Written and edited by Norm Scott:
EDUCATE! ORGANIZE!! MOBILIZE!!!
Three pillars of The Resistance – providing information on current ed issues, organizing activities around fighting for public education in NYC and beyond and exposing the motives behind the education deformers. We link up with bands of resisters. Nothing will change unless WE ALL GET INVOLVED IN THE STRUGGLE!
Over 150 retirees attended the press conference on Monday protesting the attempt to move 250K NYC municipal retirees out of medicare into privatized insurance plans (remember how well privatizing school systems via charters has worked out).
Here's the video of the entire event. Excellent speakers and great specially written songs - Imagine No Health Care --
It was a quite a success with about 150 people
attending including a large and loud group of members from the DC 37-
Retiree Association. Their President Ed Hysyk and Vice President Neil
Frumkin spoke. Many PSA retirees were there and of course, UFT retirees
were out in force. Probably some other unions were in the crowd.
Other speakers included David
Kotelchuck from the Social Safety Net Committee of PSC-CUNY, Mariana
Gaston from the CSA, Dr. Alec Pruchnicki, a board member for Physicians
for National Health Care, Denise Rickles and Bennett Fischer, UFT
Retiree Advocates, and Naomi Zewde, Asst.Professor from CUNY and
advocate for the New York Health Act.
We did get some media attention
which is no small feat in NYC. The Chief News came as did WBAI. WPIX-11
also covered it and had a short clip on the Monday night news. We heard
that Channel 4 reported it and there might have been other media as
well.
Our incredible Sound Man Joel
Breitbart not only brought his system but he recorded the entire
Conference. And the People's Dave Lippman was an added bonus. He
composed a few songs just for this occasion and performed them for the
crowd.
Ann Ambia, a DC 37 Retiree,
took pictures which we have posted on our RA Facebook page. There were
other people with cameras and we look forward to getting more photos so
we can share them with you.
I've been sleptical about Morales but will get deeper into those weeds soon. The charter industry has evil intent -- to destroy public schools and offer them up to private industry. Any candidate who takes money from them is suspect.
What
campaign other than Stringer has no charter money? That alone tells you
something. Charters are anti union - 95% non union. And anti public
schools. The goal is to charterize which is privatize the nation and
eliminate teacher unions. Like they did in New Orleans and fired mostly
black union members. Funded by billionaires. Here in nyc coalitions
have managed to hold the line and charters are a dirty word in some
quarters. Even the Uft has been weak and we formed a pre More group
called GEM to engage them in battle and push the Uft. The charter cap is
what’s holding them back and protecting your jobs. They are spreading
money around to candidates for that purpose. The honorable thing to do
is refuse their money. The BloomKlein admin was a despicable neo liberal
operation and Disnevtook a high position in that admin which is what
caused my initial reaction. But let’s give her a benefit of the doubt
though I have tried to discern an explanation. She also worked for New
Visions and during the school closing wars of attacks on poor
communities they were on the wrong side. To watch kids crying and
begging for their schools to remain open was searing. I have hours of
tape of those hearings and we used that footage which also included
abused parents who left charters crying in our interview in our movie.
@eapelosi asked a meaningful question
@eapelosi asked a meaningful question. What campaign other than Stringer has no charter money? That alone tells you something. Charters are anti union - 95% non union. And anti public schools. The goal is to charterize which is privatize the nation and eliminate teacher unions. Like they did in New Orleans and fired mostly black union members. Funded by billionaires. Here in nyc coalitions have managed to hold the line and charters are a dirty word in some quarters. Even the Uft has been weak and we formed a pre More group called GEM to engage them in battle and push the Uft. The charter cap is what’s holding them back and protecting your jobs. They are spreading money around to candidates for that purpose. The honorable thing to do is refuse their money. The BloomKlein admin was a despicable neo liberal operation and Disnevtook a high position in that admin which is what caused my initial reaction. But let’s give her a benefit of the doubt though I have tried to discern an explanation. She also worked for New Visions and during the school closing wars of attacks on poor communities they were on the wrong side. To watch kids crying and begging for their schools to remain open was searing. I have hours of tape of those hearings and we used that footage which also included abused parents who left charters crying in our interview in our movie
In
a crowded field of candidates in the Democratic primary, only two are
opposed to expanding the number of charters in a city with hundreds of
them: Scott Stringer and Maya Wiley.
The
other candidates support more charters at a time when the national
Democratic Party seems to realize that charters are a key component of
the rightwing’s longtime goal of privatization of the public schools.
Charter advocates started a PAC for Eric Adams. Andrew Yang supports charter schools and
is advised by former Mayor Bloomberg’s advisor Bradley Tusk (Bloomberg
was very pro-charter). Financier Ray McGuire’s campaign relies on
Bloomberg’s chancellor Joel Klein for advice (his wife is the campaign
manager).
Betsy
DeVos loves charter schools, so does the anti-union Walton family and
Charles Koch. Across the country, Republican legislators and governors
are passing legislation to expand charters and vouchers, while Democrats
put public schools first.
Those
ties are now producing an outpouring of contributions from the charter
industry. And Kathryn Garcia, who was endorsed by the New York Times and
the New York Daily News, declared recently that she wants more charter schools in the city and will ask the legislature to raise the cap.
There
are currently 267 charter schools in the city. Of 1.1 million public
schools in the city, 88% are enrolled in the long-neglected public
schools. Ironically, by handing off more students to charter schools,
the mayor (whoever it may be) is acknowledging his or her own
incompetence as leader of the city’s schools.
At
the beginning of the campaign, Scott Stringer was the favorite. He
served in the legislature, and he is currently the City Comptroller,
meaning he has detailed knowledge of the budget and the city’s massive
bureaucracy. The United Federation of Teachers endorsed him, along with
many progressive groups. But then a woman stepped forward to say that 20
years ago, when they were both single, he groped her. Many of those who
endorsed Stringer withdrew their endorsements. Although I have a
tendency to believe women in these situations, I think it’s unfair to
discredit a candidate based on an unverified allegation. Stringer has
been a candidate many times, and the accuser remained silent.
The
charter industry has demonstrated time and again that it has the deep
pockets to buy elections. What it has not bought is academic success.
Someone posted this info -- the battle is between Aetna and Emblem --- we don't know which group the city or MLC favor -- I assume the city favors the one that will screw us the most. Was it our pressure? Not likely according to sources but on the other hand the pressure might have firmed up the MLC a bit to resist to some extent, though they are still going ahead.
I am guessing the city wants Aetna which is probably worse than Emblem, which at least many of us have dealt with. Isn't Aetna our dental plan, which sucks? I don't really remember and am too lazy to look it up.
The problem is it now goes to arbitration and the fact is we get screwed either way.
The UFT has apparently assigned people to monitor social media for
critics and to respond in kind defending UFT leadership positions. Do
they get paid extra? Maybe they need a union. DOE employees have been hounded for their social media posts even when off time.
Do people who work for us (supposedly) have the right to engage in attacks on UFT members who are critical of union policies? By virtue of being paid a salary - and not an insubstantial salary -- is part of their job to defend the UFT leadership on social media?
UFT officials at work
It would seem so as the other day I noticed on certain FB teacher chats a battle over some policy of other in which people who clearly work for the UFT attacking a critic, with one calling the critic anti-union. And when I looked at the time, it was clearly during working hours for UFT staff -- which for many is until 6PM.
If they were working for the DOE they would be in the rubber room. Maybe our union needs a rubber room.
But what if they do this after working hours? Do they have free speech even if working for the UFT? An interesting question and I generally come down on the side of they do --- but I question if trolling for the leadership is really free speech.
Trolling means you are following a line --- talking points - we know they are because they are all so similar. Thus if the leadership says night is day, they all put on their shades. And if they reverse position they adamantly defend the position they were recently attacking.
Remember the common core and how punchy Mike defended it, only to abandon that defense not long after?
So is it really free speech when you are being handed a script?
Yes, a vote for us is a vote for stopping some of the crap that is going on.
Monday will be a rare day where I will venture forth from my fortress to join other municipal retirees, many from the UFT, in a press conference to focus attention on the move toward moving us from public Medicare to privatized Medicare Advantage, the very wrong direction our union should be going in.
I helped write more detailed info piece. click here.
This advisory, which I helped put together (this entire process had been a real learning experience for this old dog) is going out to the press.
WHAT: NYC municipal union retirees gather to save
Medicare and protest Municipal Labor Committee/NYC attempt to force them out of
Medicare into privatized Medicare Advantage plan.
WHEN:Monday, May 24, 2021
TIME: 12 Noon
WHO: Retiree Advocate/UFT, a caucus of
retirees in the United Federation of Teachers and allies in other municipal
unions and supporters defend our ability to remain on Medicare and reject
attempts to move us to a privatized plan.
WHERE:Park Row/Centre St. outside
City Hall Park by the 4/5/6 City Hall/Brooklyn Bridge Subway Station
DEMANDS:
A moratorium on any change to existing Medicare plan
NO
to privatization of government managed Medicare
Transparency on all negotiations with decision-making from all members
The
Metropolitan Labor Council (MLC), consisting of a number of unions, including
the UFT, and the NYC Office of Labor Relations are in the final stages of
negotiations to move 250,000 municipal workers currently enrolled in government-managed
Medicare into privately-managed Medicare Advantage with inherent disadvantages:
·High administrative costs
·Profit motive
·Excessive executive salaries
·Restrictions on patient services
We condemn
unions’ willingness to move away from public to privatization of
government-manages Medicare. Supposed savings can only come on the backs of
retirees. Stop the sell! Save traditional Medicare for NYC retirees!
To clear up a bit of confusion for some. While we whistle while we
work we are under a private plan which continues when we retire - until
we reach 65 when we go onto Medicare for 80% of our health care - I
haven't heard any complaints and 98% of doctors take it. The other 20% co-pay is still privately managed.
Before reaching 65 we generally had a choice of GHI where we have more freedom to
choose our doctors and a more restricted HIP plan where your doctors
have to be part of the network and you need permissions to go to
specialists. Some are very happy with HIP.
And the UFT leadership has used the fact that we have had privately
managed care as a way to attack us for making a mountain out of a
molehill. We are not.
Neo-lib Dems like Clinton wanted to save money on our backs and in the 90s allowed private insurance to offer Medicare type plans on their own to compete with Medicare -- with the obvious aim of killing Medicare off altogether. This causes some confusion for people hitting 65 and I get calls all the time about what to do, upon with I ask my wife who managed medical billing in a large hospital for decades who then shouts - tell them NO - stick with Medicare.
Funny, but as recently as March when a Retiree Advocate member went for a meeting at the UFT they were being told the same thing -- stay away from Medicare Advantage plans. Some are scams in essence.
So low and behold as we are in the final stages of the UFT retiree chapter election, we begin to hear that the Municipal Labor Committee, where Mulgrew is VP, is about to announce a forced move out of Medicare into a MedADV plan and people are reprising our youth in the 60s:
A vote for Retiree Advocate is a vote to protect your health plan.
Ballots are out and here is the chance for retirees to send the UFT leadership a message that they are not happy with the way secret negotiations have taken place to push a quarter million municipal union members out of the public Medicare and into a privatized Medicare Adv program.
Numbers count -- Retiree Advocate had 450 people register for its webinar a few weeks ago -- UFT leaders took notice.
The same with this vote -- the more we get the better the chance to influence the leaders. No, we don't expect to win but a serious improvement on our usual 20% will serve notice not to tamper with retiree benefits, especially since Unity Caucus uses retirees to hold on to power. Even a 10% shift in this election might cause a shift in next year's general UFT election. If Mulgrew totals every dropped below 70% of retirees, the UFT elections become more possible for the opposition.
In response to the health care issue:
RA PRESS CONFERENCE ON MEDICARE CHANGES
MONDAY MAY 24 12 NOON
LOCATION: PARK ROW NEAR CITY HALL ACROSS FROM B'KLYN BRIDGE
Numbers count there too even if only a press conference where usually 30 people show - Imagine if a couple of hundred showed up -- that would scare the hell out if Unity -- so if you are free on Monday -- see u there.
We have an amazing list of 130 candidates, including UFT activists and superstars going back a half century - some of whom I didn't speak to for decades. OY! Strange bedfellows, indeed. You should see some comments on the Retiree Advocate listserve. I love open debate which you can't find in too many places in today's world, both left and right.
Why so many candidates? We could have run 300.
We are voting on a retiree chapter leader, ten officers, a 25 member retiree ex board (not to be confused with the regular UFT Ex Bd), and 300 delegates to the Delegate Assembly - another key element of Unity control. It's winner take all so even if we got 20% we get no delegates or ex bd members.
Taxation (dues) without representation
So we are entitled morally and democratically to 20% of the delegates - 60 - and don't think having 60 retired activists in the DA wouldn't have an impact. And of course Unity will never give. But our voters get no representation at all at the DA. We need to throw the tea bags at the retiree meetings into the ocean. But this time we asked Unity for a measly 5 delegates. And of course they said no --- all their 300 positions were filled.
Unity delegate banned for vote at DA
But then we found out that Unity delegate Dave Pecoraro who blew up the April DA by opposing Unity endorse Corey Johnson and was one of the 300 that morning, was tossed off the Unity slate - past the deadline for submission - after the DA -- supposedly at Mulgrew's orders. He Mulgrew -- I'll take Dave's place.
Unity even cheats on leaflet enclosed with ballot -- prints RA on cheap paper
Did you notice our leaflet that came with the ballot -- went out to all 70,000 retirees. The Unity leaflet in on yellow heavier bond paper, while ours is on cheap white paper --- but I still like ours better -- and I modestly claim to have played a major role in producing it. And I loved the collaborative effort working within the RA Organizing committee. The leaflet reflects our general leftist positions but not over the top with the usual rhetoric -- I am making war on leftist rhetoric - though some may have slipped through. We have an article on why unions shouldn't opposed universal health care, a move the money from defense spending article and a stock transfer tax article.
The last time our contract addressed class size was over 50 years ago. Now money has come through to do so and you might be scratching your head as to why the
UFT leadership is not doing more to support moves in that direction. You know my theory -- that they pay lip service but fundamentally they are ed deformers and don't have a deep belief in small class size -- I know, my theory is pretty controversial, but over the years the UFT leaders have supported many ed deform underpinnings:
mayoral control
charter schools
closing so-called "failed" schools based on high stakes testing
high stakes testing itself
the "good" teacher more important than class size -- as if the number of students in a class has no impact on the relative quality of the teacher and the nature of teaching itself.
Well, I'll get off my soapbox and let Leonie (who I do not believe agrees with my analysis above) talk and ask for your support for the class size bill in the state legislature.
Dear Norm: It would be great if you could reach out to UFT members and ask them to:
send a letter to their legislators asking them to support S.6296/ A. 7447, which would update and renew NYC’s commitment to implement a five-year class size reduction plan.
If
there are any who live or work in Sen. Liu’s district (generally D25
and D26) it would be great if they could also contact me at leoniehaimson@gmail.com
No sooner had I become overwhelmed by the corpulent body of journalism
about Liz Cheney as some beacon of moral clarity than I began to feel
besieged by dissents about what a wretched opportunist she really is. -- Frank Bruni
May 12: Cheney just lost her leadership position. Who gives a shit? Well, the liberal media does, which exposes how shallow they are.
Let's face it - Liz Chaney and her dad are despicable. No heroes to me. As are the Bushes. As is the entire anti-Trump Lincoln Republican wing of the party. What does it say that the equally despicable Elise Stefanik is way more liberal than Chaney?
It's nice to see Frank Bruni and Maureen Dowd agree with me in their op eds in last Sunday's NY Times, May 8, 2021. The headlines say it all.
But I've been watching with interest. Why did she escalate her war with Trump? Yesterday she made another speech on the floor - and many Republicans walked out. These are calculated moves.
Certainly not because of moral fervor or adherence to democracy - remember Iraq! No, it's a calculated attempt to take back the party. And it's not a totally dumb move.
Trump has 70% of the party. But he doesn't have 30%. And that 30% is the key. Last week I heard an anti-Trumper on Morning Joe say something is coming and today I think it dropped in the NYT:
“This is us saying that a group of more than 100 prominent Republicans
think that the situation has gotten so dire with the Republican Party
that it is now time to seriously consider whether an alternative might
be the only option,” he said.
We know that third parties can't really win. But I don't see that as the aim. They can't win primaries with 30% but if they run in the general elections and pull 25-30% of the vote, they can help Democrats win, which they view as temporary until they regain control of the Party, which they feel they will as Trump support begins to slip -- and it will if they start losing elections.
And even internal polls show that Trump support is slipping but they are afraid to announce that.
And no worries, the Bush/Chaney wing has plenty of money, especially from corporations which will rush to help them take back control.
So imagine in battleground states the Real Republicans taking away even 15% of the vote (and some of that may come from Dems if their candidate is too far left).
They will pick their spots. And it will be interesting to see if they will get this going in time for the 2022 midterms -- they need to start now. Or wait until the 2024 elections and run Chaney for president in key states.
Will it work? They understand that many in the party are with them but afraid of Trump because they don't think they can win without him. But if they start to lose with him, the feeling is the spell will be broken and by 2028 they will be in control again.
If one allegation, with shaky evidence, is enough to
short-circuit a political career, a new playbook is opened up, one
left-leaning Democrats must take into account when embarking on future
campaigns.... Ross Barkan
“I’m
very proud of that endorsement because of what Scott has done and what
he will do,” said Ms. Weingarten, the former president of the U.F.T. “I
think he’ll be a great mayor. Am I troubled by the allegations? Of course,” she said, adding, “I’m also a unionist who has dealt with false allegations.”... NY Times report , Eliza Shapiro
Most of Stringer’s Supporters Have Fled. Not the Teachers’ Union.
The United Federation of Teachers is boosting Mr. Stringer’s embattled campaign with an advertising blitz.
I don’t know what happened. But here’s what I do know. We cannot flourish
as a society if a single accusation out of the blue upends an election
overnight and ruins a 30-year career in politics. More information may
clarify matters, but as of now, we don’t have it. Love him or hate
him—and I spoke to people who consider Stringer arrogant and bullying,
as well as others who think he’s “sweet,” “clumsy,” and “nebbishy”—he’s
entitled to a more measured assessment, as are the voters of New York
City. It is shocking that so many political figures would abandon him so
quickly. Why did they do that?
The Nation is left-progressive, as are The Intercept and Krystal Ball, and they all have raised questions, as has Ross Barkan, over the rush to judgement.
Also interesting takeaways from the NYT article of support for Stringer, who is unlikely to win, yet the AFT/UFT are not backing away. The fact that Randi seems to be leading this local battle from the national stage and not Mulgrew shows us she is still pulling the strings. He isn't even mentioned in the article.
Shapiro, not exactly teachers' favorite ed reporter made a fair point (finally):
Some parents and mayoral candidates
have accused the union of slowing the pace of school reopenings in New
York over the last year. But with the majority of families still
choosing to learn remotely, there is no evidence of a significant public
backlash against the union.
The fact is when you look at all the other candidates, the UFT doesn't really have an alternative path to Stringer, though Wiley is favored by some in the second tier leadership. Morales, favored by MORE Caucus, is too left for the union. Ironically, I recently heard a left wing NYC tennant organizer trashing her left creds because she spent a decade running an agency of a major landlord. I also often point out that Morales apparently worked in the Joel Klein anti-union administration.
Leading candidates Yang and Adams are now viewed by the UFT as existential threats. Yang is Bloomberg light as evidenced by Bradley Tusk's control of his campaign. And Adams is clearly a Charter industry clone, as evidenced by Jenny Sedlis, my old sparring partner from Success Academy, taking a leave of absense from running the ani-union Students First to form an Adams PAC.
I speculated in my report on The Intercept and Rising exposure of discrepancies in Stringer's accuser's story that Stringer, who ended Eva's political career, is a particular danger to Success and the charter industrial complex and the political hit on him serves them well -- I never put it beyond them in alliance with the Bloomberg crowd.
Mulgrew went off on Yang/Adams at last night's Ex bd as reported by Arthur:
Will be NYT story about how UFT and AFT have opened up support for
Stringer and others. Mayor's race will really get hot and heavy now.
Something we thought was happening seems to have come to fruition.
Agency run by Bradley Tusk, who campaigned against UFT running Yang
campaign, and Students First giving 6 million to Eric Adams. These
groups have worked to get city hall back. They are now major players
with two candidates. Will get ugly. All the colocation fights can be
tied to these agencies. Every time something bad happens, you'll see
them involved when it comes to us.
We know who these people are,
and we thought Adams would work with Students First. Thanks groups who
did vetting, dug into finances, and checked who they supported and
donated to. Will discuss in detail at Town Hall and DA.
Mayor's
race shaping into three person race. Stringer has allegations against
him, but most unions who've endorsed have stuck. Allegations are
allegations. Our group that first endorsed says we should continue.
Never
thought we'd go back to Bloomberg days. Yang isn't billionaire, but is
tied with this group. Adams is tied with Students First. We will get
word out.
Stringer, unlike Cuomo, had never developed any kind of reputation of
acting inappropriately toward women. There were no stories of boozy
holiday parties or anecdotes of hugs and kisses that lasted far too
long. Stringer was especially not flirtatious. Current and former aides,
many of them female, spoke highly of him. Stringer, at age 40 or
41, may have been a sexual predator. But he may not have been. The
incident with Kim took place 20 years ago. There are no witnesses, as of
now, that have come forward to recall that Kim related this allegation
to them in 2001 or shortly after.
Barkan also points to the dangers of the MeToo movement that leaps immediatley to cancel anyone charged before a vetting process takes place and how the movement can be weaponized to bring down any candidate, especially progressives. After giving details of The Intercept report, Barkan says:
None of this, on its own, proves Kim is lying. But it does raise an
uncomfortable question for the progressive Democrats most concerned
about holding men in politics accountable for their untoward behavior:
how much evidence is really required for an allegation? What allegations
should be strong enough to end a political career? The standard set
from the Stringer incident is that one allegation made by one person, no
matter the time elapsed or the amount of evidence presented, is
sufficient. And perhaps, they would argue, that is how politics should
be conducted from 2021 onwards. Women should be believed. Once they
speak out, that’s enough.
At least, with Cuomo, there are many allegations, and some of the calls for his resignation
have stemmed from a potential cover-up of nursing home deaths and a
scandalous pandemic response. Some of the women stepping forward against
Cuomo accuse him of harassing them as recently as last year. Kim’s
allegation, having taken place 20 years ago, cannot be substantiated in
such a way. It is notable, too, that many long-time Stringer allies were
willing to ditch his mayoral campaign entirely even though no man or
woman has come forward to tell the media that Kim related the incident
to them in 2001. For investigations into claims of harassment and
assault, this is the initial bar of evidence that usually needs to be
cleared.
If one allegation, with shaky evidence, is enough to
short-circuit a political career, a new playbook is opened up, one
left-leaning Democrats must take into account when embarking on future
campaigns. Last year, a popular 31-year-old progressive running for
Congress in Massachusetts, Alex Morse, was accused of engaging in improper sexual conduct
with younger men when he was a college instructor. Morse, who had been
mayor of the town of Holyoke at the time, insisted all relationships he
had were consensual. No one accused him of dating men younger than the
age of consent.
The allegations, the Intercept later reported,
were a farce. The College Democrats at the University of Massachusetts
Amherst had plotted in 2019 about ways to ensnare Morse, a young gay
man, in scandal. They were all supporters of Morse’s establishment
opponent, Richard Neal. The State Democratic Party of Massachusetts even coordinated
with the College Democrats on how these allegations could be planted in
the media. In the end, the scheme worked: Neal, the incumbent
congressman, won re-election comfortably.
What happened to Morse
could easily happen to other ascendant progressives in the future.
Conservative political operatives—or those aligned with the Democratic
establishment—can aim to coordinate or manufacture an allegation,
knowing that left institutions and politicians will rapidly withdraw
their support for the rising candidate. Morse quickly lost the
endorsement of the Sunrise Movement and other progressive organizations,
though the allegations immediately appeared dubious. If Democrats on
the left want to end any semblance of due process—if allegations, on
their own, are the equivalent of a conviction—than it is not hard to
imagine how this will be exploited by nefarious actors.
Stringer
is not Morse and there’s no evidence that other Democrats are
coordinating with Kim to damage Stringer’s campaign. Kim very well might
be telling the truth. The allegation lacks direct evidence, but
Stringer cannot disprove it, either. It will be up to voters,
ultimately, to judge Stringer, because he has rejected calls from his
rivals to drop out. With more than $7 million to spend, he is forging
onward, toward an uncertain finish on June 22nd.
What’s not yet
clear is how Stringer will be evaluated by the hundreds of thousands of
Democrats who will show up to vote. Polling in the next few weeks will
tell us. It’s very possible the allegation doesn’t hurt Stringer’s
position all that much. His supporters, many of whom have been voting
for him since the 1990s and 2000s, aren’t all defecting to front-runners
like Yang and Adams. Maya Wiley and Dianne Morales are hoping to hoover up
disaffected Stringer voters, though we don’t know yet how many of these
people they’ll be able to pull into their own camps. There is growing evidence
in polling data that older Democrats are not so easily moved by sexual
harassment and assault allegations. There’s a reason Cuomo has ignored
calls for his own resignation. Some Democrats, believing Al Franken was
unfairly driven from the Senate, are becoming less willing than
progressive organizations and politicians to throw their own overboard,
especially since Republicans almost never do.
That’s Stringer’s
political calculus. Assuming no new allegations, it may work in at least
maintaining a kind of stasis: a consistent third place in the polls,
with the hope of a last minute surge. Stringer’s most pivotal endorsers
haven’t defected yet. Congressman Jerry Nadler, the king of the Upper
West Side, is still with Stringer, as is the United Federation of Teachers.
Older voters of color are also not likely to judge Stringer especially
harshly, since it was Spitzer, the scandal-scarred former governor, who
dominated Black and Latino neighborhoods as he narrowly lost to Stringer
in that 2013 comptroller’s race. It’s no accident Stringer has been
hitting the church circuit every weekend.
If Stringer remains
viable and manages to come close to capturing the Democratic nomination,
it will be a further indictment of the nonprofit left organizations and
the elected officials aligned with them. For the last decade, these
organizations, like the Working Families Party, have boasted of their
power to move voters, to decide the direction of the left flank of the
Democratic Party. Most of the politicians who deserted Stringer are
closely allied with WFP and their member organizations, and seem to
believe, publicly at least, they are representative of the working class
voters of this city and can mobilize them at pivotal moments.
Special Education Far Rockaway teacher Daniel Alicea, the major organizer at EONYC, is doing the kind of work the UFT should be doing, following up on EONYC's enormously successful monthly Zooms on Tuesday with probably the most important issue we face:
What Should Next School Year Look Like?
The link to sign up. He has assembled a fantastic panel:
Panelists Set for EONYC May Forum: What Should Next School Year Look Like?
Our stakeholder panelists include parents, education activists, educators, and leaders from our various teacher caucuses We
are just days away from our May 11th online forum where we will gather
with expert panelists that include parents, education activists,
educators, and leaders from our various teacher caucuses. We hope to
also be able to lean on the expertise of a local medical doctor, as
well.
As this school year of hybrid learning in a pandemic winds
down, we as educators and stakeholders have begun to reflect and
formulate questions about what the next school year should look like.
At Tuesday evening’s event, we hope to share our collective thoughts,
ideas, and demands for what should be prioritized in the upcoming school
year.
Last month EONYC held a panel that included reps from every caucus and interest group in the UFT, including Unity Caucus and attracted hundreds to a webinar discussion of the UFT Mayoral Endorsement process, which is basically 3 people in a room.
Eterno pointed to how important these type of open discussions have been in his ad for the April event.
Everyone guesses the UFT will endorse Scott Stringer with some
believing Maya Wiley has a chance to be second. Is this the right
decision? Is the UFT top-down endorsement process fair?If you are
looking for a real discussion on the mayor's race and the Union's
involvement, you will most likely be out of luck at the DA as it will
more than likely be tightly controlled by Mulgrew.
This was a day before the UFT special DA where they did endorse Stringer but did not choose Wiley or anyone as a second choice. I wrote about the Stringer story a few days ago: UFT
Sticks with Stringer.
Here's more from EONYC:
Please
join our next Educators of NYC monthly meetup, on Tuesday, May 11th, at
7 PM, as we discuss: WHAT SHOULD NEXT YEAR'S SCHOOL REOPENING LOOK LIKE
IN A COVID WORLD?
We
are just a day away from our May 11th online forum where we will gather
with expert panelists that include parents, education activists,
educators, and leaders from our various teacher caucuses. We hope to
also be able to lean on the expertise of a local medical doctor, as
well.
As
this school year of hybrid learning in a pandemic winds down, we as
educators and stakeholders have begun to reflect and formulate questions
about what the next school year should look like. At Tuesday evening’s
event, we hope to share our collective thoughts, ideas, and demands for what should be prioritized in the upcoming school year.
RSVP now!!! ... as our slots to participate will go quickly.
We,
also, encourage you to take the pre-forum survey here if you haven’t
and you can also view the preliminary results. Almost 4k individuals
have responded already: http://educators.nyc/maysurvey
Lastly, if you have registered we will send you a Zoom link as the forum event approaches.
The forum event will also be live-streamed via Facebook Live our public Facebook page and private page.
Please share this with those in your education networks and circles.
Rising followed up the day after with Krystal focusing her aim on MeToo political hits, including the guys who primaried Nancy Pelosi and Richard Neal when fake stuff was leaked at a strategic point that made it impossible to recover. And that was my main beef and suspicians about Jean Kim who waited 20 years until just the right moment. Now people have been telling me I jumped the gun because more women may come out against Stringer. We may have to vet every woman he ever dated. Krystal, coming from the almost hard left, as does the Interecept reporter Ryan Grim, are important voices even though they risk cancellation.
WARNING! WARNING!! NORM ABOUT TO ENTER CANCELLATION TERRITORY
Claims by Scott Stringer Accuser Unravel as Progressives Flee New York Mayoral Candidate. New
details about Jean Kim’s role on Stringer’s 2001 campaign and her
relationship to the candidate paint a very different portrait of the
power dynamic at play....Wiley at the time recommended “assessing the accused’s credibility
and response to the allegation in comparison to the credibility of the
accuser and supporting evidence.” .... https://theintercept.com/2021/05/04/nyc-mayor-scott-stringer-jean-kim/
Video: D.C. bureau chief of The Intercept, Ryan Grim, digs into sexual harassment allegations against NYC mayoral candidates, Scott Stringer and finde major discrepancies in Jean Kim's story - Rising, The Hill https://youtu.be/qSy2d6Nq4EI
As former prosecutors and attorneys deeply concerned about respecting
the survivors of sexual assault and protecting the rights of the
accused, we believe that justice requires a more nuanced approach than
we are seeing in the current debate. We approach this, as we would any
the report of any crime, through the neutral lens of investigation.... Maya Wiley, May, 2020. https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/joe-biden-tara-reade-steps-can-provide-full-accounting-metoo-ncna1203006 {MUST READ}
5 days ago — Stringer denies the accusations claiming he and Kim had a consensual relationship for a brief period of time.
May 5, 2021, Report from a white privileged {old} male
Don't you love so-called "progressives?"
I'm so glad I've never had any power - especially in my own home.
The Intercept report and great reporter Ryan Grim's appearance on Rising yesterday might be too late to save Stringer, but I never gave him much of a chance of winning anyway. White males are not kosher this year. The way Yang is courting the Hassids, he may be the kosher one in the race.
UFT Endorsement holds
Don't get me wrong. I liked Stringer at times over the years but even he has links to Bloomberg though Micah, Lasher, his campaign manager, who many of us fighting ed deform have found to be despicable. Stringer wasn't my first choice - but actually none of them are. Much loved by the left Diane Morales once took a job in the Joel Klein anti-union pro-charter administration. But the left can conveniently forget when it needs to - except if you made a dumb tweet when you were in the womb - then cancellation for life.
The UFT endorsement with Stringer the only choice looked like another failure in UFT mayoral races. At the very least, given some high level UFT officials' support for Wiley, I figured her as second choice and viewed not doing so as a mistake.
Now with the Intercept report Mulgrew is not looking as bad - imagine if Wiley was second choice and screaming for Stringer to drop out practically before Kim got the words out of her mouth. I'm sure teachers could rely on Wiley for support for due process if they are accused of something. Anything.
Were the charges against Stringer an outcome of the UFT endorsement which gave him legs? Do I suspect the Yang camp? Maybe not him but never forget Bloomberg fave Bradley Tusk, a major POS, is Yang's handler. If Stringer had been in single figures in the poles we would have been spared this drama.
But the UFT reaffirmed its commitment to the Stringer endorsement while MORE
Caucus called for the UFT to rescind. Naturally. Some people find it funny when
unionists want to throw away due process, but having been denied the
same when I was drummed out of MORE, I'm not surprised that the idea of
due process is forgotten when politically inconvenient.
Fuck due process:
MORE-UFT Stands with Survivors and Calls on the UFT to Rescind the Endorsement of Scott Stringer Immediately
-
In light of recent allegations made against Mayoral candidate and New York
City Comptroller Scott Stringer, we call on the UFT to immediately rescind
their..The UFT Endorsement process was undemocratic to begin with. Rank and
file members had very little decision-making power nor understanding of
the process....... LOL when MORE talks about democracy in the UFT
MORE clearly is pushing Morales but have they actually taken a democratic vote of all MORE members like they are asking of the UFT? They won't officially endorse Morales but are trying to shame the UFT into doing it. The left in the UFT is voting Morales and maybe some will be for Wiley. Stringer threatened to take some left votes.
I don't often love Mike Mulgrew but not backing down from the UFT choice of Stringer is gutsy in a way. I wonder if Stringer didn't give Mulgrew a heads up on the Intercept story. I'd put a few bob on that.
I may make Stringer one of my votes and will give no votes
to amy candidate that called on him to leave the race. Actually, that condition may leave Stringer as the only candidate left for me. I stand for due
process for teachers - and everyone else. I'm pretty sure Morales, whom I was considering, also asked for Stringer to drop out -- hooray for due process.
The Stringer case has bugged me from the start. Compare to the Cuomo story - I believed all the people charging him. The use and abuse of power accumulates over time. Have we heard of much Stringer stuff over the past 20 years? And don't forget, he stopped Eva Moskowitz' political career -- believe me if there was dirt the Moskowitz machine would have thrown it -- which actually leads my conspiracy laden mind to think how bad for Eva it would be if Stringer became mayor ----- Hmmmm. Did the charter ed industrial complex have a role in the exposure of Stringer? Does the PR firm Kim works for have any connections? This stuff hit just after the UFT endorsement gave Stringer campaign legs. Put The Intercept on that case. And by the way - here is this little tidbit about her firm from their story:
Since 2015, TLM has
represented the American Petroleum Institute, Bank of America, and a
slew of other corporate, nonprofit, and developer clients. Stringer, as
comptroller, led the largest divestment from fossil fuels in the world.
I had some issues with Tara Reade's Biden story due to no other women coming forth -- I assume if Biden did what he did to Reade a man with power would do it to more women. So that counts. But there is still an element of truth in her story. In some ways her story holds up better than Jean Kim's.
But the same conditions apply to Stringer. I don't see women coming out of the woodwork making charges like we hear about Cuomo. Maybe more women will emerge but they better have their ducks in a row given the holes in Kim's story. The Intercept story in full below catches her in lie after lie - I mean real lies with written records.
It's still going to be touch and go. If no one else emerges to say he groped or propositioned them, even if Stringer loses, Mulgrew looks good for standing by him. On the process they used for mayoral endorsement - not so much. Unity claims they sent out 10 billion emails and millions of UFT members, including the ghosts of dead members, took part in the process.
I smelled a rat with Jean Kim's account from the moment I heard it based on the exquisite timing. Wait 20 years until weeks before the election, when there would be little time to vet her. It looked like a hit. And it looked like it worked. I see Stringer as dead in the water and would bet on Adams being next mayor, based on rise in crime. A black ex-cop will have leeway to do certain things that will rile the left. A black Giuliani?
Stringer has been attacked for jumping on the story that Kim had petitioned for her friend Esther Yang using a petition with Andrew Yang on the same page and when the Stringer camp brought it up they were attacked. The Stringer campaign went too far in accusing Kim of working for Andrew Yang but her claims ring false about having no connection to Andrew Yang and she was just petitioning for her friend Esther and Andrew "just happened" to be on the same petition. Not that her friend Esther had anything to do with Andrew Yang, especially when his campaign put out this call for volunteers:
Join us in Door to Door knocking for Andrew
Yang and Esther Yang! Canvassing is the best way to spread the word
about Andrew, Esther and their policies and ...
I guess Jean Kim had no idea her good friend Esther was aligned with Andrew. Note to Esther - Jean Kim was once Scott Stringer's friend. Watch your back.
One of my favorite reporters is Ryan Grim at the left-leaning Intercept and he appears often on Rising. Yesterday he was on the Jean Kim case as he explained to Krystal and Saagar in some detail about his investigation. (See video below).
Intern is the magic word
Stringer and Kim were part of the same social circle and they all volunteered for his campaign. She was 30 and had a job but initially claimed she was an intern - a bald-faced lie - and her explanation he told her it was an intern-like environment was bullshit as they actually had real interns. The Intercept talked to people who knew them and reported their relationship fell into the "friends with benefits" category.
In today's climate we're automatically expected to believe a female accuser, and often they are proven right. But sometimes with vetting, there are doubts. Witness the Biden accuser, Tara Reade, whose credibility was doubted over months of vetting her past. Some people still believe her and in some ways her story is much worse than that of Stringer's accuser.
Wiley Hypocrisy on Biden and Stringer: Fuck Due Process II
Note how Wiley gave Stringer less
than 24 hours before calling for him to resign from the race.
Progressives. People calling for Stringer to quit should also demand
Biden resign. That's a joke - but hypocrisy, rear thy ugly head. I had
considered listing Wiley on my ballot but she now joins Andrew Yang in
Norm's "ballot hell." I give Wiley the Norm Scott POS seal for standing
up for her principles of "protecting the rights of the
accused.
But Maya Wiley was quick to hold off judgement on Biden in an essay she co-wrote in May 2020.
That means that step one after accepting Reade’s allegation is to
investigate it. Because her allegations occurred long enough ago that
the statute of limitations bars any possibility of prosecution, law
enforcement agencies don't have jurisdiction to investigate, and
investigation funded by either Reade or Biden would likely be viewed as
lacking objectivity. But there is a vehicle for investigation — the
independent press, where investigative journalists are highly motivated
to seek out details and witnesses and where competing views will be
aired.
Now watch how Wiley and crew cast shade on Reade for showing support for Biden many years after the incident:
Reade has praised Biden for protecting women from sexual assault. As recently as 2016 or 2017, Reade, under the name Tara McCabe, tweeted praise
for Biden’s efforts to address sexual assault and retweeted the
accolades of others for his efforts. In one tweet, Reade said, “My old
boss speaks truth. Listen."Reade has also changed her story about the reason she left her job at Biden’s office,
Scott Stringer was on Brian Lehrer and he was really grilled by Bryan, and not in a totally fair way. Like even if they were dating, what about the power relationship - holy fuck, we must assess our power relationships before dating. Maybe we need an online form to fill out before getting permission or else expect 30 years later to be charged with something. Or male teachers -- Did you ever tell a female student she looked pretty?
Here's the Rising video
D.C. bureau chief of The Intercept, Ryan Grim, digs into sexual
harassment allegations against NYC mayoral candidates, Scott Stringer.
