” None of us is free until all of us are free.” Martin Luther King
Let me start by being very clear.
I am a patriot. I am a believer in the stated ideological foundations of the United States of America.
I am a believer, for instance, in the ideal of democracy.
synonyms: representative government · elective governmentPowered by OxfordDictionaries · © Oxford University Press\
Yes, good old-fashioned democracy. The governing by the whole population “typically through elected representatives.”
And when I, as an idealistic citizen of the United States of America, see situations that undermine democracy I get a wee bit upset.
With this context in mind, let me bring you up to date on the establishment and recommendations of the Coalition for the Future of Detroit Schoolchildren.
First of all, let’s go back to the ideal of democracy and the fact that this coalition is making recommendations to the Governor of the State of Michigan, Rick Snyder. Consider:
* That the democratically elected Detroit Board of Education, in exile since the imposition of a governor appointed (i.e., not democratically elected) emergency financial manager, did not have a say in the recommendations.
* That it is clear who did have a say- the members of the Coalition for the Future of Detroit Schoolchildren.
With all due respect, how were they picked?
Honestly, I’m not sure. Everywhere I search, news articles say this coalition was “created” or mysteriously “formed.”
Duh. We know the coalition was created, and that, as a result of this creation, it also was formed. So much for investigative journalism.
Who created it? The evidence suggests that it came from the Skillman Foundation. It’s important to note that a foundation has co-opted, intentionally or not, the task of what was formerly given to democratically elected governmental agencies. A foundation has somehow taken, been given, or had this task land its lap.
To me, as a believer in the democratic principles supposedly inherent in these United States, that is a problem.
The coalition has 5 co-chairs, and for the sake of my framing, as an example, I would like to focus on one of them, John Rakolta. Now, I don’t pretend to know John, his perspective or his intentions. In fact, I think it’s important to note that, given all of the evidence since his involvement with the coalition, it seems that he has been open-minded and fair. (See, for instance, his pointing out that the state is responsible for much of DPS’s debt accumulated while under the control of emergency management.) My gripe is not with John Rakolta, but with the usurpation of democracy that has placed John Rakolta as co-chair deciding the fate of public schooling in Detroit.
Rakolta is the white, very rich CEO of Walbridge Construction, a company that has been involved in a number of construction projects for the very poor, over 80% black Detroit Public Schools. On the surface, it seems that this might be a conflict of interest. On another level, the question comes to me, how does the CEO of a construction company (or anyone else for that matter) become a co-chair of this coalition? Who elected him? Is this how a democracy is supposed to function? According to the web-site of the Skillman foundation, the coalition is made up of, “…independent, diverse cross-section of Detroit leaders who came together to move swiftly to make recommendations for changes that will improve the city’s education system.” Who determined what a “Detroit leader” is? Who didn’t? Why is the decision-making process that has historically been made by elected school board members given over to unelected “Detroit leaders” as determined by a foundation?
Again, I have no perspective on the intentions of Rakolta or anyone else involved with this project. My question simply is, who put them in charge, and why do their recommendations trump the recommendations of others in a functioning democracy? Why do these chosen but unelected officials have more say than the fairly elected representatives of the citizens and parents in Detroit?
In trying to get at some answers it may get a bit complicated, so hang with me.
Let’s start by conducting a thought experiment.
Imagine that your local community (or use Grosse Pointe, or Birmingham, or Bloomfield as potential examples) had their locally controlled, democratically elected school board replaced first by an emergency financial manager, and then by a group of self-appointed citizens. How might that be accepted?
My guess? Not so well.
So why is it ok in a city that is 80% black with 40% living in poverty?
I’m stuck with the conclusion that it is ok because that city is 80% black, with 40% living in poverty.
Oh, did I play the race card? I’m sorry.
Let me be more subtle, then, and quote the all too common sentiment of Gary Naeyaert, the head of the Great Lakes Education Project, a pro school choice advocacy group, as printed in the Gongwer News Source,
“Enough is enough, and it’s about time we recognized that the Detroit Public Schools are academically and financially bankrupt, and they’ve lost the privilege of educating children in Detroit,” Gary Naeyaert, executive director of GLEP, said in a statement.” (Emphasis added)
I’m guessing, then, that democracy is a privilege afforded to some, and not to others. Coincidentally, the places where that privilege is denied is in cities that are overwhelming black and poor, with eroded infrastructures that make financial and academic issues exceedingly difficult to address. In other words, because of the organizing principles of poverty and race, because of the increased financial and academic stresses caused by such circumstances, despite the heroic efforts of many involved in working in such stressed conditions (to be fair, many of whom served as members of the Skillman coalition), all driven by the false narrative of “failing schools,” “they” deserve to have the “privilege” of democracy removed. It seems “they” haven’t earned it in these United States. Such an attitude might be likened to colonialism- that old idea that, since “they” obviously can’t make their own decisions, “we” need to “help them.”
Now many people will say that my analysis simply isn’t realistic. That, in the real world, such a lens simply isn’t politically practical. That it simply isn’t realistic to expect people to think this way. Many people will say, what’s the beef? Look at the results- the coalition actually made three huge, and, to me, surprise recommendations- to have the state of Michigan assume much of DPS’s debt, to dissolve the controversial EAA, and to return power back to the DPS board of education (kind of).
My problem, again, starts with the undemocratic nature of this process itself. It is a process that wouldn’t be allowed, at this time at least, in other communities.
Let’s be honest. Democracy is for some people.
And it also is a process that concluded with a recommendation that retains control in an entity that is outside the auspices of democracy. It is returning some power back to the board, but, in spite of the rhetoric, much of the actual and deciding power is recommended to stay with another newly created coalition, essentially creating a portfolio system.
“Regarding the coordination and oversight across the education sectors
- The State establish a new, lean board/legislative body, the Detroit Education Commission, to coordinate and rationalize citywide education functions for all Detroit schoolchildren, with members appointed by the Mayor. The DEC will set and hold all schools to the same performance standard.”
In other words, the DPS school board will work under the umbrella and auspices of the Detroit Education Commission. So yes, democracy is reinstated, at least, you know, kind of. Right?
In a very real, very practical way, democracy is only for some people.
Honestly, I have no illusions that this will go away. I have no illusions that Governor Snyder will reinstate democracy in Detroit.
But I do think we should all be asking ourselves an important question:
Is this what we should accept in these United States?