For years this country has ignored school infrastructure due to attempts to privatize public education. This includes indoor air quality (IAQ). It has been a part of the overall disinvestment in America’s public schools.
We’re told by the CDC, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and others, that schools should ensure clean air during Covid-19. There’s a disconnect between those who talk about coronavirus safety who work outside of schools and those who work in schools. Those writing these recommendations, no matter how well-meaning, don’t understand the reality school officials and teachers face.
They don’t seem to remember that bad air quality leading to asthma and allergies has been a longtime problem for children in school. It has been the source of learning difficulties. It’s hard to learn to read when you don’t feel well.
Why didn’t the leaders of the richest nation in the world improve the air quality in public schools before the coronavirus?
Remember when Education Secretary Betsy DeVos said not to invest in buildings?
She said:
If we really want to help students, then we need to focus everything about education on individual students – funding, supporting and investing in them. Not in buildings; not in systems.
This was her way of pushing an end to public education. The crummier the buildings, the more parents would demand choice to online charters sold as better, even if they’re not. The sooner public schools and the teaching profession would collapse.
How can school officials fix ventilation systems during a pandemic? How do maintenance workers continually replace air filters to keep children and teachers safe during the coronavirus?
The EPA provides guidelines for what healthy air quality should be during Covid-19.
Last year they reported their concern about school air quality. These concerns involved half the schools in the country!
In 2014, the National Center for Educations Statistics surveyed a sample of school districts and estimated that the average age of the nation’s main school buildings was 55 years old – putting the average date of construction for our nation’s schools at 1959. Additionally. nearly one-fourth of the nation’s schools have one or more buildings in need of extensive repair or replacement and nearly half have been reported to have problems related to indoor air quality (IAQ).
They provided a toolkit to improve air quality, but it’s anyone’s guess how many schools addressed clean air quality.
Indoor levels of air pollutants can be two to five times higher, and occasionally 100 times higher, than outdoor levels. Nearly 56 million people, approximately 20 percent of the U.S. population, spend their days inside elementary and secondary schools. In 1999, the National Center for Education Statistics of the U.S. Department of Education reported that approximately 25 percent of public schools described unsatisfactory ventilation, while 20 percent of schools told of unsatisfactory IAQ. IAQ problems can cause discomfort and contribute to short- and long-term health problems for students and staff.
Now, Americans expect schools to miraculously improve IAQ. Not only has indoor air quality been bad in half of public schools, many schools lack air conditioning and heat.
Baltimore tried to fix their heating problem in 2018. They had a $3 billion maintenance backlog.
Even modern schools have had trouble with maintenance upkeep. School districts struggle to build schools and they face difficulties with deferred maintenance, pushing maintenance aside to spend funds on more critical needs.
Parents of children attending private or parochial schools should be concerned about air quality too. Who’s guaranteeing the air in those buildings is fresh?
And charter schools? Those schools are often set up in old vacant buildings, or shopping malls, with little regulation.
What’s sad is that children haven’t been sitting in lousy classrooms because Americans couldn’t pay for it. They’ve been breathing unhealthy air because the politicians and policymakers permitted it! This country had leaders who cared more about seeing that education became a means to make a profit instead of for the social good.
They signed onto an ideological for-profit agenda that went so far as to dismiss the health of students and teachers in order to end public education.
School facilities including the air students breath, have always been critical to learning and the health of students. This virus is revealing how badly Americans have ignored public school buildings for students.
If we really want to reimagine schools, let’s hope there’s a new initiative to improve public school building safety. Americans must invest in public education and the buildings where children are housed.
In the meantime, it seems like risky business to rely on the air in any school to keep students and teachers safe during Covid-19.
This one was a great rebuttal to anybody who says teacher’s unions should not be political.
Thanks, Lawrence.
First, I’m 100% behind properly funding an authentic system of public education so please don’t mistake me for a troll.
We raised our daughters in a wealthy and predominantly white public school district in where its only high-school was built in 1972. But only 20+ years later due to rapid suburban growth it underwent a $50 million renovation and upgrade, where grade 9 was carved out of the building and housed in a new “Freshman Academy” in another renovated building next door (for some $millions more).
Fast forward to the present date, the same school district has continued to grow but not by multiples of itself….fairly consistent year after year. They have just broken ground on a $172 MILLION renovation and expansion of the same high school! Yes, that’s nearly a quarter of a billion dollars in 25 years. The amenities of this facility are too numerous to mention but I can guarantee that the occupants of the building/campus will be breathing the cleanest air money can buy. The funding for this renovation came from a special property-tax referendum that was authorized by recent legislation in Indiana that enables local school boards to go begging for supplemental funding from local voters to obtain more funding from property-owners to help maintain, expand or replace school buildings, fund adequate transportation for students, and most allow them to spend more on operating costs, most notably teacher salaries and benefits.
The Black Lives Matter movement cannot be separated from the education of our children. Both sit at the center of the struggle for racial and class equality in America. But as I learn more about BLM I cannot think of a better example of institutional racism (aka systemic racism, structural racism, or just racist policies, per author Dr. Ibram X Kendi) than the governance and financial model currently in place to operate our system of public education. The decision we made to move to the school district in the 80’s was driven partially by racist thinking and the system and policies that resulted in dramatic segregation by race and class were racist. And the decision to later pass laws to allow these heavily-segregated districts to fund country-club school buildings was also racist. Our white family, as well as thousands of others like ours, benefitted from those long-established and deeply entrenched policies that reinforce the system of haves and have-nots aligned primarily by race.
Clearly, something has to change. It’s really that bad. As a long-term outsider the current model has never made complete sense to me and even less so now that I’m “of a certain age”. We have recently witnessed a clarion call (BLM) to reform law-enforcement in our nation’s big cities. And tragically, because these systems became so entrenched and powerful, we now have millions of people and even local elected officials using the unthinkable phrase “Defund The Police”. No one should take DTP literally but they SHOULD take it very seriously because what it really stands for is the belief that the current policing system in place cannot be changed from within. It must be blown up, reimagined, reconstructed and redeployed in ways that the community fully embraces as their own and for their safety and welfare.
On the other end of the political spectrum we’ve seen a corresponding “Defund Public Education” movement over the past 20 years. That is, enough people in positions of power concluded that traditional public education could not be reformed (whatever that meant) from the inside. It had to be replaced by new models. The only real difference was that it was financial-interests, billionaire saviourism, and community apathy that drove it, and not a grass-roots call from the communities served by public schools. And, as we all know, the so-called K-12 School Reform/School-Choice agenda has been a colossal failure and waste of $billions of local and federal tax dollars.
So now we’re left with a three-headed monster (THM) of publicly-funded education that consists of a mish-mash of charters, choice-scholarships, and traditional schools all mixed together in a bureaucratic slurry of inconsistent rules regarding accessibility, accountability, financing, and transparency.
So. How long until people in our communities wake up to confront the new order in public education, i.e. the THM? How long until “Defund The THM” becomes a secondary battlecry for racial equality? And if it happens what will come to replace the THM? No one knows but what I mostly seem to hear from the community of traditional public education teachers, their unions, and administrators is that they want two of the three heads to be severed and the remaining head to be fully funded and left alone to do what it does best.
And that as an outcome is simply never going to happen. The people behind the other two heads still hold tight to a lot of seats in various state legislatures as well as US Congress and until they’re gone their interests will be served. The THM IS public education now as we know it and it must be reimagined, reconstructed and redeployed in its entirety. And traditional public school corporations must be part of that holistic process and not separated from it.
So, I’m strapped in for the duration of my ride on planet Earth as it’s going to be a bumpy one (never mind climate change!). But I think it could be slightly less bumpy the sooner elected officials and public education careerists embrace the tenants and agenda for social change of the Black Lives Matter movement and apply them to the education of our nation’s children as well.
There’s a lot to take in here, Patrick, thank you. I believe you’re saying racism exists in our country when it comes to our schools, and that is certainly true. I couldn’t agree more, Including the segregated no excuses charter schools. We are being told those schools are doing great during the pandemic. A pig just flew past my window.
Thanks, Patrick.
Hahaha – I’d like to turn that pig (charters) into bacon.
I’m saying what you summarized but more. The policies that created and maintain our current system(s) of publicly-funded K-12 education are inherently racist. Yes, that includes school-choice scholarship programs and charter schools (although some of those can be quite diverse wrt race and class) but it ALSO includes traditional public schools.
That’s because district and school boundaries,, which govern accessibility, and funding mechanisms primarily follow race and income, and are not designed to provide equal access to quality education.
That is systemic racism pure and simple and it must be addressed at its foundation in order for public education to meet its obligation to society.
I cannot wait to listen to the podcast below coming out next month and I hope you give it a listen and address in one of your newsletters, ALL of which I enjoy reading. .
Cheers
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nice-white-parents/id1524080195
It’s long past time for recognize how our economic system really works. The bankers already know this, the rest of us have to stop pretending! Functional Finance Reconsidered
By Lawrence D’Amico
The purpose of functional finance (aka monetizing the debt) is not to literally print money and throw it at the average American, ala the Joker in the first Batman movie. Rather, it is a carefully controlled transfer of funds, or “loan”, from the Federal Reserve to the Treasury Department, or other worthy cause.
According to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the Treasury Department delegated, not transferred, the role of money printing to the Fed. It was only fitting then, during World War II, for Fed Chairman Marriner Eccles to subordinate the Fed to the Treasury Department by pegging interest rates at 2%, despite a demand pull inflation rate of 10-15% throughout the war. This made it easier for the Fed to print currency, use the money to buy bonds from the Treasury Department, and then return the earned interest to the Treasury Department when the bonds matured—minus a small processing fee. Don’t believe those silly old propaganda films of average American buying war bonds; the Federal Reserve paid for World War II.
The result: a deficit of 25% of GNP was erased by the end of the 1940s (as opposed to a deficit of 6% of GNP, when George Bush Sr. left office) and a national debt of about 125% of GNP melted down to about 60% of GNP by 1973. Only with the return of large passive deficits during the Great Recession of 1973-75 and high real interest rates during the double dip recession of 1979-82 did the national debt begin to grow again.
But functional finance need not be used exclusively at the federal level. The Federal Reserve can monetize state and local debts, and can even buy bonds from private corporations. According to Lee Iacocca’s autobiography, Chrysler went to the Fed before they approached the federal government, as did New York City in 1975. The Fed could also make loans directly to a specific agency–such as a hospital or school–or to a public authority–such as the MTA. Given the power and paranoia of libertarian America, these options should also be considered.
But what if the Federal Reserve refuses to comply? Ever since the 1951 Treasury Accord liberated the Fed from Treasury control (ie Executive Branch) and replaced small town banker Marriner Eccles with William McChesney Martin the Fed has treated inflation, real or perceived, supply side or demand pull, as its only policy concern and raising interest rates as its only policy tool. Unless banks, hedge funds (Long Term Capital Management), or foreign currencies (Mexico, 1995) need help the Fed treats commodity or wage inflation as an evil to be vanquished, although stock market and real estate inflation get a pass.
No problem! The Treasury Department can monetize debt (aka make “sovereignty loans”) itself because the 1913 Federal Reserve Act only delegated money creation to the Fed.
But isn’t printing money inflationary? No problem! Just make the sovereignty loans, or bond purchases, to areas with high unemployment rates. Would a 0% interest loan to a hospital in Camden, Detroit, or Newark cause a spike in the national inflation rate comparable to Germany in 1923? Well, are we a country that just lost a war, with shortages or labor and capital, occupied by 2 foreign armies, with striking workers, and large reparations to pay? No, we are an advanced capitalist superpower with surpluses of labor and capital, and we have the power to attract more. And, we have a century of economic history to learn from.
But what if it does happen? What if Paul Volcker was right to treat inflation like a plague looking for a host? No problem! Just return the money to the Treasury Department after the impoverished hospital/school district/public authority repays the loan.
So why don’t we do this more often? Our policy makers can’t be blamed too much for fearing rising expectations. If the general public knew how easy functional finance can be people would be demonstrating over every pothole. And, given the greed, shortsightedness, and laziness of many Americans this golden goose must be carefully guarded.
Given our current unemployment level, the ignorance of many state and local policy makers regarding budget cuts, and the growing despair of many Americans it’s time to remember what the real purpose of central banks is. Financial capitalism is down, but industrial capitalism, agrarian capitalism, and government service providers need not be pulled into the ditch with them. Vive le functional finance!
Such long interesting comments here. Thank you, Lawrence,
Lack of air conditioning in many schools will make mask wearing rules very difficult to be enforced. Classroom temps in the 80s and 90s are not at all uncommon. Breathing and talking through sweat soaked masks will become intolerable for teachers And students alike. And this is a new piece of an old problem being made worse as global warming makes the need for air conditioning essential instead of a luxury. Teaching in sweltering overheated classrooms is inhumane and will make Covid safety protocols impossible to maintain.
You’ve got the right idea, but as long as Americans accept the myth that the federal government doesn’t have the money, or that Keynesian-deficit financing is no longer functional to the American economy we will never have the political will for federal funding of education–the only real solution. THIS SHOULD HELP BLAST AWAY THE MYTHOLOGY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN’T PROVIDE FISCAL STIMULUS TO HELP THE RECOVERY AND NEEDED GOVERNMENT SERVICES
Why are we so sure that debt-financed relief and recovery is the answer to the economic shock of the coronavirus?
The economic shock of the coronavirus and the public health measures undertaken to combat it are unique in their specifics, but not actually all that different from the general cause of all other recessions: They constitute a mammoth negative shock to aggregate demand. Basically, all at once, tens of millions of Americans stopped spending money on a whole range of economic outputs (restaurants, hotels, air travel, brick-and-mortar retail, etc.). Because one person’s spending is another person’s income, this type of shock almost inevitably leads to another spending pullback as, say, restaurant workers lose their income and cut back on spending even in sectors still open during the lockdown period.3
The proper response to this sudden and mammoth negative shock to demand is straightforward, if daunting. First, maintain spending power (income and wealth) during the lockdown period by providing relief (unemployment benefits, stimulus checks, etc.) to those who have lost jobs and incomes. Second, foster a rapid recovery by boosting aggregate demand as public health indicators allow a phased “reopening” of economic activity. We have already provided some relief during the lockdown, but we need to provide more. If we don’t expand and extend this relief—if we allow this relief to run out while the economy remains profoundly damaged—tens of millions of families will run down savings and take on debt, making them much less likely to spend robustly once the economy returns to closer-to-normal. This depressed spending will drag on overall recovery.
Because the goal is to maintain spending during the lockdown and boost it during the recovery, we want to finance these relief and recovery measures with debt instead of taxes. Taxes reduce disposable income and spending in the short run (although tax increases for high-income households drag on spending less than tax increases for other households). Given the crucial importance of ending the coronavirus-driven recession as quickly as possible with overwhelming force, it is best to finance relief and recovery efforts with debt instead of taxes.
Absent significant relief and recovery measures, the economic future looks grim. A measure of unemployment that accounts for misclassification and declines in labor force participation associated with the coronavirus likely peaked at just under 24% in April, but even with a couple of months of rapid job growth, we could see unemployment rates averaging over 10% for 2020 and over 8% for 2021.
Further, the experience of the Great Recession shows us beyond dispute that trying too hard to rein in deficits and public spending while the economy remains weak (i.e., inappropriately contractionary fiscal policy) makes recovery slower and more painful than it has to be.
https://www.epi.org/publication/faqs-on-debt-and-deficit-and-coronavirus-recovery/?utm_source=Economic+Policy+Institute&utm_campaign=701491f081-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_02_22_11_12_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e7c5826c50-701491f081-59922333&mc_cid=701491f081&mc_eid=62bdc7aab0
Thank you, Lawrence. I have to read this more carefully. I also appreciate the EPI link.
I had not thought of this, Rick. But you’re right! Unbearable and inhumane. Thank you for the reminder.
Great point,Nancy. I spent 32 years in a building built poorly in 1975. One of my collegues had to request a portable classroom to keep her asthma from becoming problematic.
That’s terrible! I know many teachers over the years who have worked in poor conditions. Portables don’t always have great air either. Thanks, Roy.