by Jason Russell
Washington Examiner
July 29, 2016
Hillary Clinton’s position on public charter schools has been fairly ambiguous since her presidential campaign began, but at least one teachers’ union leader says Clinton is on board with their view.
“Hillary Clinton is on the exact same page as we are,” Lily Eskelsen Garcia, president of the National Education Association, told the American Prospect’s Rachel Cohen. “[She] says there are some innovative charter schools that were designed to impact the system, to try something creative. But if a charter has any other reason for existing, like making someone money, then she does not support those, and neither do we. I don’t care if they call it a for-profit or if it’s technically a nonprofit.”
The 3 million-member NEA was one of the first unions to endorse Clinton’s presidential bid in October 2015, although they waited until after the 1.6 million-member American Federation of Teachers endorsed Clinton in July.
Clinton has generally been supportive of charter schools over the past two decades. In a July address to the NEA’s annual conference, Clinton expressed tepid support for charter schools in front of a generally anti-charter crowd. “When schools get it right, whether they’re traditional public schools or public charter schools, let’s figure out what’s working,” Clinton said, followed by a din of booing. “No, let’s figure out what’s working and share it with schools across America,” she followed up, adding a denouncement of for-profit schools. Clinton made a similar remark a couple weeks later to the American Federation of Teachers’ annual convention.
Before that, in December 2015, Clinton praised a bill for giving resources to expand high-quality public charter schools. But a month prior she was criticizing charters: “Most charter schools — I don’t want to say every one — but most charter schools, they don’t take the hardest-to-teach kids, or, if they do, they don’t keep them.”
Back in the 1990s, when charter schools were just getting their start, Clinton was generally seen as a supporter.
Charter schools are publicly funded and do not charge tuition. Compared to traditional public schools, charters have more independence and flexibility in their operations and curricula, which is why many families find charters desirable. They are open to all students, but they often don’t have enough space to meet demand. In that case, they use a random lottery system to determine admission.
Jason Russell is a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner.