Jackson Free Press

Rep. Chuck Espy's voice cracked as he jabbed his left index finger into the podium so forcefully that it's a miracle he didn't break the appendage. "I have watched this great body rise to some of its greatest points, and I've seen tensions flare and rise to levels I've never seen. But when a member is touched in any way, it is unacceptable," railed Espy, a Democrat from Clarksdale.

Espy took the point of personal privilege after the House Education Committee refused to pass along the charter-schools bill, which the Republican leadership--and Espy--wanted to be the hallmark achievement of the legislative session, to the full House.

After the 15-16 vote against the charter-schools bill, SB 2401, members emerged from the second-floor committee room to charter-school opponents' cheers. Amidst the applause, a female Central Mississippi Tea Party supporter of the bill shoved Rep. Reecy Dickson, D-Macon, who voted against the bill, according to The Clarion-Ledger, which did not name the woman.

"I cannot sit here and watch a woman--especially a black female--be disrespected in this body," Espy said powerfully to an uncomfortably and uncharacteristically hushed House chamber.

Dickson declined to press charges with the Capitol police or talk publicly about the incident, but did release a statement through a spokesperson. "We can have disagreements without being disagreeable; but, we should never let our disagreements turn into intimidation," she said.

Sen. Kenneth Wayne Jones, interim chairman of the Legislative Black Caucus, also put out a statement in which he called for an investigation "into this hateful act."

"Not only are acts of hostility and intimidation toward public officials illegal, they are detrimental to the very function of a democratic society," the Canton Democrat wrote.

House Education Committee Chairman Rep. John Moore, R-Brandon, said the incident was the result of both sides being fired up over the debate. "It's sad it happened, but I understand the passion on both sides of the issue," Moore told the Jackson Free Press Friday. "As many (charter-schools opponents) as there were, if that bill had passed, you would have seen some aggression the other way."

As for the apparent momentary defeat of the bill, Moore describes it as a mere hiccup. "We will have a good charter-school law eventually," he said. Gov. Phil Bryant has threatened to extend the legislative calendar and call a special session to force lawmakers to give him what he wants on the issue. In the meantime, everyone awaits attempts to insert the failed measure's language into an existing education bill to keep it alive.

That the Legislature would pass a charter-schools bill this session seemed like a slam dunk when each of the state's top Republican leaders expressed a desire to see it passed. When the bill that flew through the Senate met a roadblock, surprisingly, of Republicans, most observers assumed the holdouts would fall into place and tow the party line.

So what went wrong? The conventional thinking was that a lot of it had to do with Milton Kuykendall, the Republican elected superintendent of the DeSoto County School District, who made no secret of his hostility to the charter schools bill. The DeSoto school district is the largest in the state and the county's largest employer.

In a phone interview, Kuykendall said he would support a charter schools bill that prohibited for-profit companies and virtual schools from entering the state, sets up pilot programs in poorly performing areas, and establishes the Mississippi State Board of Education as sole authorizing body new charters. He also wants entities setting up the new charter schools to have an established track record of success.

"For something that's so unproven, baby steps should be taken," Kuykendall said.

Rankin County's Dr. Lynn Weathersby, who was unavailable to comment as of press time on Tuesday, is also rumored to have wanted to see the charter-schools bill fail. Weathersby's brother, Tom, sits on the House Education Committee and voted no on charter schools.

Moore believes many superintendents don't want the competition. "It does them no good at all to help the low-performing districts to move up," Moore said.

Moore said lawmakers who voted against the bill, which exempts high academic-achieving schools, represent areas that would have been off-limits to charter schools anyway.

"I can't find an argument that sounds logical to me. They're not motivated to help those at the bottom," Moore said.

Rachel Canter, executive director of pro-charter schools nonprofit Mississippi First, said the debate just goes to show that there is no political ideology of education reform.

"The letter behind your name isn't as important as who has power and sway in your own community," she said. "Ed reform makes very strange bedfellows sometimes."

Previous Comments

ID

167594

Comment

Moore is Wrong... I don't think for one minute that school districts wanted to see this bill fail because they didn't want poorly performing districts to not improve. Those district officials, for the most part, are more intelligent and reasonable than that. On the other hand, I think that they recognized that the enabling legislation was poorly written and if passed, would have caused even more problems rather than solutions.

Author

833WMaple

Date

2012-04-11T11:11:45-06:00

ID

167599

Comment

I wonder is the charter school lobby pushing so hard for the charter schools to be in "successful" districts for an opportuntiy to open charters in better "markets"? According to this edweek article ( http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rural_education/2012/01/the_rural_challenge_in_developing_charter_schools.html ) Charter schools as an alternative to low performing rural schools is a two edged sword at best, mainly because the economics don't support them. If the argument in MS is that charters would help low performing districts, most of which are in rural areas, and charters have shown to be quite a risk in providing an effective alternative for the students there, then why the republican hard sell for them in the first place? Even moreso now, why the hard sell for them in "successful" school districts? The article highlights that Desoto and Rankin Supts. wanted to have certain requiremetns for the charters, namely good oversight (from the MDE), high standards, non-profit companies and limited penetration, all of which are bad for charter business. I can't understand why the repubs are willing to sink their charter school "prize" law to try and suit private for profit charter companies. But it appears to be the case. If charter schools offer a better option for parents and students, then why not concede the other details. Must be a powerful charter lobby.

Author

Renaldo Bryant

Date

2012-04-12T11:07:25-06:00

ID

167600

Comment

I am also a little perturbed by Rachel Canter and MS 1st for their support. While I am passionate and understand the dire straits many rural parents have with no choice of quality schools, most of those parents won't have a choice even if a charter school comes to their community. Charters are highly selective when it comes to who they chose to allow to matriculate. They may allow any student to enroll, but they "thin the herd" very quickly. If there is any inkling that the student doesn't respond favorably to the program, back to the original school they go. No SPED, No ELL, and few differentiated interventions for academics or behavior. And what the students will go back to is even worse than what they had before, due to the per- pupil funding being less at the original school due to the charter. Rep. Espy touts West Helena KIPP alot, and they do good work. But West Helena Schools are still struggling, and the KIPP there only enrolls over 500 of Helena's over 4200 students, and the KIPP draws from 3 other communities besides West Helena. I just do not see why any district that is rural, or severely cash strapped, would see a charter school as a good alternative.

Author

Renaldo Bryant

Date

2012-04-12T11:24:02-06:00

ID

167601

Comment

Rural schools only? Ha, JPS is about to lose it's accreditation...

Author

RobbieR

Date

2012-04-12T12:46:40-06:00

ID

167602

Comment

Ha, JPS is about to lose it's accreditation... So what school/district educated you, Robbie?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2012-04-12T13:06:35-06:00

ID

167604

Comment

Donna, I commented a few months back where I was educated. I'm sure you can pull it up. But fwiw, a large portion of it was JPS, that wasn't on the cusp.

Author

RobbieR

Date

2012-04-12T13:47:24-06:00

ID

167605

Comment

But yea, let's discuss where I went to school instead of these numbers: Elementary Schools (33) Star: 2 High Performing: 7 Successful: 6 Academic Watch: 8 Low Performing: At risk of failing: 10 Failing: Middle Schools (9) Star: High Performing: Successful: 1 Academic Watch: 6 Low Performing At risk of failing:2 Failing High Schools (8) Star: High Performing: Successful: 1 Academic Watch: 5 Low Performing At risk of failing: 2 Failing % of total schools at Academic Watch or below: 66% % of elementary schools at Academic Watch or below: 55% % of middle & high schools at Academic Watch or below: 88% Bailey Magnet: 74% (68%) Callaway: 59% (50) Forest Hill: 56%(49%) Jim Hill: 66% (59%) Lanier: 56% (54%) Murrah: 74% (69%) Provine: 49% (38%) Wingfield: 50% (36%)

Author

RobbieR

Date

2012-04-12T13:55:17-06:00

ID

167606

Comment

That last group is graduation numbers, with males in parenthesis.

Author

RobbieR

Date

2012-04-12T14:12:21-06:00

ID

167607

Comment

Robbie, I suspect every person reading this knows JPS has challenges. Some of them, like you ("ha"), think it's funny. Most of us, I bet, are educated enough on our education history in Jackson (and the unfunded mandates of No Child Left Behind) to know why the district is so challenged. Some of us even know that Frank Melton's school-board choices devastated this district and set a lot of crap in action that takes some time to get fixed. The reason I asked about your education is that I always find it ironic when someone as prone to errors in writing as you are come on here and start sounding all uppity about public education. You don't seem to know the difference between a possessive and a contraction (it's vs. its). And this sentence makes no sense at all: But fwiw, a large portion of it was JPS, that wasn't on the cusp. It's not an actual sentence; it's a comma splice. And I have no idea what you just said. Cusp of what?! I don't usually point this stuff out, but I can't resist when someone who said "ha" about JPS' accreditation problems sounds so damn illiterate.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2012-04-12T14:14:30-06:00

ID

167608

Comment

I want to gracefully point out that JPS clearly did not start doing this bad until Edwards was hired. Most of these failures can be attributed to his poor leadership, lack of management ability, & inability to paint a vision for the district, and the list goes on. He didn't inherit these problems/he CREATED them. The accreditation problem happened under his watch, and that deals with special education.

Author

833WMaple

Date

2012-04-12T14:16:41-06:00

ID

167609

Comment

We're on a website commenting. If I throw an extra apostrophe or a typo, my humblest apologies, because by all means, that's the most important thing. The "ha" was an interjection. Interjection - In grammar, an interjection or exclamation is a word used to express an emotion or sentiment on the part of the speaker. I think I accomplished that. My sentiment was that Renaldo needed to be aware that it's not just rural schools in trouble. It's public schools in our own backyard. Hopefully my illiteracy didn't shine through on the above message.

Author

RobbieR

Date

2012-04-12T14:30:54-06:00

ID

167610

Comment

"That wasn't on the cusp" - phrase describing the status of JPS not being on the cusp of losing accreditation when I attended. #uppityRobbie :)

Author

RobbieR

Date

2012-04-12T14:33:14-06:00

ID

167614

Comment

The Republican agenda is the same as in any other arena - give rich people more money by forcing people to buy products and services from private businesses instead of lower-priced government services. It is why they cut funding to education and do other nasty tricks to get public education to fail. It is why they 'private army' mercenaries to do some Military work instead of using soldiers. It is why they undermine and undercut social security, the postal service and any number of government programs and functions. They want to be able to make a profit from people who have no other choices left.

Author

BobbyKearan

Date

2012-04-13T10:31:19-06:00

ID

167616

Comment

The Republican agenda is the same as in any other arena - give rich people more money by forcing people to buy products and services from private businesses instead of lower-priced government services. @Bobby Kearan~ I think you are describing the individual mandate in Obamacare. I would think you, of all people, would understand that a charter school is not a private school at all.

Author

WMartin

Date

2012-04-13T13:05:41-06:00

ID

167618

Comment

WMartin - one would have though, huh? I was thinking wrong there... Apparently I have been confusing Charter Schools with past School Vouchers proposals. I had to Google "charter schools" to clear things up. Still, charter schools may allow private corporations to manage the school and since "The rules and structure of charter schools depend on state authorizing legislation," I am terrified of what nuttery the Republicans would institute. (Like required Bible Study classes, damaging 'abstinence only' courses, Intelligent Creation instead of evolution and other nonsense) Also, "Charter applicants may include [snip] in some states, for-profit corporations. Wisconsin, California, Michigan, and Arizona allow for-profit corporations to manage charter schools." Since "Kuykendall said he would support a charter schools bill that prohibited for-profit companies and virtual schools from entering the state, sets up pilot programs in poorly performing areas, and establishes the Mississippi State Board of Education as sole authorizing body new charters," I think it is easy to assume, perhaps even accurately, that the bill that was proposed allowed for-profit companies to charter and run schools. So, despite my admitted confusion (its been a hard day), the basic premise stands. I do realize that Kuykendall is a Republican and I am shocked, but pleased, by his opposition to for-profit corporations controlling Public Education. Maybe he is the exception that proves the rule? If a Charter Schools bill like Kuykendall proposed were to pass, I would probably be interested in helping set one up. (But would hope kids could choose to attend classes virtually - that would be great for homeschooling and other kids!) I would love to see my proposal for Fiscal Education classes included!

Author

BobbyKearan

Date

2012-04-13T14:09:06-06:00