Infrastructure, Investment, and Internet: Vote Markey for (Ed)ucation
By: Talia Blatt
The proof is in the window paste.
I voted for the first time this past fall and felt mildly disappointed. Like many of my freshly adult peers, I moved from eagerness to the cynicism that pervades our politics, the sense that our individual votes don’t matter, that the outcome is fixed by a monolithic party elite, and that we will always need to sacrifice either ideology or pragmatism.
However, as I prepare to vote in my second election, this time in the upcoming Massachusetts senate Democratic primary, I’m actually feeling excited again.
I am voting (with zest!) for Ed Markey. Ed is an ardent, effective advocate on every salient issue, particularly areas that otherwise lack mainstream champions: telecommunications, Alzheimer’s, nuclear nonproliferation, and more. He’s a mild-mannered working class guy with decades of experience, but he embodies the optimism and vigor associated with my generation.
I could explain why his exceptional record and ideas on climate change, health care, and racial justice make him the best candidate. But the boatload of progressive leaders and organizations who have endorsed him — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, the Sunrise Movement, Indivisible, NARAL, the American Federation of Teachers, the AFL-CIO, and more — can do that more persuasively. So in the spirit of the campaign, a youth-based rhizomatic movement based on interpersonal connections, I instead want to talk about a more personal connection I share with Ed.
Kindergarten through fifth grade, I attended Joseph Estabrook Elementary School in a secluded, single story brick building that no longer exists. When I was in fourth grade at Estabrook, the school shut down for a few weeks. Tests commissioned by the Lexington Department of Public Facilities revealed Estabrook’s window caulk contained dangerous amounts of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), toxic chemicals causally associated with a litany of health problems including various kinds of cancer and damage to the immune, reproductive, nervous, and endocrine systems.
Given that they were banned more than 40 years ago, PCBs should be a non-issue. But a Harvard study found that one third of schools in the Greater Boston Area have dangerous PCB contamination; nationally, tens of thousands of schools and millions of students are affected. The chemicals are insidious, pervasive, and long-lasting; they linger for decades in paints, light ballasts, ceiling tiles and adhesives.
I was lucky, and more to the point privileged, to grow up in a public school system that could afford to even test for PCBs, let alone pay for a new building. Remediation alone cost nearly a million dollars; building the new Estabrook cost tens of millions — price tags prohibitive for many public school districts.
In fourth grade, I only understood that certain rooms in the building were abruptly off-limits, and I was sure I’d be growing a third ear or nostril in a few years. But during high school and my first year of college, as I grew more interested and involved in education reform, I started to seriously research the PCB issue.
I found a good number of concerned scientists and reporters, but no politicians — until I discovered the most comprehensive analysis on PCBs in American school systems: A 2016 report titled “The ABCs of PCBs: A Toxic Threat to America’s Schools,” written by Senator Ed Markey. The report included details about Estabrook’s PCB contamination that I hadn’t been able to find anywhere else, and put forward specific recommendations for EPA guidelines.
The dereliction of public school infrastructure goes far beyond PCBs. Yet federal funding for that infrastructure is still essentially nonexistent, and many of our national politicians remain noncommittal, offering only anodyne, shallowly rousing remarks about our “failing schools.”
Ed isn’t one of those politicians, and his beliefs about education come from more than ideology; they come from empathy and understanding. Ed was the first in his family to go to college, and he struggled with student loans even after he was elected to Congress. He recognizes that material realities shape education: In addition to leading the fight for better school infrastructure, Ed brought broadband to students across the country as part of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. He is continuing this work during the pandemic, as internet access increasingly determines educational equity.
There are innumerable points of controversy in education reform: what should be taught, who should teach, how everything should be measured, and more. But suggesting that fourth graders shouldn’t get cancer from their classrooms ought to be a more popular take. And so far, Ed is the only candidate I see bringing time, money, study, and coverage to that issue. It’s what he does: He takes on the gritty, thankless problems, the ones that affect Americans the most. He has my vote — and if you like kids and hate cancer, he should have yours too.
Read more about Ed’s education policy making here.
Support the campaign here.
