(Photo credit: Getty Images)

Back when Hillary Rodham Clinton was still an education innovator, the Democratic nominee, then the young first lady of Arkansas, brought to her adopted home state an inspired program called HIPPY, which coaches less-affluent parents who want to prepare their preschoolers for first grade.

Former President Bill Clinton gave the program a much-deserved mention in his keynote speech last week at the Democratic National Convention.

“Hillary told me about a preschool program developed in Israel, called HIPPY: Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters. The idea was to teach low-income parents, even those who couldn’t read, to be their children’s first teachers. She said she thought it would work in Arkansas. I said, ‘That’s great, what are we going to do about it?’ She said, ‘I already did it. I called the woman in Israel and she’ll be here in about 10 days to help us get started,’” he said.

Thus it was that, in 1986, Arkansas became the third state to start its own HIPPY program. Decades later, HIPPYUSA is still going strong with programs in 22 states and the District of Columbia — including three southern California programs in Riverside, Santa Maria and El Centro.

The former president’s shout-out to the HIPPY program is a reminder that his wife’s interest in early education goes back decades; it also dovetails nicely with her current proposal to make high-quality pre-K classrooms universally available. Bill Clinton’s outline of the candidate’s early activism in education also harkens back to a time when she was widely recognized as a leader in education reform. 

HIPPY’s genius lies in its recognition that one of the greatest disadvantages that poor and working-class kids face in achieving educational parity comes from their home environments, where their parents often lack stellar educational credentials themselves. Those parents are less likely to read to their children or to engage them in conversation, which limits not only their reading ability but also their vocabulary.

Experts in pre-school education believe that, by age 3, poor kids may hear as many as 30 million fewer words than their affluent counterparts. They enter first grade with less competency in reading than those children whose parents have already given them library cards and surrounded them with books, setting aside time each evening to read them bedtime stories or putting them in front of a computer screen with digital learning apps.

In other words, poor children inherit their parents’ limitations.

The HIPPY program seeks to ameliorate those disadvantages. Concentrating on families below or near the poverty level, it trains peer educators to go into homes and teach parents to teach their kids. Parents use a finely tuned curriculum, aimed at 3-, 4- and 5-year-olds, to instruct their children in reading, math, language and science, as well as motor skills. They are encouraged to spend 15 to 20 minutes daily with their children reading books and engaging in activities that develop academic skills.

The University of South Florida’s HIPPYUSA National Research and Evaluation Center tracks research on the program. It concludes that “HIPPY graduates have demonstrated higher scores on standardized pre-academic, language, and cognitive direct assessment measures.”

That’s especially important in places like my hometown of Monroeville, Alabama — the fictional Maycomb in Harper Lee’s “To Kill a Mockingbird.” On the boundary of Alabama’s impoverished Black Belt, Monroe County has an unemployment rate of around 10 percent, more than double the national rate. More than 25 percent of residents live under the poverty line, according to Alabama Possible, which tracks such data.

Kay Hamilton, Monroe County’s HIPPYUSA coordinator, says the program has served about 900 families over the past decade, relying on a core of dedicated peer parent-educators who earn around $10 an hour. Parent enthusiasm shows in the percentage of them the program retains for the full three years — upwards of 90 percent, she said.

“The other day I was in a store, and one of the clerks stopped me,” Hamilton told me. “She said, ‘My children are in the 8th and 9th grades, and they are both on the honor roll. They are HIPPY graduates.’”

Hamilton said such parent testimonials are not unusual.

That Hillary Clinton spotted HIPPY’s potential early on is testimony to her advocacy for children, her insistence that a high-quality education is the right of every American child. Lately, though, she has backtracked and tamped down that spirit to earn the support of teachers’ groups that resist change and reject reform.

Here’s hoping Candidate Clinton can rekindle the “change-agent” spark that led her to start a HIPPY program in Arkansas.

• This article was published in partnership with The74Million.org. 

(Credit: Getty Images)

This article wraps up our in-depth coverage of the Republican and Democratic National Conventions. For more analysis and backstage reports from Cleveland & Philadelphia, see our RNC and DNC archives.

We knew from the first primary debates last fall that 2016 wasn’t likely to be the education election. Candidates had other pressing things to talk about — issues that became increasingly urgent with every new headline about a terrorist attack, police shooting, boat of refugees crossing the Mediterranean and our slowing job market (just Friday, a fresh batch of headlines about economic growth falling below forecasts).

Which is not to say that education isn’t a key component of all these stories. Schools are at the very core of the jobs story. They are a central player in the immigration story — and the civil rights story. They are one of the first places kids learn about diversity, acceptance, tolerance and empathy. Education lays the foundation for everything that follows — that’s precisely why we organized the 2015 Education Summit in New Hampshire, in hopes of focusing political leaders on the issues confronting our classrooms.

The summit became a trending topic on Twitter that day; it turns out a wide swath of voters are indeed quite interested to hear what these men and women would do for their kids, their schools and their communities.

And it’s those voters that we’ve thought about as we’ve walked around Cleveland and Philadelphia over the past two weeks, seeking out any elected leader with something substantive to say about education priorities, funding, diversity, standards, curriculum, graduation rates, segregation, etc. If schools weren’t likely to come up at the convention podium during prime-time, we’d go backstage, to the streets, to the side panels and seek out answers as to where America’s major political parties were leaning on education issues.

Over 10 days, we collaborated with the experts at Bellwether Education Partners to publish more than 100 posts on what we found (you can scan our complete coverage of the Republican National Convention and the Democratic National Convention), and our convention coverage culminated in a sobering Chad Aldeman essay about why politicians, so disinclined to go specific on schools this cycle, owe it to voters to bring education into the convention spotlight. Why? Because it will both require candidates to spell out a concrete vision for our schools, and it will also give the winning candidate a larger mandate to ultimately implement their vision.

Stumping on education leads to voters caring about education which in turn drives elected leaders to act on education.

Alas, that didn’t happen last week — or the week prior either. The candidates had more pressing things to talk about when the networks where dialed in. But outside of the evening presentations, we met plenty of Democrats and Republicans who wanted to focus on students and education, and we came back with some compelling observations about where these elected leaders may take our students and schools.

18 memorable education conversations we had during the RNC and DNC:

1 and 2. Party platforms: Everybody seems to want more local school control and fewer tests, but Matt Barnum also identified five notable shifts in the GOP’s education priorities, while fact-checking new claims on the Democratic platform about tying testing to teacher evaluations.

3 and 4. Running mates: Mike Pence’s long record on school choice and vouchers, Tim Kaine’s past writings on teacher pay, career and technical education and individualized learning.

5. Have you heard about Mike Pence’s epic education feud with Indiana’s top Democrat?

6. Tim Kaine, the safe bet — He may not necessarily help Clinton woo new voters, but he’ll help her actually govern on issues like education.

7. Kaine’s wife, Anne Holton,was Virginia’s Secretary of Education. Here’s how she could influence federal policy.

8. No national pre-k: The new Republican platform turns early education into a surprising wedge issue.

9. High anxiety over the Every Student Succeeds Act at the DNC, as education reform advocates worry that local control might lead to dismantled standards.

10. Donald, they’re just not that into you— The 74 interviewed a handful of education advocates about Trump’s remarks championing school choice. But the feeling’s not exactly mutual.

11. Clinton and educators – Why the nominee is wrong on teacher compensation.

12. Michael Bloomberg likes ruffling feathers: Not just in the GOP, as he implies Trump is incompetent, but also among Democrats, as he says he disagrees with the party on its education priorities.

13. Welcome to Philadelphia — Here’s what the city’s schools chief said he wanted to hear from visiting Democrats on education.

14. A dystopian future for school children? If Donald Trump listens to Chris Christie, the head of his transition team, on issues of school funding, the future looks bleak.

15. From talk of mass incarceration in the 1990s to talk of education and opportunity in 2016: Hillary Clinton’s evolving rhetoric.

16. Beyond K-12: Sen. Coons makes a passionate argument at the DNC that education reform must extend beyond graduation.

17. Big Picture, RNC: Is Donald Trump’s nomination the end of school reform in the GOP? That’s a complicated question.

18. Big Picture, DNC: Immigration policy is actually an education issue.

• This article was published in partnership with The74Million.org

Chelsea Clinton at her 1997 graduation from Sidwell Friends Academy in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Getty Images)

The year was 1993.

President Bill Clinton had just beat Republican incumbent George H. Bush and the first family was facing an early political test: Where would they send Chelsea Clinton, their 12-year-old daughter and only child, to school?

On the campaign trail, Bill Clinton had portrayed himself as an ardent supporter of public education. He even sent his daughter to Horace Mann Magnet Middle School, a public school in Little Rock, Arkansas where 59 percent of the students were black and 41 percent white.  (Today, out of some 760 students, 58 percent are black, 26.5 percent are white, 11.7 are Hispanic and 1.7 percent are Asian.)

Local Washington, D.C. officials invited the first family to choose a city school as a show of good faith. But days before Clinton’s inauguration, the family announced that Chelsea would be attending one of the region’s most exclusive private institutions: Sidwell Friends School.

“It’s an academically challenging school,” Clinton spokesman George Stephanopoulos said at the time. “And it’s a school that Chelsea and her parents feel that she’ll be challenged and productive and happy in.”

• Read more on the live blog: The 74 and Bellwether Education Partners are partnering to cover both the Republican and Democratic National Conventions.

Chelsea Clinton would join an elite group of students that included the children of  Washington Post publisher Donald E. Graham, former New Mexico Sen. Jeff Bingaman, and New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley.

Criticism of the Clintons’ school choice was swift and broad.

Michael Casserly, the executive director of the Council of the Great City Schools, a Washington, D.C.-based coalition of city public school systems, called the Clintons’ decision an “unfortunate vote of no confidence in urban education.”

Enrolling Chelsea in a public school “would have been an excellent opportunity to spur greater parental involvement in urban public schools and to work hand in glove with the public schools from both a political and personal standpoint” he said.

Former D.C. school board member Sandra Butler-Truesdale told The Washington Post that if Clinton had picked a public school, “it would have boosted the morale of educators in this city. It would have made such a big difference in the way education is delivered.”

Rebuke also came from national political figures. Then-Secretary of Education and now U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander told CBS Morning News that the first family made a wise choice for their daughter — Alexander’s son had just graduated from Sidwell Friends — but were being hypocritical because Clinton opposed Republican calls for school vouchers that would have helped needy parents make a similar choice.

Bill Clinton had argued that vouchers would drain money from public schools; Hillary Clinton also opposes the policy.

With tuition at Sidwell Friends back then more than $10,000 a year, some 27 percent of its 1,030 students were minorities when Chelsea Clinton was admitted. Sidwell Friends remains  popular among Washington’s powerful families, most famously President Barack Obama’s daughters, Malia and Sasha. The school’s tuition has risen to $39,360, with only 23 percent of students receiving any kind of financial aid, according to the its website. The school was founded in 1883 by Thomas W. Sidwell to uphold the Quaker principles of peace and justice.

Even former president Jimmy Carter, who was the first president in 71 years to send a child to a D.C. public school while in office, said he was “disappointed.” His daughter, Amy, attended public schools throughout her four years in Washington, including Stevens Elementary School and Hardy Middle School, a predominantly black school. Amy Carter went onto Brown University but was asked to leave her sophomore year. She finished at Memphis College of Art and then got her master’s at Tulane University.

Chelsea went onto Stanford University (and Columbia and Oxford); Malia will enter Harvard in fall 2017 after taking a gap year. The Bush daughters, Jenna and Barbara, had both graduated from Austin High School in 2000, the spring before their father took office. Jenna went onto the University of Texas and Barbara became the fourth-generation Bush to attend Yale.

Amid the Sidwell storm, the Clinton family defended the choice saying, “we believe this decision is best for our daughter at this time in her life based on our changing circumstances.” Hillary Clinton added later that a private school would allow the family to better maintain Chelsea’s privacy—a sentiment she reiterated in her 2003 memoir, “Living History.”

“Our decision about where to send Chelsea to school had inspired passionate debate inside and outside the Beltway, largely because of its symbolic significance. I understood the disappointment felt by advocates of public education when we chose Sidwell Friends, a private Quaker school, particularly when Chelsea attended public schools in Arkansas. But the decision for Bill and me rested on one simple fact: private schools were private property, hence off limits to news media. Public schools were not. The last thing we wanted was television cameras and news reporters following our daughter throughout the school day as they had when President Carter’s daughter, Amy, attended public school.”

The press during Bill Clinton’s administration would, in fact, develop a general no-coverage rule when it came to the First Family’s children.

On Chelsea’s graduation day from Sidwell, though the Clintons did not seem to mind the public attention. During a two-hour outdoor ceremony, President Clinton gave a short, bittersweet talk in which he instructed the high school graduates to “indulge your folks” if they seem sad as they remember all the milestones their children have reached. Obama actually declined an invitation to speak at Malia’s graduation, saying he would be wearing dark glasses and crying.

Hillary Clinton also waxed nostalgic in her syndicated newspaper column that week: “Like parents across the country,” she wrote. “We find ourselves fighting back tears as we contemplate what our days will be like when our daughter leaves the nest to embark on a new stage of life.”

Tonight, it will be Hillary embarking on a new stage of life — and history — when Chelsea introduces her mother, who will make her acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention.

This article was published in partnership with The74Million.org.

Unlike Trump, Clinton has a substantial education record – during the campaign, she released detailed proposals on home visits and the school-to-prison pipeline. She recently addressed the country’s largest teachers union and was booed for mentioning charter schools; only a few months before she was criticized for suggesting that charters don’t enroll highly disadvantaged children.

In addition to Clinton, other high-profile Democrats who will address the convention have extensive education policies.

• Read more on the live blog: The 74 and Bellwether Education Partners are partnering to cover both the Republican and Democratic National Conventions.

Here are the edu-creds of 14 marquee names set to take the stage in Philly:

Vice President Joe Biden — During his time as vice president, Biden has taken a lead in the effort to reduce sexual assaults at colleges and universities. While a senator, Biden twice sponsored the Campus Sexual Assault Victims’ Bill of Rights Act. He also introduced a bill that would identify top-performing, low-income eighth graders as part of a program to guarantee them Pell Grant funds for college.

Former President Bill Clinton — In his 1999 State of the Union address, Clinton proposed what could be seen in retrospect as a prototype of No Child Left Behind. In exchange for federal funds, states would have to end social promotion, issue report cards on school performance, hire better-trained teachers, and “shake up failing schools,” as the Los Angeles Times put it. During his tenure as governor of Arkansas in the 1980s, Clinton pushed to direct more money to the state’s schools, set new academic standards, and required competency testing for teachers. Arkansas schools remained among the worst in the country.

President Barack Obama — The president is in some ways the model DFER-style Democrat, promoting education reforms like charter schools and data-driven teacher evaluation despite backlash from traditional allies in labor. His edu-legacy will live in the Race to the Top program (including the Common Core and teacher evaluations tied to student test scores), his push for federal pre-school spending, spotlight on the school-to-prison pipeline and, in higher ed, reforms to student loans, call to make community college free, and a crackdown on for-profit colleges.

Michelle Obama — The First Lady is probably best known for her Let’s Move initiative promoting physical activity and healthy eating to combat childhood obesity. The program set off a conservative backlash around issues of cost and government intrusion, particularly in response to her efforts to incorporate more produce and whole grains and less salt in school lunches. She also launched Let Girls Learn, aimed at helping the 62 million girls currently not in school worldwide to access a quality education.

Sen. Bernie Sanders — Vermont’s progressive sensation focused primarily on higher education during the primary and sometimes stumbled when trying to address K-12 issues, like charter schools. While in Congress he introduced bills to pay for extended school days and years, fund dual college enrollment, promote community schools, and support high school reentry. Sanders voted against No Child Left Behind as a member of the House.

Astrid Silva — Silva is an undocumented immigrant from Mexico. She arrived as a penniless small child but grew up to become a political activist whose story has often been cited by Democratic lawmakers and President Obama in arguing for passage of the DREAM Act, which would allow young people brought to the country illegally to work and go to school legally.

Sen. Cory Booker — Best known for his role in Newark’s state-run schools during his tenure as mayor, Booker pushed to include stronger accountability measures in last year’s Senate rewrite of No Child Left Behind.

Gov. Jerry Brown — The California governor approved a state budget last month that will allow for the expansion of pre-K, help with hiring teachers, boost spending for charter school start-up costs, and increase per-pupil funding. He has also resisted the national trend toward data-based school accountability.

Mayor Bill de Blasio — Improving schools has been central to the first-term agenda of New York City mayor. He has fought to retain mayoral control of the city’s schools while launching a universal preschool initiative and allocating significant extra funds to poor-performing schools. He has had a fraught relationship with charter school operators but says he doesn’t oppose charter schools.

Sen. Al Franken — The former Saturday Night Live star and comedian has focused on combating bullying against LGBT students, education technology and its possible consequences for student data privacy, and the education of Native American students, particularly those in Bureau of Indian Education schools.

Sen. Tom Harkin — The former senator and past chairman of the Senate education committee was long an advocate for early childhood education. He tried to rewrite No Child Left Behind twice and oversaw the release of a key report on wrongdoings by for-profit colleges. He is best known as the author of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Mayor Jim Kenney — Philadelphia’s top official made national news recently for successfully pushing to increase taxes on soda and other sugary drinks to pay for expanded pre-K and the creation of 25 “community schools” in the city.

Sen. Chris Murphy — The Connecticut senator was one of Cory Booker’s partners in the push for increased federal accountability standards in the Every Student Succeeds Act. He has also advocated for stronger federal restrictions on the use of seclusion and restraint for students with special needs.

Gov. Tom Wolf — The first-term governor of Pennsylvania was elected in part because voters saw the deep cuts to schools made by his predecessor as destructive. He has spent much of his time in office battling the Republican-led legislature over the state budget, a fight that had a drastic impact on Keystone State schools — particularly in poor districts — last year.

This article was published in partnership with The74Million.org.

Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa

Two and a half years ago, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa left his office steering the nation’s second-largest city with a legacy of pushing the kind of changes in the school system that education reformers relish.

Trying to make good on a campaign promise to fix the city’s schools, he fought the teachers union in court to limit seniority-protected layoff policies (he won) and supported another court challenge that sought to incorporate student test scores into teacher evaluations (no clear victory yet on that one).

He successfully lobbied lawmakers to wrest control of the school district from its elected school board (the courts turned him down), aggressively expanded choices for parents, including charter schools, founded the non-profit Partnership for Los Angeles Schools to take over the city’s lowest-performing schools and raised a boatload of money to help elect reform-oriented school board members.

Since leaving office Villaraigosa, 63, who drew national attention as the city’s first modern-day Hispanic mayor, has been stumping for Hillary Clinton, teaching at USC and traveling the country giving corporate speeches. Most recently, the man who tried to remake the sprawling Los Angeles Unified School District while in office has been singled out as a likely gubernatorial candidate.

In an extensive interview last week, we spoke with the former mayor about the political challenges he faced, what he told Eli Broad about his foundation’s $490 million proposal to dramatically expand charter schools (he’s for it with some caveats) and national education controversies. Take, for example, Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a case before the Supreme Court in which justices are weighing whether charging mandatory union dues to cover costs for activities like collective bargaining violates teachers’ free speech rights. The justices heard oral arguments in January and will have to issue a decision by the end of their term in June. If the Supreme Court sides with the plaintiffs, their ruling could severely hamper a major fundraising vehicle for teachers unions across the country but also support educators who feel union leaders use their money on political causes they don’t agree with.

Here’s what Villaraigosa had to say about Friedrichs: 

I do not support the appellants in this matter. … In a democratic society, it’s critical that workers have an opportunity to organize and collectively bargain their wages, their hours, their working conditions. … I believe the agency fee issue that is particularly in question is one that is very important. Unions have a duty (to provide) fair representation. I worked for them for eight years. They are, by law, required to represent people, even if they are not union members. I think it’s important that those non-union members pay their dues so that they can be represented fairly. I do not support the plaintiffs in that matter at all. … In fact, I am vehemently against it. … At the same time I am vehemently against the status quo where African-American children and English language learners are relegated to the bottom. … We have to stand up for these kids too. You can be pro-union while at the same time stand up for the civil rights of these kids.

On the Great Public Schools Now initiative, a $490 million proposal by the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation and other advocates to increase charter schools, a plan Villaraigosa said he is heavily involved with.

Well, I’ve already said I’m open to providing parents and particularly parents of failing and low-performing schools with better options. I support charters, successful charters. But I have also said that I believe that we should include a broader range of schools including traditional public schools that want to set a higher standard. … So what I said to Eli and them is I could support expanding charters, even dramatically. But that effort should be open to a much broader cross section of models (such as) traditional public schools (and) hybrids like my own, not just charter. … I think initially there were some who thought it should just be charters, but I think they have been convinced that in order to be successful we have to work together. We have to collaborate with the union, with parents, with charters (and) traditional public schools to improve the quality of education now in (Los Angeles) Unified. And we can only do that together.

On the perception that education reform is often implemented top-down and engineered by an elite group:

As a general proposition there is no question that most of what’s put forth as public policy priorities and the changes that emanate from them … come from the top down. Historically, that’s true. Actually, I think, with respect to the (education reform) effort, what distinguishes it is that it is more focused on parent empowerment and involvement. They have often been, particularly poor parents, missing in the equation. They have not been given their due as stakeholder. They are the ultimate consumer. … This notion that we drop off our kids and aren’t responsible for their education is misguided and a recipe for failure. We have got to include parents. We have got to engage them.

On what would need to happen politically and policy-wise to improve Los Angeles schools:

I think the Partnership Schools is the model. I think we’ve got to set higher standards. We’ve got to focus on teacher training and (select) principals, who as a first priority are instructional leaders, who are collaborative with parents and teachers. … I think at some point we are going to need more resources, but as I said to many people, “Before the public will give you more resources … they’ve got to see that you are doing more with the money you got.”

On his nonprofit, the Partnership for Los Angeles Schools:

If we were a school district we would be as large as Santa Monica-Malibu (Unified School District). It’s the largest turnaround effort in the country (and) these are traditional public schools. I think some of the elements of success we have (are) we hire educational leaders with a track record of turning failing schools into successful ones. (We hire) people who set high standards for the kids and people who understand that it’s important to collaborate with both parents and teachers while at the same time putting the interest of kids first. …When we started out there was a 44 percent graduation rate (at Los Angeles Unified). By the time I left there was a 72 percent graduation rate. … I’m very proud of what we did. We set a higher bar. … We’ve got to continue. We can’t rest on our laurels. … We should have (a) 100 percent graduation rate for virtually every one of those kids.

Does he have any regrets about the way he handled education issues in the city: 

I initially felt that we needed someone (to be held) accountable for success in our schools. And I do not believe that seven people, a (school) board and less than 10 percent of the (city’s) voters is the best mechanism for accountability and responsibility. I thought that as mayor, the buck should stop with me. I was willing to partner with the school district to improve our schools. Obviously, I was successful in getting the legislature to approve that … and give the mayor a role in LA. But in the end the courts … overturned that legislation so I had to go to a Plan B. Plan B was to help elect a group of school board members that would be more cooperative and set higher standards and give parents more choices. … That was such a radical paradigm shift that it created a furor and a level of conflict that was never my intention to create.

Was he surprised by the pushback he received in response to part of his education agenda:

Yeah, remember I worked for the teachers union. I believe in unions. I am unabashedly a progressive. I didn’t understand why there would be so much pushback. My schools were union, but I also believed in parental choice and, particularly for kids who were in low-performing to failing schools, I believe their parents had a right to a choice and that they had a right to go to a school where their kids could succeed. I was surprised at the pushback.

Why he was willing to engage in political fights over education issues: 

My only motivation was fighting for the civil rights of poor kids. I tell people it’s really simple. I recognize the historical nature of our election, the first (Hispanic to become mayor) in 133 years. I felt that the role of the first is not to bang on your chest and say how great I am. The role of the first is to acknowledge that you are here on the shoulders of others and to open up the door for the rest. I thought the only way you could do that is through education. I don’t think anyone was looking to engage in the kind of … conflict we had for eight years. … I moved ahead (be)cause I believe this issue is the most important issue facing the state and the nation. When you look at the Black Lives Matter movement, and you look at the growing poverty in California and America, you got to ask yourself why. The answer is simple: Too many of our kids aren’t going to graduate from high school and go to college. Communities of color, oftentimes, more of them are going to penal institutes than institutions of higher learning. I just don’t believe that that’s a paradigm that can work for us.

On whether the union was his biggest obstacle to bringing about more change in Los Angeles schools:

I always tell people, it was a city and a state that refused to invest in these kids. … Money does matter. We have failed as a society to make investments in these people, to create a safety net for them, and we wonder why there are so many disaffected people, angry with their circumstances. They have lost hope. I think it’s incumbent on all of us. It wasn’t just the unions. We all say we want better schools, but we haven’t wanted to invest in them in the way that we should.

Who do you listen to on education issues: 

Well, historically it was Ramon Cortines, John Deasy, Marshall Tuck (and) Joan Sullivan … but also parents (and) teachers. I don’t think we can listen to one stakeholder group to the detriment of the rest. Teachers and the unions are important, so are parents. I think the community overall is important.

When will you decide on running for governor:

I would just say that sooner rather than later…I don’t want to talk too much about (the race for) governor.

What advice would you give students about their education: 

I’d give it to the parents. I’d say, “Put your children in the best school you can.”

This article was produced in partnership with The74Million.org.

Hillary Clinton and Eli Broad on Jan. 20, 2009 at the inauguration ball of President Barack Obama.

With his massive plan to enroll half of all LA Unified’s students into charter schools, billionaire philanthropist Eli Broad is threatening major disruptions at LA Unified, cementing his role as Public Enemy No. 1 to many district and local union leaders.

But Broad’s enduring support for public charter schools now appears to be contributing to problems for an old friend, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, whom he has long supported financially.

Clinton appears poised to receive the endorsement of the nation’s largest teachers union, the National Education Association (NEA), this weekend, but the potential endorsement is causing controversy among many rank-and-file members. Similar outrage emerged when Clinton received the endorsement of the second-largest national teachers union, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), in July.

The NEA’s rank-and-file outrage is dominating many national headlines, just as the AFT outrage did, stealing the focus from what should be a public relations victory for Clinton.

Part of the concern is due to her past support of charter schools and connections to Broad, as well as her connections to Bill Gates and the Walton family, who are also major financial backers of charter schools that directly threaten union teacher jobs. An alternate candidate in the field, Sen. Bernie Sanders, a declared socialist with a track record of full-throated support of unions, makes a better candidate, according to some NEA and AFT members.

“[Clinton’s] labor credentials are significantly worse than her main challenger in the Democratic primary, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders,” wrote Huffington Post blogger and former NEA member Ben Spielberg, who also pointed out that Clinton once served on the board of directors of Wal-Mart.

“Even if she says things that today sound supportive, she’s not going to be a steadfast friend of organized labor,” Jamie Rinaldi, a teacher from Newton, Mass. and a union activist told Politico. “We don’t know she’s going to be the ally that’s going to stand with our legislative agenda.”

Almost 5,000 AFT members signed an online petition asking AFT to withdraw the Clinton endorsement, which came in July. One comment on the petition, which summed up much of the Clinton opposition, said, “The support that Hillary receives from Wall Street, and gives them in return, and her misguided support of charter schools clearly shows whose interests she is working for.”

Several NEA state branches have already called on the organization to withhold any endorsement.

“We are concerned that an early recommendation does not allow members to be participants in a real debate around the issues that are still unfolding,” Nebraska State Education Association president Nancy Fulton said in a statement Wednesday. “A recommendation this early in the process is premature.”

With most charter schools being non-union, the math behind Broad’s charter expansion plan in LA is simple to the LA teachers union president, Alex Caputo-Pearl: lose half of the district’s students, and his union, UTLA, will also lose half of its teachers. Caputo-Pearl sees this as a threat to UTLA’s very existence, which makes it strange when his two national affiliates may both end up supporting Clinton, who once said, “I stand behind the charter school/public school movement, because parents do deserve greater choice within the public school system to meet the unique needs of their children.”

The Clinton Foundation has even gushed over Broad’s charter school philanthropy. From the foundation’s website, which is referring to a 2007 donation Broad made to LA charters totaling $27 million: “[Broad’s donations] will have a far-reaching impact on improving the education of students in Los Angeles. By broadening the investments in charter schools in Los Angeles, a tipping point will be created that will put pressure on all other public schools in Los Angeles to improve the educational opportunities for all children.”

The Broads and Bill and Hillary Clinton have connections that go as far back as 1983 and as recently as Sept. 19, when Bill Clinton attended the second opening night of the Broad Museum in downtown Los Angeles.

The Los Angeles Times quoted Clinton at the gala talking about their friendship, which dated back to when Hillary was Broad’s lawyer. “I looked up one day and Eli was in my living room, and my life has never been the same,” Clinton said.

Broad, through one of his corporations, gave $100,000 to Bill Clinton’s presidential reelection campaign and was one of the controversial “Lincoln bedroom donors” who gave the then-president some bad headlines due to the perception that Clinton was using the White House to raise campaign funds.

Broad endorsed Hillary Clinton for president in 2008, has donated over $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation and was recently a co-chair of the Super PAC “Ready for Hillary” that was formed to draft Clinton into the 2016 race. It has since dissolved.

* Updated to reflect Ben Spielberg is a former NEA member, not a current one.

Click here to sign up for the LA School Report newsletter, and don’t forget to follow us on Facebook and Twitter.