A case study of how the ultra-wealthy spend millions to get what they want in school reform
Here is a case study about how influential some ultra-wealthy philanthropists in the United States have become in market-based school reform. It’s about what happened in Washington state when some billionaires decided they had to have charter schools in the state — something voters had rejected three times.
If you haven’t been following the charter school wars in Washington, here’s a quick recap:
In 1996, 2000 and 2004, voters rejected allowing charter schools in the state. In 2012, a referendum allowing them was narrowly passed with major financial support from philanthropists such as Microsoft founder Bill Gates; Alice Walton of Walmart Stores (who, unlike Gates, doesn’t live in Washington state); entrepreneur Nicolas J. Hanauer of Seattle, with $1 million; and Jackie and Mike Bezos, about $750,000 (parents of Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon.com and owner of The Washington Post).
The law was challenged by a coalition of organizations which argued that the law “improperly” diverted public school funds to organizations that are private and “not subject to local voter control.” Those groups include the Washington Education Association, the League of Women Voters of Washington, El Centro de la Raza and the Washington Association of School Administrators.
Last year, the Washington state Supreme Court ruled that the 2012 referendum was unconstitutional. It violated the state’s constitution, which explicitly says that public school funds can be used only to support “common schools.” The justices voted, 6 to 3, that charter schools — which are publicly funded but privately run — are not “common schools” because their governing boards are not elected but are appointed by the founders of the individual schools. But in March 2016, the state legislature passed a bill that would fund charter schools with state lottery revenue — and Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat, allowed it become law without his signature.
Following is a detailed case study about how this all transpired, along with a discussion of the benefits and drawbacks of philanthropist involvement in school reform. It was written by Joanne Barkan, a writer based in New York City and Truro, Massachusetts. For the past six years, her work has focused on the relationship between “big philanthropy” and democracy, and the intervention of private foundations in public education policy. This article was first published in the Nonprofit Quarterly’s spring 2016 edition, “Strategic Nonprofit Management: Frameworks and Scaffolding.” I was given permission to republish.
By Joanne Barkan
Once upon a time, the super-wealthy endowed their tax-exempt charitable foundations and then turned them over to boards of trustees to run. The trustees would spend the earnings of the endowment to pursue a typically grand but wide-open mission written into the foundation’s charter—like The Rockefeller Foundation’s 1913 mission “to promote the well-being of mankind throughout the world.” Today’s multi-billionaires are a different species of philanthropist; they keep tight control over their foundations while also operating as major political funders—think Michael Bloomberg, Bill Gates, or Walmart heiress Alice Walton. They aim to do good in the world, but each defines “good” idiosyncratically in terms of specific public policies and political goals. They translate their wealth, the work of their foundations, and their celebrity as doers-of-good into influence in the public sphere—much more influence than most citizens have.
Call it charitable plutocracy—a peculiarly American phenomenon, increasingly problematic and in need of greater scrutiny. Like all forms of plutocracy, this one conflicts with democracy, and exactly how these philanthropists coordinate tax-exempt grantmaking with political funding for maximum effect remains largely obscure. What follows is a case study of the way charitable plutocracy operates on the ground. It’s a textbook example of the tug-of-war between government by the people and uber-philanthropists as social engineers.
The Case of Bill Gates and Washington State
This story begins in 1995, when the Washington State House of Representatives first considered legislation that would enable private individuals and organizations to obtain charters to create their own K–12 schools. These were to be taxpayer-funded schools, but privately run and exempt from many of the regulations governing district (regular) public schools. The funding A case study of how the ultra-wealthy spend millions to get what they want in school reform - The Washington Post:
