Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

State Rep: Efforts at “Consensus” Lost WA State Race to the Top Dollars

On his blog, state Rep. Reuven Carlyle (D-36) writes that the reason the state of Washington failed to secure federal Race to the Top funds for education is that the state focused on political consensus at the expense of radical change. (Education reform legislation passed this year failed to track school evaluations to student performance or embrace charter schools, two criteria for Race to the Top funding).

Carlyle:

Our state’s current education reform effort is legitimate, genuine and meaningful for our state, and we should be proud of the impressive progress we’re making on the ground. Yet we cannot pretend that it is world-class in scale and scope relative to the radical systems change we need and relative to the rest of the nation.

And so now is the time for a new level of courageous honesty. It is time for a sense of moral conviction to raise previously unspoken issues–to open the dialogue–to engage in tough political discussions–to step back and talk about previously taboo subjects because they matter.

First, let’s put the toughest question of all on the table: Do we retreat into criticism of the Race to the Top process or do we engage anew in the hard work of unleashing the bold spirit of change? Let’s double down on our hard work, not retreat into lethargy of inaction about education reform.

Second, I believe, heart and soul, that we need courageous honesty to put every policy issue on the table without preconceived restrictions, restrictions or the paralysis of the status quo. Every issue means every issue.

Read Rep. Carlyle’s whole post here.


  • Comment

    I applaud Mr. Carlyle's enthusiasm and efforts.

    I understand, and can appreciate to some degree, the opposition of the teacher's unions to charter schools. And, for a long time I opposed them too as too likely to slice off revenues from the whole, thereby leaving what is left an even sicker piece. Then, I had a child enter a Seattle Public Schools high school (South of the Ship Canal, brand new $100M facility, absolutely beautiful place). So far, failure on almost every level. Been there two years.

    One teacher didn't teach at all; he handed out worksheets at the beginning of class and collected them at the end. Most (not all), had given up trying to reach the kids – let alone demand excellence. All the while the mantra of the unions was that the schools are under-funded. How much money does it take to make a kid stay after school if they don't turn their homework? This, however, wouldn't be requested because the prevailing attitude is, “the kids are now old enough to choose for themselves.” What? At 15 years old they know enough to make all choices about their education? This just strikes me as wrong.

    And then, I started reading about some charter schools.

    Here is one abstract:
    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/05/11/0… (if you subscribe to the New Yorker you can get full access)

    Here is the website for one charter school group:
    http://www.greendot.org/

    I know, charter schools don't solve all problems, and unions aren't the source of all problems. And, if there was more money available some problems could possibly be addressed pretty well in the current system. But, in the absence of better funding now (which I think is somewhat unlikely, although I will vote for the income tax initiative), we move through the molasses failing to educate children while doing almost nothing to change. I, personally, think we ought to experiment with a few charter schools to see if they can help. What do we have to lose?

  • http://spifflines.blogspot.com/ John Bailo

    Here's my plan for schools.

    Make all “book learning” optional.

    Kids would be required to go to school for “social learning”, athletics, clubs and organizations.

    Classes would be more like seminars.

    Learning would be heavily self-driven using Internet tools.

    A state wide “Web Curriculum” would be developed usable by anyone from home or in school.

  • Trevorg

    Reuven Carlyle thinks privatization is “radical” agenda most of the time. The “courageous honesty” he calls for is pretty much never to raise taxes or close corporate tax loopholes, but to reduce the wages of government employees in the name of efficiency or to simply outsource or devolve government functions to the private sector. His push for “zero-based budgeting” starts from the presumption that our budget is limited and we must find more efficient ways to cut. If I saw him talking about justice and not just efficiency, about the shrinking middle class and not just the need to shrink government, I'd take his ideas more seriously.

  • Comment

    Thanks for the clarification. I don't know this guy. Isn't my rep and I don't follow him. My comment was in no way meant to be an endorsement of his overall agenda (I may agree with him on many topics if I knew his positions, and just as likely I may disagree with him). Here, just passing along my reaction to the article and his blog post.

    Take care,

    Comment

  • Ample funding!

    Failure to fund the schools adequately is still the greatest problem. My son goes to one of the best ranked schools in the state and his AP history text ends with Regan's election. The text books are out of date, the computers are old. These things are not given away for free by the market driven publishers, hardware/software makers, utilities, etc. Even if you don't want to pay teachers a decent professional wage you will still have to pay market rates for everything else in the schools. The massive layoffs anticipated in the next biennium will have to be averted with more revenue (you know, the dreaded T word). The Democrats in Olympia have shown no courage so far, I don't expect them to in the future race to the bottom.

  • Barleywine

    Yours is one time a bland name speaks LOUDLY!

    So loudly that the others kind of blend (Oh, yeah..you blend.)
    Kind of funny if you think about it.

  • Comment

    Agreed.

    Will change soon.

    BTW, you sound yummy.

  • Trevor

    I wonder how “ample” our funding would look if we included PTA fundraising in our assessments of public schools. And that doesn't even take into account the shameful way in which the state relies upon local parents to organize levies time and again just to keep their schools going in the absence of state money.

    In the debate over I-1098 on KUOW, when Matt McIlwain claimed that our schools don't need more funding, John Burbank went so far as to point out that Matt's kids go to private school where they receive far more funding per pupil than they would at public school. It was a bit of rough justice, but fair, given the harsh class politics that lie behind the claims that our schools would be doing just fine if we paid our teachers less.

    http://www.kuow.org/program.php?id=20848