and is willing to fight harder for – always doing what is best for kids. 

     

    3) Sure the unions stamp their feet, but so what?  You owe them nothing.  In fact, they did everything they could to squash your candidacy during the primaries.

     

    4) Finally, it would send a powerful message that you're truly a New Democrat, focused on doing what is best for the country, even if it means angering entrenched interests in your own party.

     

    Deputy Secretary of Education

    The Deputy Secretary of Education is a powerful and important position, so in addition to picking a strong Secretary, Obama also needs to choose an equally strong, reform-oriented #2.  From what I hear, while Linda Darling-Hammond has no chance of being Secretary, but there might be a natural inclination by the Obama team to throw her (and the unions) a bone by making her Deputy Secretary, which would be a disaster.  Do NOT underestimate her: she's influential, clever and (while she does her best to hide it) an enemy of genuine reform, so she could totally undermine whomever is Secretary.  Let's be realistic – she's likely get some position in the DOE, but it must not be the powerful #2 position.  (For more on LDH, see the article below and my thoughts on her at: http://edreform.blogspot.com/2007/12/obamas-disappointing-choice-of-linda.html)

     

    Instead of LDH, there are many other superstars who would be great #2's such as the following four people (listed in alphabetical order; full bios are at the end of this email):

     

    n     Michael Lomax, the President and CEO of the United Negro College Fund.  He's been a teacher, elected official and university president, and serves on the national boards of KIPP and Teach for America, among others.  

     

    n     Ted Mitchell, the CEO of the NewSchools Venture Fund.  He was formerly the President of Occidental College (coincidentally, where Obama attended before transferring to Columbia).

     

    n     Andrew Rotherham, the co-founder and co-director of Education Sector, an independent national education policy think tank. He is a member of the Virginia Board of Education, launched the Progressive Policy Institute's 21st Century Schools Project, and served at The White House as Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy during the Clinton administration, where he managed education policy activities at the White House and advised President Clinton on a wide range of education issues.

     

    n     Jon Schnur, the founder and Chief Executive Officer of New Leaders for New Schools, who is currently on a leave of absence to advise Obama on education issues.  He was a policy advisor on K-12 education in president Bill Clinton's administration for seven years, serving as White House Associate Director for Educational Policy, Vice President Gore's Senior Policy Advisor on education, and Special Assistant to U.S. Secretary of Education Richard Riley.

     

    Obviously only one of these guys can get the #2 position, but all of them should be offered other senior positions in the DOE, as it's critical that genuine reformers are in key staff positions throughout the DOE.

     

    Thank you for making a call this weekend, if you're able, and let's cross our fingers!

     

    Sincerely yours,

     

    Whitney

    -----------------------

    Here are three AWESOME articles that came out today.  It's truly historic when liberal-leaning publications like these three are calling on a Democratic President to break with the most powerful interest group in the Democratic Party -- the Washington Post editorial even refers to "the forces of the status quo"!

     

    1) The Washington Post's editorial:

    We trust that Mr. Obama was serious when he promised change and will select someone who -- instead of just tinkering with a tired, low-performing system -- will be bold in choosing new directions for American education...

    ...Nor should opposition from the forces of the status quo scare Mr. Obama away from considering someone such as New York City Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein, who has helped improve the nation's largest school system.

    We are not promoting any individual, but the ideal candidate would be someone who is not afraid to break with orthodoxy, who is more concerned with results than with ideology, who has a proven ability to lead large systems toward change and is passionate about regaining America's place as the best-educated country on the planet. It's encouraging that, in his nominations to date, Mr. Obama has been sure-footed and inspiringly unpredictable. He won't be able, nor should he try, to placate all the education interests, so he should focus on the only interests that matter -- those of America's schoolchildren.

    2) An Op Ed in the NY Times by David Brooks:

    But the union lobbying efforts are relentless and in the past week prospects for a reforming education secretary are thought to have dimmed. The candidates before Obama apparently include: Joel Klein, the highly successful New York chancellor who has, nonetheless, been blackballed by the unions; Arne Duncan, the reforming Chicago head who is less controversial; Darling-Hammond herself; and some former governor to be named later, with Darling-Hammond as the deputy secretary.

    In some sense, the final option would be the biggest setback for reform. Education is one of those areas where implementation and the details are more important than grand pronouncements. If the deputies and assistants in the secretary's office are not true reformers, nothing will get done.

    The stakes are huge. For the first time in decades, there is real momentum for reform. It's not only Rhee and Klein — the celebrities — but also superintendents in cities across America who are getting better teachers into the classrooms and producing measurable results. There is an unprecedented political coalition building, among liberals as well as conservatives, for radical reform.

    No Child Left Behind is about to be reauthorized. Everyone has reservations about that law, but it is the glaring spotlight that reveals and pierces the complacency at mediocre schools. If accountability standards are watered down, as the establishment wants, then real reform will fade.

    This will be a tough call for Obama, because it will mean offending people, but he can either galvanize the cause of reform or demoralize it. It'll be one of the biggest choices of his presidency.

    Many of the reformist hopes now hang on Obama's friend, Arne Duncan. In Chicago, he's a successful reformer who has produced impressive results in a huge and historically troubled system. He has the political skills necessary to build a coalition on behalf of No Child Left Behind reauthorization. Because he is close to both Obamas, he will ensure that education doesn't fall, as it usually does, into the ranks of the second-tier issues.

    If Obama picks a reformer like Duncan, Klein or one of the others, he will be picking a fight with the status quo. But there's never been a better time to have that fight than right now.

    3) An article in The New Republic:

    In November, Barack Obama bewildered education reformers by tapping Linda Darling-Hammond, a Stanford professor who had advised his campaign, to oversee the transition's education policy team. Their verdict was swift and harsh. "Worst case scenario," wrote Mike Petrilli, vice president for national programs and policy at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, an education think tank, the day after The Wall Street Journal leaked the news. "This is a sign that the president-elect isn't a bona fide reformer," he later told me. Kate Walsh, president of the National Council on Teacher Quality, confirmed, "The reform community is scared to death."

    The "reform community" is an aggressive group of education advocates who argue that the certification programs which produce teachers, and the unions that represent them once they're in the classroom, have had too tight a grip on progressive priorities in the field for too long. Instead, they want to shake up the system through programs that bring in new blood and hold teachers accountable. They place their hopes in nervy, pioneering leaders like Michelle Rhee and Joel Klein, the chancellors of the D.C. and New York City public schools, respectively. In Darling-Hammond--an academic, union favorite, and vocal critic of Teach for America and No Child Left Behind--they see the opposite: an ideological enemy representative of a sluggish status quo.

    Reformers are right to be nervous. During the campaign, Obama deftly appeased all sides of the policy debate. While appealing to the unions, which have long been bastions of Democratic support, he also gave great hope to reformers inside and outside the party by supporting merit pay and pledging to increase funding for charter schools. In asking Darling-Hammond to helm the transition--a precursor, some worry, to her appointment as secretary of education--Obama has suggested that he wasn't entirely serious about change, at least when it comes to education. It's a misstep that threatens to derail his quest for post-partisanship--and ruin a critical opportunity to revolutionize America's lagging schools...

    ...That may be, but, with Darling-Hammond as the point person on deciding how to implement the most important pieces of an undoubtedly evolving platform, it's easy to imagine reform-backed proposals falling by the wayside. That's why, even if she does not secure a position in the Obama administration, the symbolism and influence she has in this preliminary stage are troubling. Vexing education's boldest change agents won't help Obama substantiate his still-murky education reform credentials and forge bipartisan policies. And, if Obama does elevate her to his Cabinet, the appointment would leave lasting wounds, both among reformers and in the nation's schools. "Hopes would be dashed . . . if [the secretary of education] isn't reformed-minded," Williams says.

    In The Audacity of Hope, Obama wrote that "ideological battles [in education] . . . are as outdated as they are predictable." Too bad he's just started another one.

    ------------------
    A Job for a Reformer
    Will Barack Obama opt for boldness or the status quo in choosing an education secretary?

    Friday, December 5, 2008; A24

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/04/AR2008120403655_pf.html

    WITH MUCH of his national security and economic teams in place, President-elect Barack Obama faces another critical pick: education secretary. No names have emerged from the transition team, but warring camps within the Democratic Party are furiously seeking to influence the decision. We trust that Mr. Obama was serious when he promised change and will select someone who -- instead of just tinkering with a tired, low-performing system -- will be bold in choosing new directions for American education.

    --------------------

    December 5, 2008
    Op-Ed Columnist

    Who Will He Choose?

    As in many other areas, the biggest education debates are happening within the Democratic Party. On the one hand, there are the reformers like Joel Klein and Michelle Rhee, who support merit pay for good teachers, charter schools and tough accountability standards. On the other hand, there are the teachers' unions and the members of the Ed School establishment, who emphasize greater funding, smaller class sizes and superficial reforms.

    During the presidential race, Barack Obama straddled the two camps. One campaign adviser, John Schnur, represented the reform view in the internal discussions. Another, Linda Darling-Hammond, was more likely to represent the establishment view. Their disagreements were collegial (this is Obamaland after all), but substantive.

    -------------------
    How dangerous is Linda Darling-Hammond, Obama's old-school, pro-union education guru?
    Education Wars by
    The New Republic,
    Friday, December 05, 2008

    www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=2668834e-678b-4295-ae53-b8f2c236bd23

    In November, Barack Obama bewildered education reformers by tapping Linda Darling-Hammond, a Stanford professor who had advised his campaign, to oversee the transition's education policy team. Their verdict was swift and harsh. "Worst case scenario," wrote Mike Petrilli, vice president for national programs and policy at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, an education think tank, the day after The Wall Street Journal leaked the news. "This is a sign that the president-elect isn't a bona fide reformer," he later told me. Kate Walsh, president of the National Council on Teacher Quality, confirmed, "The reform community is scared to death."

    -------------------

    Bio of Michael Lomax

     

    As president and chief executive officer of the United Negro College Fund (UNCF), Dr. Michael L. Lomax heads the nation's largest and most successful minority higher education assistance organization. Through its headquarters in Fairfax, Virginia, and 24 field offices across the country, UNCF annually provides operating and program funds to its 39 member private historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and their 60,000 students. In addition, it manages more than 400 scholarship programs that support nearly 10,000 students at over 900 of the nation's colleges and universities. In the course of its 62-year history, UNCF has raised and distributed over $2.5 billion and has assisted over 300,000 students in earning undergraduate degrees. In 1999, UNCF received over $1 billion, the largest private gift to American higher education, from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to administer the Gates Millennium Scholars Program, which provides outstanding minority students with an opportunity to complete their undergraduate and graduate college educations.

     

    Dr. Lomax joined UNCF after serving in a series of high-level academic and political positions. Immediately before joining UNCF, he served seven years as president of Dillard University in New Orleans.

     

    Dr. Lomax went to Dillard after thirty years in Atlanta, where he pursued simultaneous full-time careers as a university professor and public servant. He graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Atlanta's Morehouse College (the alma mater of Dr. Martin Luther King) and, after receiving his M.A. degree from Columbia University and his Ph.D. in American and African American literature from Emory University, taught literature at Morehouse and Spelman Colleges and the University of Georgia.

     

    At the same time, he became a prominent figure in Atlanta government and politics. He began his public service as an assistant to Maynard Jackson, Atlanta's first African American mayor, and went on to serve as the first head of Atlanta's Bureau of Cultural Affairs. In 1978, he was elected to the Fulton County Board of Commissioners. Two years later, he became the Board's chairman, the first African American ever to hold that position and served in that position for twelve years.

     

    Dr. Lomax is a trustee of Emory University, a member of the founding Council of the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of African American History and Culture, and a member of the Boards of Directors of Teach for America, The KIPP Foundation, The Carter Center, the High Museum of Art in Atlanta, the Studio Museum in Harlem, The Bill T. Jones Dance Company and the National Black Arts Festival, of which he was founding chair. President George W. Bush appointed him to the President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities. He has also received numerous awards including The Laurel Crowned Circle Award from Omicron Delta Kappa (2006), the distinguished Emory Medal, the Candle in the Dark award from Morehouse College and several honorary degrees.

     

    Dr. Lomax and his wife, Cheryl Ferguson Lomax, have two daughters, Michele and Rachel. His oldest daughter, Deignan, graduated from Dillard University in 2000.

    ---------------------

    Bio of Ted Mitchell

     

    Ted Mitchell assumed the role of CEO of NewSchools Venture Fund in the fall of 2005, after having served on the NewSchools Board of Directors for seven years.

     

    Prior to joining NewSchools, Mitchell served as the 12th president of Occidental College in Los Angeles. Mitchell's tenure at Occidental was marked by a dramatic improvement in both the College's national reputation and its engagement in the community, as well as by unprecedented financial growth. A former deputy to the president at Stanford University and vice chancellor at University of California, Los Angeles, Mitchell is a national leader in the effort to provide high-quality education for all students and has long been active in California and Los Angeles educational reform initiatives. He currently chairs the Governor's Committee on Educational Excellence, charged with making recommendations to improve California's system of K-12 finance and governance, and is President of the California State Board of Education. He also serves on the boards of a variety of nonprofit education organizations.

     

    Ted graduated from Stanford with bachelor's degrees in economics and history, and also earned a master's degree in history and a doctorate in education there.

    ---------------------

    Bio of Andrew Rotherham

     

    Andrew Rotherham is co-founder and co-director of Education Sector, an independent national education policy think tank. Rotherham, who Washingtonian Magazine describes as being "at the forefront of U.S. education policy," is also a member of the Virginia Board of Education. In addition, Rotherham writes a monthly column for U.S. News & World Report as well as the widely read and award winning blog Eduwonk.com, which an Education Week study found to be among the most influential sources of information in American education today.

     

    In 1998, Rotherham launched the Progressive Policy Institute's 21st Century Schools Project, which he directed until 2005. Under his leadership, the project became a leading Washington D.C.-based education policy center. It developed public policy strategies to eliminate systemic inequities in American education and to redesign American public education into a system based on universal access to high-quality instruction, public sector choice and customization, common academic standards, and accountability for results. The project's ideas have been implemented in national and state education policy. Washington Post columnist David Broder cited one of the project's major policy proposals as "the clearest evidence of change" in the national education policy debate.

     

    Rotherham previously served at The White House as Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy during the Clinton administration. He managed education policy activities at the White House and advised President Clinton on a wide range of education issues including the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, charter schools and public school choice, and increasing accountability in federal policy. Rotherham also led the White House Domestic Policy Council education team, the youngest person to have done so.

     

    Governor Mark Warner appointed Rotherham to the nine-member Virginia Board of Education in 2005. He was the youngest appointee in the modern era. In addition, Rotherham is currently a member of the board of directors of the Indianapolis Mind Trust and Democrats for Education Reform. He is also a trustee of the César Chavez Public Charter High School for Public Policy in Washington, D.C., and serves on advisory boards and committees for numerous organizations and institutions including The Broad Foundation, Harvard University, the National Governors Association, the National Charter School Research Project, the National Association of Charter School Authorizers, and the Campaign for a U.S. Public Service Academy. Rotherham is also a member of the Aspen Institute-New Schools Entrepreneurial Leaders for Public Education 2008 Fellows class.

     

    Rotherham has published more than 100 articles, book chapters, papers, and op-eds about education policy and politics. Doublethink calls him "the go-to guy for those looking for serious, cogent, analysis of the latest education trends" and American School Board Journal says Rotherham is "one of Washington's leading commentators on education policy." He is a regular commentator on National Public Radio, and has written for a wide-range of publications including The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times, USA Today, Education Week, The Washington Monthly, and The Times of London as well as academic and trade publications. In addition, Rotherham has authored or edited four influential books on education policy.

     

    Rotherham, recently recognized as one of the "40 People Under 40 to Watch" by Washingtonian Magazine, was born and raised in Virginia and educated in Virginia's public schools and universities. A graduate of Virginia Tech he holds a master's degree from the University of Virginia and is completing a doctorate in political science from the University of Virginia. Rotherham lives in Earlysville, Virginia, with his wife, Julie who worked in international aid and public education prior to taking a professional break to focus on their two young daughters.

    -------------------

    Bio of Jon Schnur

     

    Jon Schnur is the founder and Chief Executive Officer of New Leaders for New Schools - a national non-profit organization devoted to improving education for every child by attracting and preparing the next generation of outstanding principals for our nation's urban public schools. Schnur was a policy advisor on K-12 education in president Bill Clinton's administration for seven years, serving as White House Associate Director for Educational Policy, Vice President Gore's Senior Policy Advisor on education, and Special Assistant to U.S. Secretary of Education Richard Riley.

     

    He spearheaded the development of many educational policies in such areas as teacher recruitment and training, after-school programs, school reform and charter schools.

     

    Schnur spent several months at Harvard designing the business plan for New Leaders for New Schools while taking coursework at the Graduate School of Education, the Business School and John F. Kennedy School of Government. He graduated from Princeton University cum laude in 1989 and from a public high school near Milwaukee, WI, in 1984.

    Sunday, November 23, 2008

    Thoughts on Obama's Choice as Secretary of Education

    I've started to get some nervous emails about who Obama will select as Secretary of Education. Education reformers are right to focus on this, as this is indeed BY FAR the most important decision that will impact millions of American children over the next few years (and, not to be too hyperbolic, the economic future of our country). I'm not too worried because Obama understands the crisis, knows the tired old "solutions" are NOT the solution, owes nothing to the teachers unions (they were aggressively supporting Hillary) and, most importantly, consistently makes really good decisions. I'm quite certain he won't appoint an old guard union apologist and think he's wise enough not to pick a VIP -- a big name who lacks extensive experience in the education world. Among many worthy reformers, I'm sure he'll pick someone who'll be an excellent Sec. of Education.

    The worrying reminds me of this hilarious and spot-on photo that I sent around to my Obama email list shortly after the Republican convention and the Palin pick, which temporarily put the race into a dead heat, freaking out Obama's supporters: