Skip to main content

The suns sets in the west: we now discover that special interests on both sides organize for school board elections

Transparent Christina makes a big issue out of the Delaware Chamber of Commerce's Rich Heffron apparently appealing to his members to "buy" school board elections.

If you follow the link John provides, here's what Mr. Heffron says,
Rich Heffron of the Delaware
Chamber is on the right; that's
John Kowalko on the left.


"The leaders of our business community need to identify good candidates, recruit them to run, and assist them with their campaigns.  Furthermore, they must instill in their employees the importance of school board elections, encourage them to participate in campaigns."

In the context of the article, "good" clearly means people who support education reforms like Vision 2015.

Oh.  On the right is Frederika
Jenner with Lillian Lowery and
Jack Markell at a Vision 2015
event.  Who knew?
Now let's look at what the DSEA's Frederick Jenner said, right after successful school board elections in 2009:
‘We have a winning strategy–we have proven it twice in Red Clay. Identify good candidates with great public appeal, plan a 2-3 month campaign from filing through Election Day, involve all critical stakeholders, be willing to spend some money and commit some time, and then run the plan."
In the context of this article, "good" clearly means people who support the agenda of DSEA.

If you read the whole segments from both, you will discover that they are . . . pursuing exactly the same electoral strategy.  In fact, Mr. Heffron's piece could almost have been clipped from Ms. Jenner's in terms of the importance of such elections to his constituency, and the importance of organizing a special interest group to be successful.

Pretty much all that has been discovered here is that the business community was slower on the uptake than the teachers' union (by about three years), and that this is the first school board election to be fought out since Citizens United changed the playing field for the worse.

Folks, the real answer is that they're ALL playing us.

Comments

Steve, to be fair, you selectively left off the following quote:
"If Vision 2015, Race to the Top and STEM are to be successful, then it is important that dedicated citizens, ones who understand the goals of these programs, and how they can be successfully implemented, run for election to their local school board"

I didn't realize that submitting to their litmus test on agenda supersedes the desire to serve the interests of children, first.
Steve,

I will never make an excuse for DSEA on this, but they sold out completely at the behest Jack Markell under the "leadership" of Diane Donohue. A mistake they will regret deep into the future.

The only reason they are at the table is so they are not on the table. You do know this in your heart, right?
John,

I said in context what "Good" meant. Virtually the same sort of quote exists in the Jenner article.

I stipulate that they're looking for reform-friendly candidates, just as DSEA is looking for union-friendly candidates.

Both would deny that this means they don't serve the interests of kids first.

And both would be fooling themselves.
The only reason they are at the table is so they are not on the table.

OK it has been a long day, but John I don't know if I know that in my heart or not because (I'm not kidding here) I don't know what you just said.
Wait, I got it.

Didn't see the "on" in the second clause.

Now at least I know what you said.

No, I don't agree. I think that the senior leaders of DSEA have their own personal agendas that are not those of the majoriy of their constituents.

I think they have rationalized that with sentiments such as the one you expressed (and I finally understood).
Steve, fair enough. I am directly suggesting that the DSEA is a "willing" partner, merely to avoid being devoured by Edreform plans/logic
John, in return, fair enough.

If I were a DSEA strategist (which I am obviously not), from 2009 forward I would have been recruiting anti-reform candidates.

That's not what DSEA did, and most of the candidates the organization did support are at least open to the reform agenda.

If you also take a look at which legislative candidates DSEA has been supporting you'd come back to a comment Barbara Finnan made over on Kilroy's when Mark Murphy was nominated.

(I paraphrase cause I'm too lazy to look it up): she said that Markell's rubber stamp General Assembly would give him exactly what he wanted, whether it was good for education or not.

And my thought was--after having spent over a million bucks primarily to elect DSEA-friendly candidates to the General Assembly, somebody needs to be asking for their money back!
Steve, no problem, we just disagree on that point then.
100% agree on money back comment.
kavips said…
So how do you propose we fix it?

DSEA candidates got us into this mess. Probably not in reality, but at least the perception is there. The Race To The Top candidates have no way of getting us out..

Before school board candidates were always at the mercy of someone.

I think what you need are smart people who have no agenda, and have the capacity to sort through facts, and derive the best possible solution for that time.

Which means, we probably won't be getting any change soon.
To be clear: DSEA candidates did not get us into this mess; DSEA campaign donations started it and the Rodel folks ham-handedly upped the ante.

Unfortunately, the system is now so thoroughly broken that I have come around (reluctantly, very reluctantly) to believe that the only possible solution is to move school board elections to November.
kavips said…
That would a) make it partisan, and b) we'd be having the discussion when our minds were ready for it, and not on some random day in spring when, face it, the last thing I want to do, is walk inside a building....

Whereas the issues today probably resonates within 10% of the population, during November, they would most likely resonate with around 48% of the population.

However, post thought, their could be a risk. Someone says No to all taxes and that theme carries straight down the ticket with no one giving it thought.

Still, despite the risk, I'd say lets work to get them in on November 2014.... For one, it would cost less money keeping the polls open on one more extra day....

Popular posts from this blog

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?

New Warfare: I started my posts with a discussion.....

.....on Unrestricted warfare . The US Air force Institute for National Security Studies have developed a reasonable systems approach to deter non-state violent actors who they label as NSVA's. It is an exceptionally important report if we want to deter violent extremism and other potential violent actors that could threaten this nation and its security. It is THE report our political officials should be listening to to shape policy so that we do not become excessive in using force against those who do not agree with policy and dispute it with reason and normal non-violent civil disobedience. This report, should be carefully read by everyone really concerned with protecting civil liberties while deterring violent terrorism and I recommend if you are a professional you send your recommendations via e-mail at the link above so that either 1.) additional safeguards to civil liberties are included, or 2.) additional viable strategies can be used. Finally, one can only hope that politici

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba