What does it mean to be partisan?

As a retired public school teacher, I find it useful to define terms by imagining how I would define them to children. The trick is to present a term with its most basic meanings. This works particularly well with political terms, since the media already defines them in childlike ways. Thus, if children ask me what Republicans and Democrats are (and they have) I might lift a simple definition right out of the media: “Republicans are people who don’t want to spend money, while Democrats want to spend money.” That would, of course, be an oversimplification, but it would satisfy the needs of the typical adult newspaper reader and might lead a child to ask more.

These days I don’t talk to as many kids as I used to, but the discourse is surprisingly similar. Consider, for instance, the reply of a California Democrat to this question: “What do you think state money should be spent on?” You’ll get a simple answer: “It should be spent on services for society’s most needy: children, the indigent,” etc. That’s an answer a child could understand. And most children, hearing such a statement, would think, “Well, why would anyone not be a Democrat? We should help children and poor people.”

Thus partisanship, the adherence to one party over another, is born. The problem, of course, is that adult political life is not so simple. To put it bluntly, Democrats don’t particularly care about children and poor people. Quite the reverse, in fact.

Take, for instance, the question of President Obama’s Race to the Top (RTTT) grant, which, we’re told, is supposed to help children. In California, as in the rest of the nation, almost all office-holding or appointed Democrats are for it, while many Republicans are against it. What I am arguing here is that, while this is a partisan struggle, it is not about whether or not we should help children.

To begin with, RTTT applicants must commit to adopting new federal “Common Core” academic standards (CCS). The reason given is that many states have poor standards. But California, in the estimate of virtually everyone who has studied its standards, is not in that category. Nonetheless, the Schwarzenegger appointed state school board approved paying, according to the non-profit group EdSource, up to $1.6 billion to cover the costs dropping our standards and adopting the CCS, and the board’s new members, appointed by Democratic governor Jerry Brown, are not perturbed at the prospect. Meanwhile our RTTT application was rejected and we will receive no federal money, so we will be paying the $1.6 billion with state funds, increasing by that amount our $25 billion deficit.

So Democrats do want to spend money. But are they spending it on children? The money will go to test writing companies, textbook publishers and professional development pundits. Does that sound like children? Do you hear the words “student,” “teacher,” or “school” in that description?

But our partisan state, our Democratic state under Governor Brown and his new appointees to the state board is proceeding with CCS adoption because, well, because if you’re a Democrat you believe in spending money.

When last I wrote for Liberty Maven, the struggle over RTTT and CCS was under the radar, but now that states across the nation are at last dealing with their huge deficits there is a lot of noise. Washington, Maine, Massachusetts and others have been addressing CCS for several weeks, with heated debates occurring in their state houses, and Rand Paul is asking the right questions in Congress. What is happening in our Democratic state of California? That depends on where you look. If you look at online forums, whether Democrat or Republican, you’ll see scores of outraged teachers, parents and education researchers asking where the adoption money is supposed to come from, and what good it will do to spend it on new standards. But if you look at Sacramento, you’ll see partisanship in action: a lockstep march towards embracing CCS. No one anywhere is questioning the wisdom of adoption, or even admitting that we are not yet committed to it. Per education writer Tom Chorneau, the newly-established state advisory panel tasked with “providing professional development to teachers on the Common Core changes” had its first meeting in late February, and everyone discussed the done deal of adoption in total harmony.

This is great news for the recipients of the anticipated windfall. If you look at the textbook companies’ websites you’ll see glowing reports on their CCS compliance. Here’s what major publisher Pearson has to say on its home page, (http://commoncore.pearsoned.com/): “Only Pearson offers complete and cohesive support to implement the new Common Core State Standards and provide the easiest possible transition.” Note: the last realignment of textbooks for newly adopted California standards cost $1 billion over four years (see the Schiff-Bustamante bill, 1998).

“Democrat” is getting a little harder to define, isn’t it? We’ve gone from spending money on those in need to spending money on those in greed.

But it gets worse. Even normally impartial and informative education commentator John Fensterwald, in a recent exchange with me in his online forum, Thoughts on Public Education, brought partisanship into a new Alice and Wonderland dimension:

Me: Every research institute from Fordham to Pioneer has found that the current CA standards are among the best in the nation and are in no need of replacement.

John: Doug: “Every research institute from Fordham to Pioneer” is like saying “every politician from Ron Paul to Sarah Palin.”

As a consultant for both Fordham and Pioneer during their assessments last summer of state standards in relation to CCS, it was news to me that a positive evaluation of California’s standards denotes any kind of politics at all. I’m still working on John’s meaning. I think it’s something like, “We won, so our side gets the loot.”

Let’s tell it like it is: Democrats want to spend money, yes, on their buddies. Now that’s something any child can understand.

—————————————

Doug Lasken is a retired LA Unified teacher, freelancer and consultant. Write him at [email protected]

Read more at Liberty Maven