Education policy is difficult, and every political movement that has worked on it has had at least 1 stupid and counterproductive idea. The particular stupid idea under discussion here happens to be one done by the movement that identifies itself as progressive, and in a state where progressives hold a lot of political power.
IME, tracking is only a portion of the issue, anyway. A confluence of factors stymied my growth; having to take Algebra 2 and Trig separately and Precalc as a standalone course didn't help, but poor instruction from "sink or swim" advocates was probably more consequential, and having parents distracted by a messy divorce and economic stresses from the 07/08 crash even more so. Between those, I went from starting middle school on track to take college-level Differential Equations or Calc 2, and ended up almost flunking AP Calc. Never really recovered.
If any young people out there are reading this and scratching their heads, let me offer a small piece of advice: if someone's argument hinges on generalizations against a group of people, it should give one pause.
Edit: I just made a generalization about the uber rich. Please, think of the uber rich. They suffer so.
Here is what Jo Boaler has to say on the issue: https://patch.com/california/across-ca/lets-move-past-acrimo...
she claims that having different math tracks creates a “mathematical nowhere” for some students that stop at algebra 2, but absolutely nothing in her system really alleviates this non-issue or makes it better. It’s honestly such a nonsensical policy to me that has nothing to do with politics whatsoever, in my mind, but people will inject what they believe into what they see.