media claim Trump and Nunes are engaging in a massive cover-up. but where’s the crime?-

media claim Trump and Nunes are engaging in a massive cover-up. but where’s the crime?–58jhh.,b58

Ben Shapiro –March 28, 2017

On Tuesday, the media bumped its Outragemeter to 11 over a story from The Washington Post stating that the Trump administration attempted to stop former acting attorney general Sally Yates from testifying before the House Intelligence Committee. The Post reported:

The Trump administration sought to block former acting attorney general Sally Yates from testifying to Congress in the House investigation into links between Russian officials and the Trump campaign….According to a series of letters reviewed by The Post, Yates was notified earlier this month by the Justice Department that the administration considers a great deal of her possible testimony to be barred from discussion in a congressional hearing because the topics are covered by the presidential communication privilege.

Furthermore, Yates was supposed to testify before the Intelligence Committee this week, defying the Trump administration – and today, news broke that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes had cancelled the hearing at which she would testify.

That theory gained new life thanks to Nunes’ newly-uncovered secretive visit to the White House, where he met with an unspecified official who presented him with intelligence information regarding the Trump team and Russia, the day before Nunes said publicly that the intelligence community had surveilled Team Trump. Nunes said that he went to the White House in order to use a secure computer for perusing intelligence information – but as Lachlan Markay of The Daily Beast points out, “This is real shady. The House Intel Committee has its own SCIF. There’d be no need to use the one at the WH.”

Nunes’ defense is that the information was only available to the executive branch, and that as chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Nunes can see such material. Nunes hasn’t revealed what intelligence official communicated the information to him. And as The Weekly Standard reports, “Unknown, too, is what sort of protocols for revealing these classified documents did Nunes’s source have to abide by in order to allow Nunes access to the system for executive-branch only reports. Nunes spokesman Jack Langer declined to comment, and a senior White House aide claims to be unaware of any such protocols.” The next day, Nunes went to brief Trump on the material he saw, all before informing his colleagues on the House Intelligence Committee.

But why didn’t that intelligence official, who works for President Trump, just go talk to President Trump directly?

Nunes’ activities can be read as innocent, wild incompetence or nefarious scheming. And the attempts to stop Yates from testifying could be seen as an obvious attempt to stop her from simply railing against Trump on the basis of speculation. Remember, Yates was fired after refusing to defend Trump’s travel ban, and she’s an Obama holdover.

So, let’s imagine a counterfactual to the Left’s agenda. Let’s imagine that Obama intelligence community members are widely dispersing information that’s suggestive but not actually condemnatory (this part we already know). And let’s assume that Nunes found out about it from someone in the intelligence community who doesn’t want to speak directly to Trump for fear of Trump’s blunderbuss approach to politics. Nunes goes to the White House to speak to that person. Nunes then refuses to allow Yates’ open testimony because she has a record of demagoguery with regard to Trump.

source–ben shapiro, the post, sally yates, lachlan markay, the daily beast, jack langer, weekly std,


Sessions threatens to withhold funds in sanctuary city crackdown-


Attorney General Jeff Sessions threatened on Monday to cut off U.S. Justice Department grants to cities that fail to assist federal immigration authorities, moving the Trump administration closer to a potential clash with leaders of America’s largest urban centers.

Sessions’ statements were aimed at a dozens of cities and other local governments, including New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, that have joined a growing “sanctuary” movement aimed at shielding illegal immigrants from stepped-up deportation efforts.

Police agencies in those jurisdictions have barred their officers from routinely checking on immigration status when making arrests or traffic stops. And they have refused to lock up individuals longer than otherwise warranted at the request of federal agents seeking to deport them.

Trump administration officials says the deportation crackdown is focused on illegal immigrants convicted of serious crimes. They insist public safety is jeopardized when police refuse to notify U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement of plans to release such a person from local custody.

“Failure to deport aliens who are convicted of criminal offenses puts whole communities at risk, especially immigrant communities in the very sanctuary jurisdictions that seek to protect the perpetrators,” Sessions said at a White House news briefing.

His threat to withhold grants as punishment drew swift condemnation from California and New York officials.

California Senate leader Kevin de Leon, a Los Angeles Democrat, called Sessions’ threat “nothing short of blackmail,” accusing of “race-based scapegoating” in its crackdown on immigrants.

Critics also argue that enlisting police cooperation in rounding up immigrants for removal undermines communities’ trust in local police, particularly among Latinos. And they question whether the administration is really targeting dangerous criminals.

President Donald Trump, who made tougher immigration enforcement a cornerstone of his campaign, directed the government to cut off funding to sanctuary jurisdictions in a Jan. 25 executive order. That order has yet to be put into effect, but Sessions’ announcement seemed to be the first step in doing so.

The Justice Department grants typically are used to help police improve crime-fighting techniques, buy new equipment and assist victims of crime.

Federal records show the Justice Department doled out $1 billion to state governments and $430 million to nonprofits, but only $136 million directly to cities and counties last year.

New York state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said his office would continue helping local governments “have the tools they need to protect their immigrant communities.”

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, whose city is home to one of the largest U.S. immigrant communities, also denounced Sessions’ threat to use funding as a form of coercion.

California’s De Leon is backing a bill that would essentially make all of the most populous U.S. state a sanctuary, but he does not currently have the votes to pass it.

San Francisco may not be affected by the new restrictions, as the city and county received no funding from the department in the most recent fiscal year.

However, Sessions’ order could impact other jurisdictions. New Orleans, Philadelphia, Chicago and New York City – all singled out as possibly noncompliant by an inspector general’s report last year – collectively received $15 million in Justice Department grants.

According to Trump’s executive order, Sessions would have to wait until the Homeland Security Department determines what constitutes a “sanctuary city” before funding is restricted. DHS last week reported roughly 120 cities and counties that it deems uncooperative, though the agency has not finalized the list.

source–newsmax, kevin de lron, eric schneiderman, eric garcetti

tax foundation: ‘avoiding tax reform is no longer an option’-

tax foundation: ‘avoiding tax reform is no longer an option’–16GH.,B32

Taxpayers spend 6.1 billion hours a year — at a cost of $234 billion in direct costs and lost productivity — to comply with the federal tax code, according to the president of the conservative National Taxpayers Union.  At an event Monday held by the tax research group Tax Foundation, NTU president Pete Sepp said avoiding tax reform is no longer an option, the Washington Free Beacon reported.

“The problem is the status quo — thinking that, well, if we don’t do tax reform this year it will just be that bad,” Sepp said, the Free Beacon reported. “No, the status quo is not the static quo — it’s going to get worse.” “The paperwork burden inventory at the Office of Management and Budget related to Treasury is expected to rise by another 2 billion hours in the next few years,” he added. “One-third added to that, we’re looking at tax compliance costs of north of $400 billion a year.”

We now have about a trillion dollars of baseline problem now that we didn’t think we would have before assuming Obamacare was going to be repealed.”

“That’s going to make tax reform a much tougher task. It also means we’re going to have to find other ways of making every single simplification measure count, more so than it ever would have needed to count in the past.” Treasury Secretary Steven has said he’s overseeing work on the Trump administration’s bill over the past two months — and that it’d be introduced soon in one proposal covering both cuts in individual and corporate taxes.

“That’s going to make tax reform a much tougher task,” he said. “It also means we’re going to have to find other ways of making every single simplification measure count, more so than it ever would have needed to count in the past.” House Republican leadership withdrew the American Health Care Act on Friday ahead of a scheduled vote, following President Trump’s request that the legislation be pulled. Trump said tax reform would be the next item on the agenda. “We are going, right now, for tax reform,” Trump said. “Which we could’ve done earlier, but this really would’ve worked out better if we could’ve had Democrat support.”

“So we’ll probably … start going very strongly on big tax cuts,” Trump said. “Tax reform—that will be next.” Trump has proposed cutting the corporate tax rate from its current level of 35 percent to 15 percent, reducing the number of individual tax brackets from seven to three, and changing the structure of tax deductions. He vowed to cut personal income taxes for all Americans.

source–newsmax, cathy burke, pete sepp, wash free beacon, ali meyer

blacklisting rule–

blacklisting rule–20lh.,b12-1— the hill-

President Trump repealed the so-called “blacklisting rule” Monday that required federal contractors to disclose labor violations.

The Obama-era rule was intended to prevent the government from contracting with businesses responsible for wage theft or workplace safety violations at any point within the last three years. But business groups feared it gave unions the upper hand at the bargaining table.

Trump struck down the blacklisting rule, along with three other regulations aimed at protecting the environment and students, Monday afternoon during a White House signing ceremony.

The other regulations Trump overturned include the Interior Department’s land use rule, as well as Education Department’s rules for teacher preparation and school accountability. Republicans lawmakers voted to strike down these regulations through the Congressional Review Act, which allows certain regulations to be undone with only a simple majority in the Senate.

Since January, Trump has repealed seven regulations under the Congressional Review Act, with more expected in the coming weeks.

The Obama-era rule was intended to prevent the government from contracting with businesses responsible for wage theft or workplace safety violations at any point within the last three years. But business groups feared it gave unions the upper hand at the bargaining table.

Employers were particularly concerned about the blacklisting rule. “The rule violated the due process rights of contractors by forcing them to report mere allegations of misconduct — which are often frivolous and filed with nefarious intentions by special interest groups,” said Ben Brubeck, vice president of regulatory affairs at the Associated Builders and Contractors.

“The message Donald Trump is sending today is that there are no consequences for companies who break American Labor law,” said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Good Jobs Nation, which is part of the movement lobbying for a $15 federal minimum wage.

President Obama’s executive order calling for the blacklisting rule was partly inspired by the Chemical Safety Board, an independent agency that recommended “additional contractor responsibility” in a 2013 report. Republicans lawmakers voted to strike down these regulations through the Congressional Review Act, which allows certain regulations to be undone while preventing the minority in the Senate from using the filibuster.

Amit Narang, regulatory policy advocate at the left-leaning Public Citizen, accused Republicans of challenging “every rule under the sun.” James Goodwin, senior regulatory policy analyst at the Center for Progressive Reform, criticized GOP lawmakers for the “orgy of Congressional Review Act resolutions” they are sending to Trump.

“It’s an incredibly reckless approach to congressional oversight,” Goodwin said. “We’re talking about rules that have been in the works for four, five, six, seven years. They’re lining them up for repeal, even though they probably have no idea what they do or which agency they came from.”

Sam Batkins, director of regulatory policy at the conservative American Action Forum, admitted the Congressional Review Act is a “pretty blunt instrument,” because it not only repeals these regulations, but it also prohibits future presidents from issuing similar rules. What has surprised Batkins and other conservatives are the number of obscure rules Congress is repealing this way.

“One thing I was struck by is that some of the regulations being repealed are not things that were on my radar,” said Susan Dudley, the former administrator of the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs under President George W. Bush.

President Trump and the Republican-led Congress are using a special rule to do away with many of President Obama’s regulations. Since Trump entered the White House two months ago, the House has passed 14 resolutions disapproving of Obama-era regulations under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The Senate has approved 10 resolutions, and President Trump has signed three measures into law. The White House has indicated Trump intends to sign all of the measures approved by Congress with the use of the CRA. The deadline for Trump to sign these repeals is May 9.

The Security and Exchange Commission’s resource extraction rule issued last July requires oil companies to disclose payments of more than $100,000 made to foreign governments.

The Interior Department’s stream protection rule prohibits coal miners from setting up shop within 100 feet of streams, rivers, or lakes. Democrats say the rule will protect groundwater, but Republicans see it as another example Obama’s so-called “War on Coal.” This was the first disapproval resolution passed by the current Congress, but the second one that Trump signed, on Feb. 16.

The Social Security Administration’s gun regulation requires the agency to report disability beneficiaries who it believes are mentally ill to the FBI’s background check system. Gun control supporters say this will keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. But the National Rifle Association says it violates the Second Amendment and the due process rights of disability beneficiaries, who may be targeted by the government even though they are not be a danger to society. Trump signed a measure repealing the rule on Feb. 28.

Congress has voted to repeal another seven regulations, five of which have been sent to the White House and are awaiting Trump’s signature.

The “blacklisting” rule requires federal contractors to report labor violations. It was a joint rule issued by the Defense DepartmentGeneral Services Administration and NASA. Democrats hope the rule will discourage the federal government from doing business with companies that treat their employees poorly. But Republicans say unions could use this information to “blackmail” federal contractors during labor negotiations. Congress voted to repeal the rule on March 6, but it didn’t arrive on Trump’s desk until 10 days later.

The Education Department’s school accountability rule would hold states responsible for providing “every child, regardless of race, income, background, or where they live” with a “high-quality education.” Democrats say the rule protects students who live in low-income neighborhoods who might otherwise receive a poor education. But Republicans argue states should have the final decision on how to best educate their students. Congress voted to repeal the rule on March 9, and sent it to Trump’s desk on March 16.

The Education Department’s teacher preparation standards would measure the performance of educators. Congress voted to strike down the rule on March 8, and sent it to Trump on March 16.

The Interior Department’s predator control regulations would apply to national wildlife refuges in Alaska. Congress voted to overturn the rule on March 21, but has yet to send it to Trump.

(OSHA) last December finalized new requirements for construction and manufacturing companies to maintain records of workplace-related injuries and illnesses. Congress voted to repeal the rule on March 22, but has yet to send it to Trump. The House has passed another four disapproval resolutions under the Congressional Review Act and the Senate has passed one, which the other chamber must still vote on.

The Interior Department’s rule for methane and natural gas is intended to limit emissions. The House voted to repeal the rule on Feb. 3, but the Senate has yet to take it up.

The Labor Department issued two rules for government state retirement savings plans. The House voted to overturn those regulations on Feb. 15, but the Senate has yet to take up the legislation.

The Department of Health and Human Services last December issued new healthcare protections for women. The House voted to repeal the rule on Feb. 16, but the Senate has yet to consider the bill.

The Federal Communication Commission’s internet privacy rules would prohibit service providers from selling information about the online search histories of their customers without their permission. The Senate voted to strike down the rule on March 23, but the House has yet to take it up.

Republicans have also introduced at least 14 other disapproval resolutions under the CRA that neither chamber has voted on, which could be taken up in the near future.

source-the hill, ben brubeck, good jobs nation, joseph geevarghese, center for progressive reform, amit narang, james goodwin, sam batkins, susan dudley, cra, osha

Susan Rice must testify to Congress

Susan Rice must testify to Congress–43jh.,b60

Former national security advisor Susan Rice’s “unmasking” of Trump campaign and transition officials caught up in intelligence services’ surveillance of foreign officials is a very big story, and a possible political scandal, today’s editorial argues. The liberal media is dismissing the story, mostly because it’s not about Trump but his predecessor. “Not only should journalists be taking this issue seriously, but Congress also owes it to the public to get the bottom of Rice’s inconsistent account of what happened and discover whether it was indeed improper.” , Susan Rice, made sure she knew who was who on President Trump’s transition team during the waning days of the Obama administration. As Trump’s team prepared to take over the federal government, intelligence services’ surveillance of foreign officials incidentally popped up with conversations about or involving members of Team Trump. Logs kept on a White House database reportedly show that Rice asked in several cases to see the names of the Americans involved. That information is typically “masked” or concealed in written reports because U.S. intelligence services are not supposed to monitor Americans. Meanwhile, details about at least one such conversation, with names included, were leaked to the Washington Post.

CNN’s Chris Cuomo on his show Tuesday morning. “What is it? Well, this suggestion that former national security adviser Susan Rice improperly unmasked the identity of Trump associates is part of what the president calls a crooked scheme. An associate of Rice says it’s just plain false.”

Don Lemon, of the same network, was even more dismissive the night before: “On this program tonight,” he had said, “we will not insult your intelligence by pretending otherwise, nor will we aid and abet the people trying to misinform you, the American people, by creating a diversion.”

It’s also a big enough story that Rice probably should not have gone on television Tuesday to discuss what she may or may not have done. But she did, and she confirmed much of the story, denying only that her actions were improper.

Not only is Rice’s track record spotty when it comes to telling the truth on television, but it is also known that the Obama administration was willing to use the coercive power the federal government to attack political opponents; just ask all those conservative groups victimized by the IRS.

Rice’s explanation also raised as many questions as it answered. For one thing, why did she deny any knowledge of this affair in a PBS interview two weeks ago, only to admit her involvement now? Is her memory just that bad?

Further, Rice told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell that the names of Trump campaigners that she requested to be unmasked were neither leaked by her nor disseminated to others in government. In that case, who provided the Washington Post’s David Ignatius with the information about Mike Flynn’s phone calls to the Russian ambassador a week before Trump even took office? As Rice noted in the interview, that leak illegally put classified information into the open. Not to mention that it is a police state tactic worthy of Vladimir Putin’s government but not of ours. It is improper for intelligence services to leak secret surveillance information about American citizens to the press, even if it is gathered lawfully and by accident.

Susan Rice further confuses ‘unmasking’ story: Susan Rice did no one any favors when she appeared on MSNBC to respond to reports alleging she personally requested the identities of “masked” Americans in U.S. intelligence reports linked to President Trump’s transition team and campaign be “unmasked.” Dismissing the Susan Rice ‘unmasking’ story is the exact wrong way to cover it: Never tell a crowd of curious onlookers, “There’s nothing to see here.”

. “The allegation is that somehow Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes – to spy, expose, anything,” Rice said. “That’s absolutely false.” Left unexplained: Who defines “political purposes,” and how? MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell then asked in reference to Trump’s former national security adviser: “Did you leak the name of [retired Gen. Michael Flynn]?”

Rice’s answer to this straightforward question was anything but illuminating. “I leaked nothing to nobody,” she said, “and never have and never would.” That’s a tidy double negative. Does that mean she leaked something to somebody? It’s entirely possible Rice misspoke in the moment, and that she simply garbled her words into something nearly unintelligible. Then again, it’s not out of the ordinary for a career bureaucrat to sit behind carefully parsed sentences that offer cover and plausible deniability.

The person who reportedly discovered that Rice had made several “unmasking” requests was Ezra Cohen-Watnick, according to the Bloomberg report. Cohen-Watnick was brought into the Trump administration by Flynn, who resigned just a few weeks into his term as national security advisor after it was revealed he had misrepresented his previous communications with Russian officials to Vice President Mike Pence.

“The effort to ask for the identity of the American citizen is necessary to understand the importance of an intelligence report in some circumstances,” she added.

This is some detailed information, and from former President Obama‘s national security adviser no less! It’s also a long ways away from when Rice said on March 22 that she knew “nothing” about the intelligence community’s incidental collection of information on Trump’s transition team following the Nov. 8 election.

source–chris cuomo, dom lemon, eli lake, pbs, msnbc, wash post, david ignatius, t bbrckrt adams, bloomberg, ezra cohen,

GOP Moves Quickly to Give Input to Infrastructure Bill–

GOP Moves Quickly to Give Input to Infrastructure Bill–4GH.,B12-1,58

Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao met with several GOP lawmakers Wednesday, where she got input on ways to fulfill one of Trump’s top campaign promises: fixing America’s crumbling roads, bridges, and airports.

Originally slated for fall, the infrastructure bill got bumped up after the failure of an Obamacare repeal and replacement last month. Chao now says to expect action sometime in May.

Rep. Lou Barletta, R-Pa., a former member of Trump’s transition team, called that “music to my ears.”

Trump “doesn’t wait very long,” Barletta told The Hill. “He’s moving forward quickly, and I think Congress needs to begin to run instead of skipping.”

At Wednesday’s hourlong meeting with lawmakers, Chao “talked about the infrastructure bill and how important it is to the president,” House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman Bill Shuster told The Hill. “Forty-five members were there asking lots of great questions.”

But Rep. John Duncan Jr., R-Tenn., described it differently, saying, “It was a bunch of people asking questions, and they were very parochial questions about specific things in their districts.”

Democrats, meanwhile, were not happy about being left out of the meeting, especially since the infrastructure bill is seen as being high in bipartisan support.

Lawmakers are scrambling to help shape President Trump’s $1 trillion infrastructure proposal as the administration considers speeding up its timetable for the legislative package. Dozens of Republican lawmakers on Wednesday offered their ideas to Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao about the emerging plan to repair U.S. roads, bridges and airports, a key campaign promise for Trump. Following a defeat on healthcare reform, Chao said the infrastructure measure could now be unveiled as soon as next month — a major shift from the administration’s initial goal of fall.

“We’ll be willing to process whatever they send us, and we’ll do it in a timely way,” Thune said. “And if it precedes tax reform, then we’ll take it in order. But I think a lot of this is just going to be driven by when the administration is ready to submit and present their proposal.”

Chao said during a town hall event at the White House on Tuesday that the administration is still in the process of crafting a $1 trillion bill that “will probably be in May or late May.” The proposal wasn’t expected to be considered until much later in the year, after Congress tackled healthcare and tax reform. But since the House failed to move forward on ObamaCare repeal last month, some have predicted that the timeline for priorities such as infrastructure may be accelerated.

Republicans at Wednesday’s meeting made their own pitch to Chao about what should be targeted in the bill, according to members who attended the meeting.

“It was a bunch of people asking questions, and they were very parochial questions about specific things in their districts,” said Rep. John Duncan Jr. (R-Tenn.). Lawmakers brought up projects such as a decaying bridge in Ohio, an oft-criticized high-speed rail project in California and an airport in American Samoa without an air traffic control tower. Others voiced complaints about the Army Corps of Engineers and how long it takes for projects to get approved for a permit — an issue that Trump has vowed to address in his bill.

There will likely be a wide range of infrastructure interests competing for a slice of the funding pie, which Trump said could top $1 trillion. Chao has said the legislation could include money for energy, water, broadband and veterans hospitals, while Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson has maintained that it could include funding for housing, according to The Washington Post.

Trump has also floated the idea of giving projects a 90-day deadline to get off the ground in order to receive any funding. “We’re going to be very strong that it has to be spent on shovels, not on other programs,” Trump said Tuesday. “If you have a job that you can’t start within 90 days, we’re not going to give you the money for it.”

But Shuster said key details of the measure, such as how to pay for it and how to best leverage private-sector dollars, still need to be worked out. Some lawmakers are pressing Trump to use international tax reform to pay for infrastructure upgrades.

Reps. John Delaney (D-Md.), Ted Yoho (R-Fla.) and Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) have presented their ideas to the administration. The trio recently introduced legislation aimed at tapping into cash stored overseas and using that revenue to revitalize the country’s infrastructure.

” But questions remain over whether Trump’s proposal would be able to move quickly through Congress, where long-term funding solutions for infrastructure have long remained elusive.

Infrastructure could also bump up against other priorities if the bill is released in the spring. Lawmakers need to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration before its legal authority expires in September, while tax reform and healthcare may still be on table.

source–newsmax, greg richter, elaine chao, lou barletta, melaine zanona, bill schuster, john delaney, ted yoho, rodney davis,

Charter Schools a good thing or not?—

Charter Schools a good thing or not?—44g.,b21                                                                          4/12/17

The Missouri House passed a bill this month in favor of “Charter Schools”.  Charter can be formed if at least 1 school earns a score of below 60% on its annual performance report at least twice in 3 years? Failing schools– if no yearly progress can be desisignated a charter school.


A charter school is an independently run public school granted greater flexibility in its        operations, in return for greater accountability for performance. The “charter” establishing each school is a performance contract detailing the school’s mission, program, students served, performance goals, and methods of assessment.


Charter schools are public schools of choice, meaning that families choose them for their children. They operate with freedom from some of the regulations that are imposed upon district schools. Charter schools are accountable for academic results and for upholding         the promises made in their charters. They must demonstrate performance in the areas of academic achievement, financial management, and organizational stability. If a charter school does not meet performance goals, it may be closed.

  1. Are charter schools a good thing or a bad idea for Missouri:

Why do people want them–Parents, community leaders, social entrepreneurs, businesses,            teachers, school districts, and municipalities can submit a charter school proposal to their state’s          charter   authorizing entity.

Do they have the same regulations—Charter management organizations (CMOs), generally             speaking, are organizations that contract with an individual school or schools to deliver              management         services. These services typically include curriculum development, assessment design, professional            development, systems implementation, back-office services, teacher     recruitment, and facility services.            Uncommon Schools is a nonprofit CMO that contracts with        individual charter school boards of trustees

Families can choose to place their children in them

                What are their goals, mission, assessments

                Can they be closed if they don’t meet the goals, mission and pass the assessments?

  1. Are all charter schools following the same guidelines–Are there more minority and low income students in these schools– Nationwide, students in charter schools have similar demographic characteristics to students in the local public schools. In some states, charter schools serve significantly higher percentages   of minority or low-income students than the traditional public schools. Charter schools accept students       by random, public lottery.
  2. Those that get selected is it by a public lottery

                Do they have fewer  rules and regulations–A charter school is authorized to function once it has received   a charter, a statutorily defined performance contract detailing the school’s mission, program, goals,        students served, methods of assessment, and ways to measure success

                But most are granted for 3–5 years. Accountability for student achievement

Charter schools are accountable for student achievement by their sponsor

Many charter schools are created with the original intent of providing a unique and innovative                                       educational experience to its students.

Charter schools are still held accountable for test scores, state mandates, and other traditional        requirements that often have the effect of turning the charter school into a similar model and design as             the public schools.

  1. What are the cost of a charter school versus a public or private school.

Who pays for these charter schools–federal grants, public funds, does the federal government only pay      90% of the cost–the 10% covered by?

Are charter schools more expensive that public or private schools

Are these charter schools tuition free– As public schools, charter schools are tuition-free. Charter    schools are entitled to federal categorical funding for which their students are            eligible, such as Title I and                 Special Education monies. Federal legislation provides grants     to help charters to manage start-up costs.


  1. Taxes

Can a district refuse to establish them in their district

In many states, charter schools are funded by transferring per-pupil state aid from the school district            where the charter school student resides. Charters on average receive less money per-pupil than the            corresponding public schools in their areas, charter school funding automatically refunded yearly.

Some charter schools do not enroll a proportionate number of students that require special education or   student support services. Additionally, some charters are not required to provide transportation and         nutrition services.[29] The Federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Part B, Sections 502–511    authorizes funding grants for charter schools.

Charter schools receive about 22 percent less in per-pupil public funding than the district schools that         surround them, a difference of about $1,800.

A 2010 study found that charters received 64 percent of their district counterparts, averaging $7,131 per pupil compared to the average per pupil expenditure of $11,184.

  1. Understand that charter school numbers are growing with approx. 6500 started.

400,000 on a wait list to get into them

School board members must live within the district.

Charter school proponents assert that charter schools are not given the opportunities to restructure often                 and are simply closed down when students perform poorly on these assessments.[22] As of March 2009,      12.5% of the over 5000 charter schools founded in the United States had closed for reasons including academic, financial, and managerial problems, and occasionally consolidation or district interference.

  1. How many private schools are in the USA–33.600—5.2m students–12:2 TEACHER RATIO–most private schoolsdepend on their own funding, which may come from parents through tuition,          grants,    donations, and endowments. Private schools also often actively seek money from alumni, businesses, and community organizations. If the school is associated with a religious group, as is the case        with Catholic parochial schools, the religious organization — like the Catholic Church — may be an             important source of funding as well. Finally, in areas with a voucher system, some private schools are               primarily funded by tuition paid for by a voucher from the state. Because they’re autonomous, private                 schools are free to offer religious education, or curriculum not regulated by state standards. Some good              schools are not accredited, although most are. Accreditation ensures that the school meets regional or                 national standards set by a group of peers. It also ensures that the school’s administration and academic    programs undergo review by an outside group at least once every few years. Tuition can be expensive

10 How many public schools are in the USA–98,300–50.4m students–16:1 TEACHER RATIO

  1. How many charter schools in the USA—6800–3m students–in 42 states
  2. in 2015 400 new charter schools ,while 270 closed due to low enrollment , lack of funds, los performance.
  3. TEACHERS: Many people assume that teachers at private schools are as qualified as those at public ones, but it’s noteworthy that public school teachers usually hold a bachelor’s degree and are state-certified or are working towards certification. Certification means that a teacher has gone through the training required by the state, which includes student teaching and course work. Teachers who work at a charter school may fall under more flexible certification requirements than other public school teachers. Teachers in private schools may not be required to have certification. Instead, they often have subject-area expertise and an undergraduate or graduate degree in the subject they teach.
  4. Public vs. private vs. charter schools— Every parent wants the best education for their children, but where should you begin your search? For many parents, choosing between the local public school, a charter school, or a private school can become a roadblock in and of itself. For many, personal bias plays a huge role in their choice. Some equate private school tuition with a superior education. Others are firmly committed to public schools because they provide a more diverse cultural experience. It can be confusing because school choices are much wider than they used to be. And depending on your family, your child and your district, the best choice may not be the neighborhood school around the corner. However, charter schools are still funded by government coffers and accountable to the government body — be it state, county, or district — that provides the charter.

15. MAGNET SCHOOLS: By law, public schools must accept every child in its district, but this doesn’t mean your child will get into the school of your choice. Magnet schools draw children from larger areas than a neighborhood zone and can be very difficult to get into. Some high-performing public schools accept children based on high test scores. Schools may also not accept a child based on limited resources:

So the teachers need to be certified for charter schools?—

  1. Charter schools are run like a non-profit organization?— Charter schoolsoffer an institutional hybrid. Like traditional public schools, charter schools are free, and they can’t discriminate against students because of their race, gender, or disability. However, parents must usually submit a separate application to enroll a child in a charter school, and like private schools, spaces are often limited. Charter schools are independently run, and some are operated by for-profit private companies.

However, charter schools are still funded by government coffers and accountable to the government body                 — be it state, county, or district — that provides the charter. (Many successful charters do substantial   additional fundraising as well.) If a school is mismanaged or test scores are poor, a charter school can be     shut down.

  1. No child left behind help start the charter school program?
  2. Are charter schools weaker in math and reading?—
  3. What is a uncommon school?

No. Charter schools can vary a great deal in their design and in their results. Uncommon   Schools creates    schools based on the principles and practices that have proven successful in producing significant        academic gains at high-performing urban charter public schools across the country. Uncommon schools           share the following key attributes: a college preparatory mission; high standards for academics and     character; a highly structured learning environment; a longer school day and a longer school year; a             focus on accountability and data-driven instruction; and a faculty of committed and talented leaders          and teachers. Schools within the Uncommon network are modeled on some of the highest-performing    urban public charter schools in the country. Each school admits students through a random lottery, must        give preference to students resident in the Community School District (CSD) in which the charter school is   located. Teachers Certification requirements vary on a state-by-state    basis.

  1. Do charter schools adjust their curriculum to meet student needs, adopt themes, subjects, and enforce new generations learning models
  2. What are charter schools strong points— allow children to have opportunity at top performing schools in the country, they close the achievement gap, they raise the bar, higher percentage accepted into college