Much has been said and written about the Charter School Amendment and sometimes it’s a challenge to separate fact from fiction. This column is intended to deliver some basic logic and facts for anyone trying to make an informed decision about how to vote on the Charter School Amendment.
Georgia is made up of 159 counties, each of which has at least one public school system. Many, like Floyd and Bartow counties, have more than one public school system. As divergent and independent as our myriad systems of education are, they all make up “Georgia” schools. No matter how good individual systems may be, the weight of our statewide education failures drags down the reputations and limits the opportunities of the best and brightest students graduating from Georgia schools.
Schools in our communities are among the best in the state and the likelihood that parents in our systems will be clamoring for public school alternatives is pretty slim.
PASSING the Charter School Amendment is about giving parents and children in failing systems an opportunity for success in education when that opportunity has been denied by the politicians and lobbyists who have a choke-hold on the purse strings of those systems. When the children and parents in those systems are able to demonstrate the success of school choice, there is a natural progression toward improvement in schools across the community—not just in the charter schools. The improvement is felt in the aggregate as Georgia’s reputation and ranking improve in measurable areas of achievement. By voting “Yes” parents of Floyd and Bartow County students will not only be giving educational choice to students in those failing systems, they will be improving the opportunities for their own.
Conservatives have long touted the benefits of local control in all manner of government undertakings. Suddenly, some liberals have taken on the mantra of “local control” to argue that the Charter School Amendment somehow usurps local control in favor of central planning. In reality, school choice is about educational control at the most local level — he family. The Charter School Amendment seeks to break the log jam of lobbyists and politicians who have entrenched themselves between children and their full educational potential, allowing families to regulate the stream of educational development for their own children. That is real local control.
WHEN industry determines where to invest in new development, one of the most important factors considered, perhaps the most important factor, is the state’s education system. In order to make Georgia more attractive to industry, education has to improve. As indicated above, school choice makes for better education and better results. As Georgia’s schools improve their standing, so does Georgia’s competitive edge in attracting economic development.
Our founders understood that by separating and balancing the powers of government into three branches the inevitable encroachment of government power over individual liberty would be substantially slowed. When one branch of government exercises unauthorized authority over another, the separate powers become unbalanced and individual liberties are the collateral damage. Every intrusion by one branch must be answered with a restoration of the balance to prevent the complete erosion of liberty.
The Charter School Amendment became necessary because unwarranted judicial activism was used to curtail the will of the people as demonstrated by their elected representatives in the General Assembly and the Executive branch. The only way to restore the balance and return liberty to the people is to thwart the judicial power grab. The Charter School Amendment is the means for forcing the judicial branch back into its appropriate role as a separate and balanced branch of the government. In this way, the Charter School Amendment protects individual liberty and restores the balance of power between the branches.
THERE ARE some basic truths about what the Charter School Amendment and its implementing legislation would and would not do. Those politicians and lobbyists who stand to lose significant power over taxpayers have filled the debate with misinformation and unsupported innuendo. The five basic truths set out below should clarify some of the false information.
1. Charter schools are public schools. Like every public school, they are free and open to all students in their respective attendance areas.
2. Locals run the schools. The proposed charter school commission would have the ability to authorize and hold charter schools accountable but would not run the schools. By joining 33 other states that already have this authority, we would stand with them in ensuring that high quality charter schools are approved.
3. Charters provide real accountability. Charters exist for the express purposes of increasing student achievement and parental involvement. The goal is to improve public education. Charters not meeting their performance goals are closed.
4 Public charter schools benefit all public school students. There have been at least 19 studies on the impact of school choice on students in traditional public schools. Not one found negative consequences for traditional public school students; many saw academic gains—a rising tide lifts all boats.
5 Local dollars are not used to fund public school charters. Local dollars will not be used to fund state approved charter schools, and HR 1162 explicitly prohibits a direct deduction of state funds to local school systems.
It is time to give Georgia’s students and their parents public school options. Vote yes on the Charter School Amendment in November.
Rep. Christian Coomer, R-Cartersville, represents portions of Floyd and Bartow counties in the Georgia General Assembly. Readers may contact him at ccoomer@coomerlaw.com
Dear Community Partners,
If I were to say “trunk” to you with no explanation or context, what would be your initial interpretation of what I meant?
Would you think of the trunk of a tree or would you think of the nose of an elephant? Would you think of the space at the back of a car? Or would you think of a large box with a hinged lid for storing or transporting belongings? Trunk could mean that portion of a body that is separate from the limbs and head. Then again some professionals might think of the main part of an artery or nerve from which smaller branches arise. And trunk is such a simple word!
There are many other words like “trunk” with multiple meanings so that it is easy to miss what the user of a word means and make a wrong assumption about a concept.
Consider “charter school” for example. The term has been in the news a lot lately, and there is a very important constitutional amendment on the November ballot that needs to be understood by voters.
I have always thought a charter school to be a choice for a community school system to move beyond state mandated basics for education and accept the goals and responsibilities of a more effective, productive, creative education for its young people. I have seen it as a lofty goal since many state mandates, in my opinion, are non-productive and binding. But I’ve come to find out that like there are trunks and there are trunks, there are charter schools and there are charter schools. The charter school amendment on our November ballot is not the charter school I thought of when I first read about it.
Because I believe a well-informed populace is key to combating the threats against our traditional democracy of “by the people and for the people,” I want to share some things I think we need to consider regarding Amendment 1. This amendment creates a politically appointed State Charter School Commission not accountable to taxpayers or voters. This amendment has nothing to do with charter schools as I have thought them to be. Local boards of education along with the communities in which they serve can already authorize charter schools. This amendment offers the opportunity for the state to bypass locally elected boards to create a state commission that that strips local voters, parents and local officials of any authority, placing it instead in the hands of state politicians. It also diverts our tax money from funding our local public schools to for-profit state charter school management companies who may be more concerned about shareholder profits than student performance. Apparently the amendment emerged from a group of angry state legislators who were offended that the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional for the state to approve charter schools over the objection of the local boards representing the communities. Additionally the state commission would be able to give more funding to the state run schools than to our traditional students. The state has already cut Bremen City Schools almost $3 million over the last two years. Will a state commission cut more so that they can fund their pet school projects? When the state gives less, more burdens are placed on the local property owners. The amendment on the ballot reads: Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended to allow local or state approval of public charter schools upon the request of local communities? The language is misleading. There is already both local and state authority to do that. It is reported that campaign disclosure reports show that 95% of the funding for the campaign supporting the passage of this state constitutional amendment is coming from out of state donors including for-profit education management organizations who stand to benefit. Funding opposing the amendment is 100% from within Georgia.
As my friends, I want to say to you that I am horrified by the greed for power that is being demonstrated in our state and federal governments. We have got to stand up, stand together, be informed and seek the truth. Sadly, truth is hard to find. The trunk of this nation is being attacked by parasites wanting to thrive at the expense of the roots holding the health of the American tree. We still have the chance to make a choice to make a change. If not us, then who? If not now, then when? If not America, then what?
May God have mercy on us, grant us grace and inspire us to stand and not blink. I am deeply grateful for you and I love living here with you.
Sharon Sewell, Mayor- Bremen, GA
Saying that lobbyists (code word for these two professional organizations) come between students and their potential is to say that practically all of Georgia's teachers come between students and their potential.
I've taught public school, and I know the immense sacrifice our teachers make. I was at the Friends of the Library book sale, and a woman was buying books for her daughter, who is a teacher, to use in her classes. If public (non-charter) schools are put even lower on the Legislature's list of priorities (and it's difficult to see how they could be), then we'll see these dedicated men and women leaving the field in droves.
Instead of public education, we'll have public ignorance, and an ignorant electorate will serve only the demagogues who seek to gut the promise of literacy for all.
Charter schools, according to Rep. Coomer's summary of the bill, must meet their performance goals or be closed.
The parents who take the effort to send their children to a truly good charter school are likely to be the same parents who are likely to (as I suggested earlier make sure their kids succeed, regardless of what school they attend. In other words, these charter schools will cherry pick the students (and parents) with initiative. As a result, such schools should have no trouble meeting reasonable performance standards (even if the education they provide is no better than what's available at a traditional school).
But what of the school whose best students are siphoned off, along with the per-student payment from taxes? Such schools--regardless of the valiant efforts of their teachers and staff--will be unable to attain whatever state and federal standards are set for them--outside of their control, losing even further funding.
We will have a two-tier system: the educational haves and the educational have-nots, and with a large block of poorly funded schools, Georgia will be unable to attract the industry that the sponsors claim will come if the bill passes.
I'm not saying we should lower the performance of good students with responsible parents--I'm saying we should improve the performance of students currently at the bottom. And shifting money and attention away from them will only make the problem worse.
Proprietary trade schools are filled with students who believed the commercials they saw during The Jerry Springer Show.
It's easy enough to disguise a for-profit institution as non-profit. Hollywood studios claim they lose money on every movie they make, when it comes time to paying actors based on profit percentage, and they have accountants who can cook the books to prove it.
The charter school ads themselves are proof of how easy it is to create a convincing pseudo public-spirited image without fact or evidence.
No, the real purpose of the amendment (besides enriching supporters who plan to turn a buck off the enterprise--supporters who have their own lobbyists) is to allow state legislators to pass the buck downwind, while fooling parents into thinking that they have a choice.
The choice all parents have is to turn off the video games, delete the facebook accounts, and cancel soccer matches until their children perform at a level that they're capable of--a level that will make all Georgians proud and bring industry to the state, and that won't cost a cent or transfer tax money to profiteers.
How does HR 1162 reduce, or hold steady, state taxes? How does it keep the elderly from being exposed to “school taxes” in the form of increased state income taxes or some form of special tax or fee? I thought Republicans were opposed to raising taxes.
Are you boys under the Gold Dome going to stop pork-barrel spending to come up with funding for this, or has the State suddenly found a money printing press? Where do the "state funds" mentioned in HR 1162, sec. 3 come from?
What constitutes a “failing system” and who is, under our Constitutional form of “local control”, responsible for such failure even if caused by politician and lobbyists who have a choke-hold on the purse strings of those systems? AND, just who are these “politicians and lobbyist”, anyway? How are they controlling purse strings? AND, why aren’t you and your colleagues controlling these “politicians and lobbyist”, you have the authority to do so; or are you implying that you don’t want to control them?
Additionally, if you allege that “judicial activism” thwarts the will of the people, then why not bring impeachment proceedings if those judges willfully and intentionally misapplied the Rule of Law? The Legislative Court does still have that authority, ya know (even though you refuse to use it)!
Consider, too, that the US Supreme Court held in Brown v. Bd of Ed. that "… in the field of public education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” How does this HR not violate that holding since the implication of this HR is that it will establish schools unequal to the common schools?
Why do you politicians always complicate things? Just figure how much it should reasonably take to provide a child with a quality education and establish a system where that amount of money would follow the child … to whatever school its parents would want it to attend, and establish by law the basic rules and standards for those institutions to adhere.
Thanks for any thoughts on this, even if it is carefully crafted deceptive advocacy.
As I said in an earlier comment, the charter school amendment is not a silver bullet or a fool-proof fix-all that will cure our educational ailments. Funding is an issue--it's a discussion and a debate that will result in legislators deciding which items get funded and which items are left on the cutting room floor. As president Obama ironically said in last Wednesday's debate: "Budgets matter." However, the debate will not be a tug-of-war between traditional public school funding and charter school funding--that protection of per-pupil funding in traditional schools is written into the amendment's implementing language. The push/pull will be between charter school funding and other areas of the state budget, like economic development (there's a legitimate argument about educational improvement being a form of economic development--I refer you to the very persuasive article above). :)
The selection process will remain as it was for the ten years that the state charter program existed before being halted by the state Supreme Court last year. Local boards will keep the right of first refusal on charter school applications. The funding mechanism for charters is much more advantageous to schools approved by the local board, so charters would naturally seek that method of approval first. If they are denied locally, then they can apply to the state board for approval. This is an area that has created some confusion and I want to take a little more space to clarify it here: the State can charter schools now, but the Supreme Court decision, based on a completely erroneous reading of our state constitution, made funding those schools practically impossible. The charter school amendment simply reasserts the state's right to fund charter schools.
I don't believe there is one and only one right answer on education, whether the question is "What's wrong with it?" or "What can we do to fix it?" I do believe there is one univserally WRONG answer to both questions: "Nothing." Those who are most adamantly opposed to the charter school amendment have been intimately intertwined with the steady decline of education in Georgia and yet they offer no alternatives, no other solutions. It's obvious the status quo is not working in a lot of places across this state. The charter school amendment gives families in those places an opportunity for something better.
http://rn-t.com/view/full_story/20391106/article-EDITORIAL--Don-t-be-fooled?instance=news_page_lead_story
@appalucy: You are correct--in fact, in a previous draft of this column I pointed out that this is probably one of the few areas of policy where people as politically disparate as Barack Obama and Mitt Romney actually agree. The charge for the charter amendment has been co-lead by Democrats and Republicans in the House of Representatives. This is not a party issue--this is a concerned citizen issue.
@jwagdoc: First, charter schools spend less per pupil--which is part of the reason they have become so attractive to policy makers. Second, if students leave traditional schools for charters, the operating expense of the traditional schools will necessarily decrease, freeing up funds to be used elsewhere in the budeget. That is different that re-directing state funding on a per-pupil basis, a practice prohibited under the charter school amendment. Third, "for-profit" charters are specifically excluded in Section 3 of the amendment. The specific language provides, "that such state charter schools shall not include private, sectarian, religious, or for profit schools or private educational institutions." Fourth, local communities "veto" charters by not enrolling students in them. Charter schools are "options" for parents--they are not mandated. If a charter school fails to make good on promised results, parents will not send their children and the school's doors will close. Your concerns present good questions that were thoroughly hashed out in the legislative process that lead to the specific language in the charter school amendment.
I understand that funding needs will decrease as student population decreases in a failing school, but I am concerned about that. First of all, the decrease in cost will not be proportionate to the loss of students since fixed costs will not change. The building will stay the same size and require the same maintenance. The utilities will be used, etc etc.
Also, the change takes time. If for instance a school gets a poor rating on results and 10% of the parents move their children to charter schools and away from that failing school, are 10% of faculty, staff and administration terminated forthwith? I doubt it, meaning that we're paying the same amount of teachers (possibly teachers that should not be teaching) at the failing school PLUS the 10% increase in faculty, staff and administration at the charter school. Obviously just moving the same faculty and staff from the failing school to the charter school would not be a good solution.
Finally, will the selection process for charter schools be left up to local boards or will that be state regulated?
Thanks.