Politics K-12

If you haven't already, you should check out my colleague Erik Robelen's story about education in this off-year election. He points out that the very tight races for governor in New Jersey and Virginia will help shed some light on how well the Democratic brand is faring, now that the party is in charge of practically everything and the economy is still slumping. The New Jersey race is close, according to these recent polls. And the GOP has an edge, according to this one from Virginia.

Although it might not seem so on the surface, those gubernatorial races may matter quite a bit in terms of the Obama administration's education priorities. If Democrats Gov. Jon Corzine, of New Jersey, and state Sen. Creigh Deeds, of Virginia, lose badly, the election will be read by some as a rebuke of President Barack Obama.

And that may mean Democrats in Congress, who are worried about their own electoral futures, will be less likely to go along with some of Obama's priorities (like, say, merit pay) that might anger folks who members of Congress will need to get re-elected (like teachers' unions).

Bottom line: If Dems win in both states, it will likely be a lot easier for the Obama folks to sell their ideas on health care, student loans, and the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Act to Congress. If not...maybe not.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 3:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A new report out by the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government makes it clear that states are still in big fiscal trouble, having experienced a record drop in sales tax for the second quarter in a row.

While the recession may be slowing, and the nation may even be recovering, clearly states are in this economic slowdown for the long haul. My co-blogger Alyson is working on a story about this for our next issue, and I'll link to it as soon as it's finished.

For education, this persistent bad economic news at the state level means that the stimulus-generated funding cliff that states and school districts have been warned about is not just a threat, but a reality.

States have had a tough time making do even with some $40 billion in state stabilization stimulus funds, as many states have used this money to backfill cuts and free up money to balance other parts of their budgets. In 2011, that money officially runs out, which will make balancing budgets--and maintaining K-12 funding levels -- extremely difficult.

This has implications for the competitive grant programs, such as Race to the Top, as well. Pushing through education reforms can take a lot of political will at the state level. But so does balancing budgets. Will there be enough political will to go around?

What's more, award money from Race to the Top may seem mighty tempting for a cash-strapped state. The $4 billion competitive fund isn't nearly as large as the state stabilization fund, and would likely amount to a few hundred millions of dollars for each winning state, but it's still valuable money for a financially strapped state. While states certainly will have to agree to make good on their Race to the Top promises, policymakers in states that win an award might be inclined to reduce education funding elsewhere in light of the extra money coming in from the U.S. Department of Education. After all, we're seeing a similar phenomenon now, with criticisms of how states are using state stabilization funds.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 12:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

In another indication that no one is immune from this economic downturn, a new study reveals that, for the first time ever, the gambling industry is down on its luck.

And this is yet another blow for state budgets.

A new report from the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government reveals that gambling revenue in fiscal 2009 (which ended June 30) is down 2.8 percent from fiscal 2008.

This poses both a direct, and an indirect, problem for states and for K-12 education.

Directly, many states use gambling to pay a small part of the tab for K-12 education. Think of those "education" lotteries out there (in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee, to name a few). Overall, lottery revenue is down 2.6 percent. Casino revenue, which helps some states fund schools, is down 8.5 percent.

Indirectly, any slump in revenue from any source further throws state budgets out of whack, so states that have the heaviest reliance on gambling revenue could suffer the most. It's no surprise that Nevada, which gets 13.6 percent of its state revenue from gambling, is tops in reliance on gambling revenue. Second, though, is West Virginia, which gets 9.2 percent of its revenue from gambling.

So this might be a warning sign out there for governors and legislators who look to gambling to help patch budgets. Case in point is Ohio, where state officials were dealt a setback from the State Supreme Court, which ruled that a proposal to put slots in racetracks (which would help fund K-12 budgets) must be subject to a public referendum.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 1:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

South Carolina Superintendent of Education Jim Rex, a Democrat who has squared off against Republican Gov. Mark Sanford over school choice, stimulus funding, and whether the state would participate in the common standards movement, now wants Sanford's job.

In an opinion piece in The State newspaper, he declared his plans to run as a "turnaround governor" in the 2010 election. Sanford, who famously disappeared for days to Argentina over the summer and ended up admitting an extramarital affair, is term-limited. Rex was elected in 2006 in a tight race that ended in a recount.

When I interviewed Rex in April 2008 for a story on single-gender schools—part of his broader push for more school choice options—I sensed in the interview he had higher ambitions.

And that was confirmed that same day when, in his office, I spotted large postcards he was mailing out to South Carolina residents. In bold letters on the front, was a quote: "South Carolinians expect and demand choices in their lives. They shouldn't have to make an exception for public education."

It was signed Jim Rex.

Those campaign-style postcards seemed to be a smart way to start building name recognition throughout the state—a necessary step in any successful bid for governor.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 4:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The $4 billion in state fiscal stabilization fund money headed to California is barely going to make a dent in the state's budget mess after voters rejected a package of amendments earlier this week that would have capped state spending and freed up more money for schools.

The state is now facing a $21 billion budget deficit.

The result for K-12 education? Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said schools may have to close seven days early this year, and tens of thousands of teachers will be laid off. And if you think it's easy to avoid such draconian cuts, then play this "budget challenge" game from a California nonprofit.

The second round of stabilization fund money, to be awarded this fall, will mean an additional $2 billion for schools. But even after all of this stabilization money is sent to California, the state's budget will hardly be stable. This is very bad news for California schools. Perhaps states that aren't in such deep budget trouble (think Wyoming and Texas) would be willing to forgo their stabilization fund monies. After all, states aren't exactly rushing to the till.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 12:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The Colorado Senate lost a big education advocate when Peter Groff, that chamber's president, left for a new job with the U.S. Department of Education.

But never fear, ed reformers.

Taking Groff's seat (but not his leadership role) in the State Senate is Michael Johnston, an education adviser to then-candidate Barack Obama. Johnston is the principal of a Denver-area charter school that got a much-publicized visit from Obama (when he was still a candidate.) UPDATE: Thanks to the commenter below, who pointed out that while Mapleton is a choice school within the school district, it's not a charter school.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 5:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The White House once again rejected South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford's request to use stimulus money to pay down school construction debt, so the governor is saying thanks, but no thanks, and rejecting $700 million in state stabilization fund dollars, which are intended primarily to prop up education budgets.

In a press release issued today, Sanford expresses a sentiment that others certainly share: "We simply cannot afford to base 10 percent of our state budget on money that will disappear in two years' time."

But he also takes aim at the White House: "We're obviously disappointed by the White House's decision, because it cuts against the notion of federalism and the idea of each state having the flexibility to act in a manner that best suits its needs."

Sanford also told lawmakers that if they decide to seek the stabilization money on their own, they should use the stabilization money for the intended purposes (education) but then use the state money that's freed up to pay down state debt. (There's some debate about whether legislatures can override governors on stimulus-related issues.) The legislature would have to be careful to steer clear of "maintenance of effort" requirements that are attached to the stabilization money that seek to keep states from replacing their own dollars with state dollars.

Joel Sawyer, the governor's spokesman, told me the White House's rejection applies only to state stabilization funds—and that Title I and special education funding will still flow through to the state.

Earlier this week, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin also announced she was rejecting stimulus dollars, including Title I and special education funding.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 3:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

When you've got control over $100 billion, and 50 states to deal with, you're bound to get lots of questions and complaints about the money. Letters from governors and other policymakers about the stimulus package have already started flowing into Education Secretary Arne Duncan's mailbox.

What follows is the Politics K-12 oversimplified translation for a sampling of these official letters:

* Dear Arne: We don't have time to wait for official forms and guidance! Nobody's gambling in our casinos and we are about out of money! Sincerely, Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons, in a March 18 letter requesting a waiver from one of the stimulus law's requirements.

* Dear Arne: Pick me! Pick me! We've got merit pay in Minnesota already, so make it easy on yourself and just give us your $4.35 billion in incentive funds. Sincerely, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, in a March 13 letter urging the secretary to look at his state's Q Comp model for teacher compensation.

* Dear Arne: Gov. Don Carcieri isn't playing fair with stimulus money! Make him share. Sincerely, Providence, R.I. mayor David N. Cicilline, in a March 11 letter complaining that the governor's funding formula unjustly takes away money from his city's schools.

And for good measure, let's include South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford's letter to President Obama, asking a second time for flexibility in using stimulus money, this time to pay off school construction debt:

*Dear Barack: Do you remember what happened last time South Carolina didn't get its way? Sincerely, Mark, in a March 17 letter.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 12:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The Great GOP Divide among governors was on display yesterday as Republican Florida Gov. Charlie Crist appeared with President Obama during a pep-rally stop in the Sunshine State to tout the economic stimulus package.

Florida's schools have been among the hardest hit across the country as cuts have forced them to lay off teachers and trim programs. Legislative leaders predict next year's state budget deficit could reach $5 billion, and already, the governor has pushed through a $2.5 billion package of cuts for this budget year and next.

Given his state's dire straits—with a huge home foreclosure crisis and pockets of very high unemployment—it's no big surprise that Crist was one of four Republican governors to sign a letter in support of the stimulus package. (Crist may also be making sure the state can get a waiver from so-called "maintenance of effort" provisions that require the state to spend on schools what it spent in 2006 -- a tall order since school funding has been cut to levels lower than that year.) The others were Connecticut's Jodi Rell, Vermont's Jim Douglas, and California's Arnold Schwarzenegger. And it's no wonder Schwarzenegger has signed on—he's got a gigantic budget mess on his hands.

But lining up in opposition to the stimulus package are fellow Republican Govs. Sarah Palin of Alaska, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Haley Barbour of Mississippi, Rick Perry of Texas and Mark Sanford of South Carolina.

Of course, there's plenty of political ideology at work (a couple of those governors have national ambitions and Sanford, especially, is a hard-line budget hawk.) However, it's important to note that their budgets don't have the glaring budget gaps that others do. According to the latest report by the National Conference of State Legislatures, Alaska has a budget deficit worth about 4 percent of Palin's general fund budget, isn't reporting a budget deficit next budget year, and has billions in oil and natural gas profits in a special reserve fund. In Texas, Perry is in a similar position: His state also enjoys oil profits, isn't reporting a budget deficit now, and faces a shortfall of just 5 percent next budget year. Mississippi, under Barbour, is reporting a 4 percent budget deficit this year and none next year. Jindal, in Louisiana, has closed his budget deficit but does, potentially, face a double-digit one next year.

So, it may be a little easier to oppose the stimulus when your state—including your schools—aren't in desperate and immediate need of the money.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 8:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Illinois Education Association is calling for Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich to resign after the governor and his chief of staff, John Harris, were arrested this morning on corruption and bribery charges.

The Democratic governor allegedly tried to benefit financially from the pending appointment of the Senate seat recently vacated by President-elect Barack Obama, according one of a number of accusations included in the FBI's 78-page indictment. Blagojevich has sole authority to select Obama's replacement.

In a statement on the matter released today the teachers' union said:

We are appalled by the allegations found in the complaint against Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Illinois has serious problems that can only be addressed by leaders who command respect. We urge Gov. Blagojevich to resign immediately. We also support the immediate commencement of impeachment proceedings against the governor.

Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn, also a Democrat, would take over Blagojevich's spot if the governor resigns or is forced from office.

If Blagojevich is ousted from his post because of the allegations, it doesn't sound like education organizations in the state will miss him much.

"According to our members it would not be a huge blow," said Ben Schwarm, an associate executive director for the Illinois Association of School Boards. He said some districts had been angry with Blagojevich for his refusal to support a dedicated funding mechanism for education, although he did acknowledge that schools had gotten spending increases during the governor's tenure.

Ken Swanson, the president of the IEA, agreed that Blagojevich had been "a roadblock" to educators' push to get a designated revenue source for schools. The union endorsed neither the governor nor his opponent during Blagojevich's 2006 re-election bid.

Blagojevich is known more for his work on health care than on education. As governor, he promoted the concept of universal pre-K, although the state never provided enough funding for it. And he helped champion new high school graduation standards that required students to take an extra year each of math, science, English, and writing. He also fought to appoint political allies to the State Board of Education.

The indictment also accuses Blagojevich of threatening to withhold state assistance from the Tribune Company, which publishes the Chicago Tribune, unless the newspaper's editorial board fired members who had been critical of the governor. He is accused of specifically singling out John McCormick, the paper's deputy editorial page editor, who remains employed by Tribune.

And the indictment mentions Blagojevich's association with Chicago businessman and political fundraiser Antonin "Tony" Rezko, whose name became infamous nationally during the presidential campaign because of his ties to Obama. Rezko was convicted on corruption charges in June. One of the prosecution's witnesses in that trial was attorney Stuart Levine, sits on the board of the state Teachers Retirement System and allegedly steered its investments to Rezko's preferred businesses.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 3:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

In the midst of your excitement—or your depression—over the election of Barack Obama as president, don't overlook the importance of what happened at the state level for education.

Democrats made inroads in statehouses, too, but it wasn't a blow-out, as my updated story details.

These races are important because state legislators and governors will have to craft new state budgets—and determine funding levels for K-12 education—in the midst of one of the worst financial crises since the Great Depression.

Maryland policymakers will get a little help from slot machines, which were approved last night by a fairly wide margin and could bring in about $600 million a year for schools.

After the election, Democrats now control 58 legislative chambers to 37 for Republicans (one chamber is tied--the Alaska Senate--and two are still undecided.) Five chambers flipped to Democratic control, and four to Republican, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Democrats also control 29 governor's offices after they took Missouri, where Attorney General Jay Nixon won. Republican Gov. Matt Blunt, a supporter of vouchers, did not seek re-election. Vouchers had started to gain traction in Missouri, so the National Education Association already this morning is celebrating the switch to Democratic control here.

One important race for education was still undecided this morning: the Washington State superintendent of education's post. Terry Bergeson, who is seeking her fourth term, was trailing union official Randy Dorn this morning. She was locked in a fierce battle with the Washington Education Association, which did not endorse her and has opposed her stance of support of high-stakes testing.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 10:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Two controversial ballot measures in Oregon are headed for defeat, but a third is too close to call right now, according to unofficial results posted on the Oregon secretary of state's Web site.

Oregon voters have rejected an effort to limit the amount of time non-English-speaking public school students may be taught in a language that is not English. They also voted down a proposal to redirect roughly 15 percent of state lottery money away from schools and toward law enforcement. That would have amounted to a loss of about $200 million every two-year budget cycle.

But the fate is uncertain for a proposal to restrict political spending of unions. Results posted so far haven't given either side a decisive victory. The measure would prohibit payroll deductions from public employees for organizations, including unions, for political purposes.

Posted by David J. Hoff, edweek.org at 1:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Maryland voters gave their public schools what could be a $660 million annual gift when they approved a measure to open five gambling halls throughout the state.

The Associated Press is reporting that the ballot question passed. The measure will dedicate the revenue generated from the 15,000 slot machines voters authorized to the state's public schools. The Maryland question would create the most revenue of the several gambling-for-school-funding measures before voters in today's election, according to Michele McNeil's Ed Week story from last month.

Still to come: Results from Arkansas, Maine, Missouri, and Oregon.

Posted by David J. Hoff, edweek.org at 10:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

If Democrats can hang on to the governor's seats Washington State, then they'll have a good night in the statehouses because they picked up Missouri.

Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon, a Democrat who campaigned on improving college affordability (along with a host of other issues), beat Republican Kenny Hulshof by a fairly wide margin.

This is a blow for voucher advocates, who had a friend in outgoing Gov. Matt Blunt, a Republican, who decided not to seek re-election.

Before tonight, Democrats held 28 governors' seats. They've held onto Delaware, New Hampshire, Montana, West Virginia, and North Carolina (an open seat, which former teacher and Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue won in a tight race). Republicans held onto Indiana, Vermont, North Dakota, and Utah. We're still waiting on Washington State.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 8:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

"Inflation Hits Annual Pace Not Seen Since 1991," reads a headline from today's online New York Times.

Though you don't have to be a Nobel Prize-winning economist to know the economy's in bad shape, this news just reaffirms that many school districts are in for a long, tough, budget-cutting road ahead of them.

The fact that gas prices have skyrocketed is bad enough for school districts struggling to fuel their buses. But other costs are rising too—from food to health care, and even education supplies and books, according to the Consumer Price Index. But making matters worse is that most states are also experiencing a slump in tax collections, which fund schools.

Bottom line: Prices are going up, and there's less money to go around. A fiscal double-whammy.

I don't envy those who are running for office in the states with a slumping economy, because they'll be tasked with the unpopular job of making cuts to public services—and cutting funding for public schools is probably one of the most politically difficult of all cuts to make.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 1:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

"America is only as strong as her schools...As our schools go, so goes our country."

That's the conclusion of a new ad by ED in '08, which will start running today in seven key election states: Ohio, Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, New Mexico, Virginia and Wisconsin. ED in '08 (which in this ad is referring to itself by its Strong American Schools moniker), spent $5 million on these ads, called "One Nation Left Behind." Watch the ad here.

In the ad, actress Jamie Lee Curtis provides the voice-over, and ticks off the names of countries that are passing us--countries like Finland, South Korea, France, and Denmark. She urges viewers to go to Strong American Schools' website to learn about how children in the U.S. stack up against their peers internationally.

The ad hits the airwaves just as the nation's governors are wrapping up their annual summer meeting, held this year in Philadelphia. They are an important group of people to watch, as they have more control over their states' schools than the presidents do. This was a meeting that was more sparsely attended than in years past (budget woes and politics kept about half of the governors home) and only three of the 14 governors who sit on the education committee actually attended Sunday's committee meeting, which focused on teacher quality. (Kudos to Maine Gov. John Baldacci, Oklahoma Gov. Brad Henry--the committee vice-chair--and committee chairman Donald Carcieri, Rhode Island's governor, who attended.). Most of the time was spent celebrating the National Governors Association's 100th year in existence, and dealing with the pressing issues of surging energy prices and a weakening economy. But education wasn't completely ignored.

On Saturday, former President Bill Clinton, in an hour-long speech about a myriad of topics, called for a rewrite of No Child Left Behind and for the NGA to become a serious player with the next administration and Congress over its reauthorization. Clinton said the governors must come up with a "substantive" platform for changes. But this has been a difficult task for the governors, given how divisive NCLB is and how the NGA doesn't like to get involved when its members can't reach consensus. When NCLB was reauthorized, the governors were barely in the picture. Will they be now? I asked that question of Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a Republican and the outgoing NGA chairman. Yes, he said, "preliminarily", an unspoken acknowledgment that the devil is always in the details.

The other theme developing in Philadelphia is a growing interest in international benchmarking. There will be more to come on this later. But that should make ED in '08 happy.

My takeaway from this NGA meeting is that education will continue to struggle for traction this election cycle, because it even struggles for attention in a roomful of governors who spend nearly half of their states' budgets on public education.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 8:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

One of the most disturbing things I heard today during a press conference about state budget conditions was this: the economic downturn in many states could last three or four years.

That's about as long as the next president's first term.

Even if the national economy takes an unexpected upward swing, states are always slower to come out of slumps. Ray Scheppach, the executive director of the National Governors Association, explained that it's because states typically don't feel the negative impact from unemployment (which means fewer dollars coming in from income taxes) until months after job losses hit their peak. For example, even though the recession in the early 2000s officially ended in 2001, states had to make huge budget cuts in 2002 and even into 2003. The NGA and the National Association of State Budget Officers unveiled the latest edition of their fiscal survey today, which is quite gloomy (unless you're in an energy- or food-crop-rich state like Texas, Wyoming, or North Dakota.)

When considering the national economic woes and the presidential candidates, it's important to look at state budgets for several reasons. First, states (and their local governments) are responsible for paying nearly 90 percent of the tab for K-12 education. Second, K-12 education is the biggest line-item in a state general-fund budget. And third, states are often the incubators of education reform. (If you need another reason, then consider that Obama is meeting with Democratic governors on Friday to involve them in the larger discussion about the economy.)

I can think of plenty of ways that a drawn-out slowdown in the states could affect the education plans of the next president, whether it be Sen. Barack Obama or Sen. John McCain.

For one, Sen. Obama's promised $4,000-a-year tax credit to offset the cost of college tuition won't go nearly as far if higher ed institutions jack up tuition and fees because state lawmakers cut their funding. (Higher ed is traditionally cut long before K-12 education is.)

Sen. McCain's pledge to freeze discretionary spending, including Title I money that accompanies No Child Left Behind, would be even more painful.

States and school districts, though always welcome to new money, are often hesitant to start new programs if they worry the funding source might disappear. Overall, I wonder how any new programs proposed by either candidate—whether it be funding to expand technology (which McCain's camp has talked about) or devoting more money to recruiting teachers (Obama's plan)—will be embraced if states are still struggling to pay for the basics. It will be hard for education leaders who are involved in the day-to-day running of schools to think about revolutionizing K-12 when they're struggling to pay the salaries of their existing teachers, or the fuel to bus kids to and from school.

Just one more reason why the economy and education are so closely tied together.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 2:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Actually, Campaign K-12 will continue on, but I need a break. Blogging is hard work!

In all seriousness, I'll be out of the office until after Memorial Day, leaving this blog in the capable hands of frequent contributor Alyson Klein, who covers the federal beat here. My colleagues Mark Walsh, who covers the school legal beat, and David Hoff, NCLB reporter extraordinaire, may also make guest appearances.

As for Harry Potter, I'm perhaps one of only a handful on Earth who hasn't read this series. But apparently I should, because the villain of the seven volumes is the inspiration behind a teachers' union campaign to oust Washington State Schools Superintendent Terry Bergeson. Read the Associated Press exclusive story here.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 5:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Today, voters from my home state go to the polls to decide whether they want Democrats Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama to head the 2008 presidential ticket. But as the two were canvassing the state, scouring for votes, something election-related happened over the weekend that could have an even bigger impact on education in the Hoosier State: Veteran Superintendent of Public Instruction Suellen Reed, who has been the state's education leader for 16 years, announced she won't run for re-election.

During my years covering education in Indiana, I got to know Reed—even visiting her farm in rural Indiana, where her mom served me homemade, fresh-from-the-oven muffins. Though a Republican, she got along with the Democratic governors she served with, and often clashed with Republicans (like current Gov. Mitch Daniels.) She ushered in the development of Indiana's statewide standardized test, pushed for and ultimately succeeded in getting more full-day kindergarten in the state, and has visited schools in all of Indiana's 92 counties. She was one of the first state schools chiefs to implement a high-stakes graduation exit exam, in effect for the Class of 2000, and stuck by the requirement even as the parents of special education students sued because they saw it as unfair.

Most times, Dr. Reed acted more like the elementary school teacher that she once was than a veteran politician. Still, she's been one of the Republican Party's top vote-getters in the state, and someone will need to step in to fill the giant hole that will remain when she leaves. In Indiana, the down-ballot statewide offices (like schools chief) are selected at party conventions. And since Indiana voters tend to vote Republican on these less glamorous statewide offices, the candidate who is picked at this year's GOP convention will probably win. Already, the line is forming.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 11:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This dispatch comes from my colleague Lesli Maxwell, who has done a fabulous job covering recovery and reform efforts in New Orleans' public schools in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. As part of this special project, she's spent nearly nine weeks in the city on several different trips, getting to know the students, teachers, and the man who is running the schools of New Orleans.

Now that the Chicago media have reported that Paul Vallas, superintendent of the Recovery School District in New Orleans, is “open to running again” for governor in his home state of Illinois, there will be no tamping down speculation in the Crescent City that the hard-charging schools chief is a short-timer. Today, picking up on reports of the speech that Vallas gave in Chicago on Monday, the New Orleans Times-Picayune has a story that raises good questions about who might succeed Mr. Vallas and whether his political aspirations might distract him from running the city’s post-Katrina system of low-performing schools.

Rumors about Vallas’ political ambitions began swirling soon after he got to New Orleans last summer, though some have been wilder than others. One charter school leader told me last fall that she heard that Vallas was sizing up whether to run for mayor of New Orleans! When I first asked Vallas about his gubernatorial plans early last fall, he was cagey, saying that he was committed to New Orleans and any talk of his next step would be premature.

I let a few months pass, and asked him again. He was still coy, but was willing to say that he’d be weighing the idea for the next six to eight months. Well, that deadline is approaching, and with his public statements in Chicago, it seems pretty clear that he wants folks (i.e. Democratic fundraisers!) to know that he is considering another run at the job. He narrowly lost the Democratic nomination to current Gov. Rod Blagojevich in 2002. Plus, his wife and sons already live in Chicago. And, he’s been frank about his intentions to stay in New Orleans not much past two years, enough time, he believes, to stabilize the troubled post-Katrina school system and set in motion some lasting reforms. On that timeline, he would be out of New Orleans in summer of 2009, plenty of time to put a campaign together for the 2010 race.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 2:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In Delaware, which has a hotly contested race for governor, funding public schools is becoming a big issue as the state faces a $250 million budget deficit.

And in Chicago, a new report says Latinos are particularly concerned about the issue, especially since they face long lines for prekindergarten programs in their neighborhoods and persistently high dropout rates.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 12:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In Ohio, election officials have levied their biggest fine ever—$5.2 million— against a school-choice lobbying group called All Children Matter.

The group has been involved in numerous states across the country, and as the 2008 election season heats up in the states, it's one worth keeping your eye on.

I've been following All Children Matter since it started running ads in 2004 in Indiana Statehouse races when I was a reporter for The Indianapolis Star. Though its purpose is to get school-choice-advocates into local and statewide office, the Michigan-based All Children Matter, which has its money-raising PAC in Virginia, uses controversial tactics. The group often comes to local races late in the game, using direct mail, and television and radio ads to hit candidates on polarizing issues such as illegal immigration and, in the Indiana case, same-sex marriage.

And in the Ohio case, its tactics didn't pay off. The All Children Matter Virginia PAC sent $870,000 to its local Ohio PAC, but the fine was more than five times that amount. The violation, according the media reports of the Ohio Elections Commission meeting, occurred because the Virginia PAC wasn't registered in Ohio.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 1:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

...like academician, psychometrician, statistician.

Democratic Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland last week hurled those labels at his state schools chief, Susan T. Zelman. Hired by her board of education in 1999, Zelman is well-liked in her state, and nationally as well. But from Strickland's perspective, she's not "visionary" enough, according to this report of Strickland's visit to the Cincinnati Enquirer's editorial board. (Hat tip to Ohio blogger ohdave.)

Strickland, who like a lot of governors wants to have more direct control over education, wants to essentially do away with her office and have his own education czar. And Zelman isn't his choice.

But when you start making it personal—about Zelman—and not about the structure of government, then you're bound to get pushback. And now, people are starting to rally around Zelman.

In Dayton Daily News reporter Scott Elliott's blog, Elliott includes a letter of response from a state school board member, Carl Wick, who throws his own labels at the governor: "not dignified, virtuous or professional." The board has reason to be angry, too, because Strickland wants to strip them of their powers and make them advisors only.

In Maryland, Gov. Martin O'Malley tried to take down his chief—the venerable Nancy Grasmick. It didn't work.

When I was working on a story for this week's issue of EdWeek about how state boards of education are under siege, and having their power diluted, Brenda Welburn, the executive director of the National Association of State Boards of Education made a good point. It went something like this: Just because Eliot Spitzer screws up in New York doesn't mean you get rid of the office of governor, you get rid of him.

Politics is personal, and personalities in office change. So Welburn's point is that governors should think hard before they start wanting to do away with an office entirely just because they don't like who's currently serving in it.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 9:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Here at Education Week, we divide up states among reporters, who are then charged with keeping tabs on education reform ideas in those states. We monitor the legislatures, the state chiefs, and the governor, especially around budget and State of the State times.

New York is my state. And so I gathered around the TV, with my colleagues, about an hour ago to watch Gov. Eliot Spitzer resign from office, in such an unfortunate and untimely way.

The "Sheriff of Wall Street" had great promise when he took office last year. After all, observers wondered what would happen if Spitzer were to concentrate his political capital and his desire to fix-what's-wrong-with-the-world into education reform? At a Jan. 29, 2007 speech I attended for this story, he said: “We are poised to begin implementing what may be the greatest reform agenda directly tied to the largest infusion of resources in our state’s history."

After that speech, education commissioner Richard Mills (who is hired by the Board of Regents), told me that the mere fact that Spitzer delivered that speech in the education building, and invited board members, was a sign that Spitzer wanted to work together to improve education. Educators were encouraged.

To help achieve this 'great reform', he enlisted the help of Manuel Rivera, the former Rochester, N.Y., superintendent who was going to take charge of Boston Public Schools before Spitzer tapped him to be his chief education adviser. Perhaps now Mr. Rivera will be persuaded to take that No. 2 job at LA Unified if offered.

Spitzer was tasked with helping make the state's school funding constitutional after years of court rulings that had indicated otherwise. He proposed more funding and changes to the overall school-funding formula, and was making progress. And he also crafted a "Contracts for Excellence" plan that attached strings, and accountability, to additional funding for schools.

He's also has been praised for lifting the cap on charter schools in New York, which advocates had tried to accomplish for years.

More recently, Spitzer has taken some heat for proposing a budget that education advocates said didn't provide enough additional money for schools, especially in light of court rulings.

So what happens to Spitzer's most ambitious reform agenda?

Lt. Gov. David Paterson, who is legally blind and will become the nation's second serving African-American governor, will take over and put his own stamp on it, starting Monday. So I'll keep you posted as I learn more the education priorities of New York's new governor. (UPDATE: Read my colleague Christina Samuels' post on her Special Education blog.)

Posted by Michele McNeil at 11:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I think Joe Williams at Democrats for Education Reform gets a medal for being one of the first ones out of the gate—if not the first one—to offer a statement on what the pending resignation of New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer means for K-12. The statement was posted on his blog at 9:37 a.m. today and hit my email in-box at 10:30 a.m. today.

Perhaps this is Joe's journalistic instincts taking over. Spitzer is expected to announce his resignation today at 11:30 a.m.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 10:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Given the problems that have befallen New York's caped crusader against corruption, Eliot "Client No. 9" Spitzer, it seems appropriate to examine what's at stake for education, and the guy who might replace him.

New York is at a pivotal point in education, as Gov. Spitzer has championed and succeeded in investing more money in public schools—prompted by court rulings declaring that the state wasn't spending enough money to provide kids with an adequate education. At the same time, he's demanded accountability in exchange for that money.

There's no indication Democrat Lt. Gov. David Paterson (pictured) would halt the momentum should he become governor in the wake of the Spitzer scandal. When I traveled to Albany for stories on Spitzer's school-funding plans, Paterson was always nearby to show his support.

What's more, Paterson, who is legally blind, also has been a champion for students with disabilities.

He's also been a supporter of charter schools, and in this 2006 New York Observer story, earned praised from voucher advocate Clint Bolick for being a friend of school choice. However, if you keep reading, you'll see that while Paterson supports the idea of choice, he's not particularly keen on the tactics of the school-choice movement.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 10:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

...otherwise known as the National Governors' Association just-concluded winter meeting, which I staffed in hopes of getting a good story about initiatives underway by governors to improve public schools.

Instead, I wrote this story for EdWeek: "Education Gets Short Shrift at Governors' Winter Meeting."

So, what's on the governors' minds? Other really important things, like health care, the "real ID" federal identification mandate, the federal economic stimulus package and clean, affordable energy. And then, of course, attendees and the governors at this Washington D.C. conference talked about who's endorsing whom for president and whether any of these heads-of-state might get picked as a vice presidential running mate.

Any hopes I had that education would emerge as a top-tier issue on the presidential scene were dashed. After all, if the governors aren't talking about schools—and about half of their state budgets go for K-12 and higher education—then who will?

Even the only meeting of the education committee on Sunday was sparsely attended by the governors. Of the 14 governors on the committee (and nearly all were in attendance at the overall meeting) only six sat through most of the two-hour session on turning around low performing schools. Props go to: Republican Gov. Donald L. Carcieri of Rhode Island (the committee chairman); Democrat Gov. Brad Henry of Oklahoma; Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter, a Democrat; Connecticut Gov. Jodi Rell, a Republican; Maine Gov. John Baldacci, a Democrat, and Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine, a Democrat.

Missing-in-action for most or all of the meeting were: Alabama Gov. Bob Riley, a Republican; Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, a Republican; Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, a Democrat; and Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, also a Democrat. Idaho Gov. "Butch" Otter, a Republican, didn't attend the meeting at all because he's recovering from surgery. Also on the committee (and not attending all or most of it) were the governors of American Samoa, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 11:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Lost in the Super Tuesday hoopla was the fact that California voters agreed to expand tribal gambling in their state by adding 17,000 slot machines to further tempt people. The proceeds will go to help prop up the state budget. Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who supported and helped broker the gambling deal with the legislature last year, even appeared in television ads (included below) with state superintendent of public instruction Jack O'Connell. (And those two don't always see eye to eye). The message? More slot machines=more money for schools.

This isn't just a California issue. In Illinois, the state is considering legalizing a land-based casino in Chicago and expanding its riverboat casinos to provide money for schools.

In Nevada, the state teachers' union is campaigning to put a question on the November ballot that would increase taxes on Las Vegas casinos to raise more money for teacher salaries schools.

Maryland is considering legalizing slot machines in racetracks to help shore up its budget (which includes K-12 education).

What's more, states and politicians such as those in California are using schools to sell the notion of gambling. Some states, such as North and South Carolina, call their lotteries the "Education Lottery." In fact, The North Carolina Education Lottery is catching heat this month for filming an ad featuring 15 children, who are black and white, in a prekindergarten program. One legislator is accusing the lottery of exploiting black children to sell more lottery tickets. You can read more about this here.

Lotteries, slot machines, and casinos are seen as easy ways for states to make some extra money—considerably easier than raising taxes. Gambling revenue is more volatile than say, a property tax—often ebbing and flowing with the peaks and valleys of the economy. Lotteries are particularly expensive to run. So states may tread into a danger zone when they start relying on the unpredictable world of gambling to fulfill fundamental government responsibilities, like educating children.

Are states this desperate for cash?

Apparently, yes.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley and longtime state Education Czar Nancy Grasmick look like they're about to sign a peace treaty between two warring countries.

Almost.

These two arch enemies are now pretending to be friends after the Democratic governor backed down Monday from his demands for legislation that he get to appoint his own education superintendent. If you'll remember, he was all riled up that the state board of education renewed her contract over his opposition.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 10:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Usually, politicians don't run for office for the money. Elected officials are often highly accomplished people who could make much more working in the private sector. Of course, there are other perks to elected office—power, name recognition, and those warm fuzzy feelings about helping your country.

And a new policy brief by Indiana University's Center for Evaluation and Education Policy confirms the same is true for elected versus appointed state schools chiefs.

The conclusion: Being elected will not make you wealthy.

Elected state education superintendents make far less than their appointed counterparts in other states. The highest-paid superintendent is Missouri's Kent King, who is appointed by the state board of education, at $292,500. The lowest-paid? The elected state schools superintendent of Oregon, now Susan Castillo, who earns $72,000 a year.

Not much better paid is the longest-serving elected superintendent (his first year in office was 1985), Wayne G. Sanstead, of North Dakota, who makes $77,434. But as I was researching a story about state chiefs for this week's issue, Mr. Sanstead told me that being elected has one big perk: You answer only to voters, and not to any other politician, such as the governor.

"I know chiefs who can't call their souls their own," said Mr. Sanstead, who said he's leaning towards running again, though he hasn't made up his mind yet.

But Indiana's elected chief, Suellen Reed, said the toll of running for re-election is a big one. (Her salary is $79,400). Not only does she have her day job—overseeing the department of education and championing school reform in Indiana—but by night and weekend, she has to either campaign, or keep those ties with the voters who put her there. Regardless, she told me she's going to run again, for her fifth term.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 11:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

YouTube has become a powerful communication tool for politicians who want to bypass the mainstream media and appeal directly to voters. Now Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt, a first-term Republican who championed school choice and had controversial ties to a pro-voucher PAC called All Children Matter, has put a new spin on use of the technology.

Blunt, who was facing a tough re-election battle, stunned his state by dropping out of the governor's race—announcing it on YouTube.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 10:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Yes, this presidential election is very important to the future of public schools. And yes, the campaign is shaping up to be a fascinating barn-burner. But as I've been scanning headlines from across the country, I've been reminded that the nuts-and-bolts of running schools—from how many teachers a school can afford to hire to what kind of after-school programs a district can offer—are determined by state and local politicians, many of whom will be elected or re-elected this year.

Headlines from major newspapers across the country—just from the last week—foreshadow daunting budget tasks that politicians will tackle in the coming couple of years.

In Kentucky: "Possible education cuts spur fear," Courier-Journal, Jan. 12.

California: "Governor's budget would be a major setback for schools"," San Diege Union-Tribune, Jan. 13.

New Mexico: "2008 Legislature: School districts scale back requests for state funds," Santa Fe New Mexican, Jan. 13.

Kansas: "Budget worries shadow new Kansas legislative session," The Kansas City Star, Jan. 14.

Alabama: "With budget cuts on horizon, Alabama Education Association won't seek teacher raises for 2009," Birmingham News, Jan. 10.

Nevada: "School officials try to plan for cuts amid uncertainty," Las Vegas Review-Journal, Jan. 8.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 9:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In Maryland, the icy and downright hostile relationship between State Superintendent of Schools Nancy Grasmick and Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley exemplifies the ugly power struggle that can result when a governor doesn't directly control his state's school chief.

As O'Malley continues to push for Grasmick's resignation, she refuses to step down. After all, the governor is not her boss—the State Board of Education is. Reporter Liz Bowie details the duel from Grasmick's perspective in this Baltimore Sun story.

Says one Grasmick critic in the story, who wants her to bow to the wishes of Gov. O'Malley: "The governor was elected to a four-year term by the people." Yes, that's true. But the people of Maryland, through their elected representatives, at one time crafted the state law that established the education bureaucracy—and whoever was in power then clearly thought it wise to create a chain of command that does not lead directly to the governor.

While there is something to be said for giving a governor more authority over education, a compelling argument also can be made for having a state schools chief who is not at the governor's beck and call.

For about half of this country's school chiefs, their relationship with the governor is clear and this usually isn't a problem. There are 14 state school chiefs who are separately elected officials and thus answer to voters. By my count, six are up for re-election in 2008. On the other end of the spectrum, there are 12 who are appointed directly by, and answer to, the governor.

But the rest of the chiefs, like Grasmick, are caught in the middle and are appointed by their state boards of education. In some states, these boards are elected, in others, the governor appoints some or all of the members.

Most states have created some distance between governors and their state's education chiefs for a reason. Education is a responsibility spelled out in all state constitutions, so state legislatures created separate boards and chiefs to govern them. In fact, according to the Maryland state law, the governor can only remove an education board member in extreme circumstances, such as in cases of "immorality" or "willful neglect of duty."

Regardless of how a state school chief comes into that job, it's not a particularly glamorous one—after all, it's a lot of day-to-day monitoring of schools and education laws, not to mention enforcing the ever popular No Child Left Behind Act. What's more, in many states, district school superintendents make more money than state chiefs.

But increasingly, governors want, and are taking, more control over education as they realize the connection between their state economies and the quality of public schools. That's not to mention the fact education is an election issue, and school spending takes up about half of state budgets. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democrat and a presidential candidate, was one who successfully sought more control over education in his state.

In Indiana, where I covered education for a decade, the elected Superintendent of Public Instruction Suellen Reed, a very popular Republican who has been elected to four terms so far, doesn't hesitate to be a thorn in the sides of the legislature or the governors she's served with. And almost every year, some lawmaker files a bill to make her position appointed by the governor, rather than elected by voters. (Some view it as her punishment.) But it never succeeds, for several reasons. For one, lawmakers are hesitant to take such a decision away from voters (who also elect them.) And secondly, I think there are many lawmakers who think that checks-and-balances between vested policymakers, even if they do result in heated debates over education, are ultimately good for schools.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 12:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There's a big fight brewing over merit pay in Oregon, where an anti-union activist is taking on the teachers' unions by campaigning for a 2008 ballot initiative that would link teacher raises to "classroom performance." Read more about that here.

Voters in Oregon nixed a similar proposal when it was on the ballot in 2000. But it's eight years later, and merit pay has become a much bigger education reform topic and has spread to states like Texas and Minnesota. Merit pay is even being talked about on the presidential campaign trail. Read my earlier posts here and here.

The results from previous ballot initiatives show that issues that face strong opposition from teachers often fail. There's little doubt that Oregon teachers will get help, in terms of money and volunteers, from the National Education Association—a formidable political force.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 10:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

While most of the education fuss on Election Day last week was over the voucher referendum in Utah, there was another significant, state-level referendum, this one in Washington State where results are still, a week later, neck-and-neck.

Although many believed a referendum that would have made it easier for school districts to get property-tax levies approved by voters had failed, days later, we find out differently. As of Election Night, according to the story, the measure was trailing by a seemingly formidable 38,000 votes—what was thought to be a somewhat comfortable lead. But late votes, including mail-in ballots, have tipped the scales toward victory for referendum supporters—at least for now. You can monitor the results as the rest of the votes are tallied and later certified on the state's website.

This would count as another victory for teachers' unions, including the National Education Association, which got involved in raising money and volunteers to pass the referendum. The referendum is important to teachers because it would relax the standard for approving district property-tax levies by requiring a simple majority of votes, and not a 60 percent "super-majority." These levies, according to media reports, make up about 17 percent of district budgets -- and that's where teacher salaries come from.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 10:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)