Politics
Congress Struggles to Replace No Child Left Behind
By Jazelle Hunt
NNPA Washington Correspondent
WASHINGTON (NNPA) – As Congress works toward a comprehensive education policy that will replace the Bush Administration’s No Child Left Behind, two different bills from the House and Senate are up for consideration.
No Child Left Behind expired in 2007 – the law was the last time the original Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) was renewed.
If either of the current proposals is signed into law in their current states, it could spell difficulties for Black and Brown children, according to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan.
“I always say that education is the civil rights issue of our time,” he said. “The next question we as a nation should be asking is whether Black children, Latino children…children around the nation – are they receiving the quality of education they need and deserve? And too often the honest answer is, not even close. There should be nothing political or ideological about this; this is about fighting for kids’ educational opportunity.”
Secretary Duncan believes that Congress’ resistance to federal oversight will weaken whatever law is passed. Neither the House’s Student Success Act (SSA) nor the Senate’s Every Child Achieves Act (ECAA) gives the Department of Education the authority to hold states accountable for educational outcomes, create national standards/mandates, or pass judgment on a state’s education system.
Also, neither bill closes the ESEA’s “comparability loophole” – a loophole that allows states to skimp on state and local funding for needy schools, forcing them to rely heavily on federal Title I money. As a result, high-poverty schools remain under-resourced and saddled with underpaid, inexperienced teachers, because the state won’t match the federal funds.
“Education will always be a primarily a local issue, but [there is] a clear federal role here on several levels. First of all, taxpayers…are putting billions of dollars out to states every year for poor children, for English language learners, for children with special needs,” Duncan said in an interview with the NNPA News Service. “And there’s no real accountability. Transparency by itself doesn’t change a kid’s opportunities.”
The similarities between the laws end there.
In general, the SSA seeks highly flexible public education by prohibiting almost all federal involvement, allowing states to create and rely on their own education plans instead. There are guidelines for what these plans must address, including a system to find and correct racial disparities, or deal with ineffective teachers. But the bill painstakingly avoids telling states how they should meet these guidelines.
A state can also create whatever curriculum it wants – as long as it includes at least math, literacy, and science, and state tests to go along with the curriculum. States would also be largely responsible for holding themselves accountable for their own strategies and all students’ academic success. The Department of Education would only be responsible for reviewing the states’ self-evaluations to make sure tax dollars aren’t misused. In that case, Secretary Duncan is only allowed to issue recommendations and public reports.
The SSA also includes a controversial “portability provision,” which would direct Title I funds wherever a low-income student is enrolled. Even a well-resourced public school or a private school could receive Title I funds if it has a single low-income student.
“House Republicans have chosen to take a bad bill and make it even worse,” Duncan said in a statement after the SSA was passed in the House. “This bill – which was passed in an entirely partisan fashion – represents a huge step backward for America’s students. They deserve better.”
The Senate’s ECAA attempts to provide state flexibility and more support than No Child Left Behind did, while still providing some federal guidelines. For example, while states would create their plans, the plans must be aligned with college entrance requirements or career/vocational education standards, and must include high standards for early childhood education programs, students with disabilities, and English language learners.
Under the bill, states are encouraged to use a variety of data in fostering and measuring student achievement, including projects, portfolios, and annual state exams. Both states and the Department of Education would share “best practices” from schools around the country.
The ECAA also sets aside funds solely for states to reward the best teachers and supports and interventions for less effective ones. Additionally, the state plans must distinguish between low-performing schools and those that need support for less-controllable factors, such as a high migrant student population.
Even the bill’s supporters have reservations, however. Last month, the Congressional Tri-Caucus, a coalition of the Black, Asian, and Latino Congressional caucuses, issued an open letter stating that while they appreciate the bill’s bipartisanship, it does not yet “do enough to protect the historically disadvantaged and vulnerable students the ESEA is intended to serve.”
A few amendments have been made since then, including guidelines for disabled students, increased access to STEM lessons and opportunities for “underrepresented” students, and better means of identifying and supporting homeless students.
Duncan hopes the final law will draw on best practices from school districts around the nation; cap the amount of time spent on standardized testing; close the comparability loophole; compel states to intervene and support the lowest-performing five percent of its schools; and grant the Department of Education Department the authority to implement and enforce these benchmarks.
The Senate will likely vote on a final version of the ECAA this week. When it does, key members of both chambers will have to find a way to combine their proposals and send one bill out for the President’s signature. If he rejects it, it’s back to the drawing board – or the ESEA just won’t be reauthorized anytime soon.
“Everyone has their opinions and debate is healthy and important. So I’ll just [reiterate], this is a civil rights law,” Duncan told the NNPA News Service. “This is fighting to increase equity and opportunity so that every child has chance at life. Educational opportunity has to be the equalizer in our nation, the one thing that will help equality the gap between the haves and have-nots.”
Activism
Oakland Post: Week of May 31 = June 6, 2023
The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of May 31 = June 6, 2023

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.
Activism
Community Opposes High Rise Development That Threatens Geoffrey’s Inner Circle
City Council chambers were full for the May 17 Planning Commission hearing, and almost all the 40 speakers who had signed up to make presentations talked about the importance of the Inner Circle as part of Oakland and Geoffrey Pete as a stalwart community and business leader who has served the city for decades.

By Ken Epstein
An outpouring of community supporters – young, old, jazz lovers, environmentalists and committed Oakland partisans – spoke out at a recent Planning Commission hearing to support Geoffrey Pete and his cultural center – The Inner Circle – an historic Oakland landmark whose future is threatened by a proposed skyscraper that out-of-town-developer Tidewater Capital wants to build in the midst of the city’s Black Arts Movement and Business District (BAMBD).
City Council chambers were full for the May 17 Planning Commission hearing, and almost all the 40 speakers who had signed up to make presentations talked about the importance of the Inner Circle as part of Oakland and Geoffrey Pete as a stalwart community and business leader who has served the city for decades.
The speakers argued passionately and persuasively, winning the sympathy of the commissioners, but were ultimately unsuccessful as the Commission unanimously approved the high-rise to be built either as a residential building or office tower on Franklin Street directly behind Geoffrey’s building.
Mr. Pete has said he would appeal the decision to the City Council. He has 10 days after the hearing to file an appeal on the office building. His appeal on the residential tower has already been submitted.
Mr. Pete said the Planning Department still has not published the boundaries of the BAMBD. “Tidewater’s applications and subsequent applications should not be approved until the Planning Department fully acknowledges the existence of the BAMBD,” he said.
“This (proposed) building poses a grave danger to the historic (Inner Circle) building next to it, arguably Oakland’s most meaningful historic building,” Pete said.
“We’re here to advocate for what’s best for the African American district and community that has gotten no representation, no advocacy, as of yet,” he said. “The (commission) is guilty, the City of Oakland is guilty, and Tidewater is guilty.”
One of the first speakers was Gwendolyn Traylor, known as Lady SunRise, who directly addressed the developers.
“With all due to respect to your business, it’s not a need of this community. I would like to ask you to reconsider the location …What is being (promised) here does not add to the healing of this community,” she said.
Naomi Schiff of the Oakland Heritage Alliance emphasized that Geoffrey’s Inner Circle is a treasure of Oakland’s history.
“Our first concern is the integrity of the historic district, in particular the former Athenian-Nile Club, now Mr. Pete’s equally historic venue, which has been the location of a great number of important community events,” she said. “It would not be OK with us if the integrity of the building were damaged in any way, no matter how much insurance (the developer bought) because it is very difficult to repair a historic building once it’s damaged.”
The Inner Circle was previously owned and operated by the Athenian-Nile Club, one of the Bay Area’s largest all-white-male exclusive private membership club, where politicians and power brokers closed back-room deals over handshakes and three martini lunches.
Cephus “Uncle Bobby X” Johnson pointed out that commissioners and the city’s Planning Department have “acknowledged that you went through the entire design review process without even knowing that the Black Arts Movement and Business District existed.”
The district was created in 2016 by City Council resolution. “At the heart of the opposition to this building is the desire to further the legacy of local Black entertainment and entrepreneurship exemplified by businesses like Mr. Pete’s … a historical landmark and venue (that serves) thousands of people who listen to jazz and other entertainment and hold weddings, receptions, and memorial services,” said Uncle Bobby.
This development is taking place within a context in which the “Black population in Oakland has decreased rapidly … because of the city’s concentration on building houses that are not affordable for people who currently live in Oakland,” he said.
John Dalrymple of East Bay Residents for Responsible Development said, “This project will result in significant air quality, public health, noise, and traffic impacts. He said the city has not adequately studied the (unmitigated) impacts of this project on the Black Arts Movement and Business District.
“This project is an example of what developers are being allowed to do when they don’t have to follow the law, and they don’t have to be sensitive to our city’s culture and values,” he said. The commission should “send a signal today that we will no longer be a feeding ground for the rich.”
Prominent Oakland businessman Ray Bobbitt told commissioners, “Any decision that you make is a contribution to the systemic process that creates a disproportionate impact on Black people. Please do yourself a favor, (and) rethink this scenario. Give Mr. Pete, who is a leader in our community, an opportunity to set the framework before you make any decision.”
Though the City Council created the BAMBD, the 2016 resolution was never implemented. The district was created to “highlight, celebrate, preserve and support the contributions of Oakland’s Black artists and business owners and the corridor as a place central historically and currently to Oakland’s Black artists and Black-owned businesses.”
The district was intended to promote Black arts, political movements, enterprises, and culture in the area, and to bring in resources through grants and other funding.
Activism
Community Meeting on Crime and Violence
Join Oakland City Councilmember Dan Kalb to discuss the uptick in crime and violence in District 1 and across Oakland. Representatives from the Oakland Police Department will be in attendance. This event will be held in-person and online.

Join Oakland City Councilmember Dan Kalb to discuss the uptick in crime and violence in District 1 and across Oakland. Representatives from the Oakland Police Department will be in attendance. This event will be held in-person and online.
Tuesday, May 30, 2023
6:30 p.m. – 8 p.m.
Oakland Technical H.S. Auditorium
300-340 42nd St.
Oakland, CA 94611
For more information, contact District 1 Chief of Staff Seth Steward: ssteward@oaklandca.gov, 510-238-7013.
-
Activism1 day ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 31 = June 6, 2023
-
Activism1 week ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 24 – 30, 2023
-
Activism2 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 17 – 23, 2023
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 10 – 16, 2023
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 3 – 9, 2023
-
Antonio Ray Harvey4 weeks ago
Reparations Task Force to Recommend “Genealogy Branch” to Prove Eligibility
-
Activism2 weeks ago
Rise in Abductions of Black Girls in Oakland Alarms Sex-Trafficking Survivors
-
Bay Area4 weeks ago
Alleged Drug Dealer Faces Felony Charges After Fentanyl Seize