In USA Today, DeWayne Wickham writes about the potential adverse consequences of the NEA’s new
public relations legal strategy again noting that railing against unfunded mandates is a self-destructive stance for the left.
Here’s another one. The NEA strategy which is basically anti-accountability in terms of NCLB (yes, yes, they support the goals, everyone supports the goals…) and anti-choice overall, even including public school choice and charters, puts Democrats in the position of essentially championing a role for public schools that doesn’t focus on either student learning (especially for disadvantaged students) or parental preference. Politically this leaves the field pretty wide open for Republicans but intellectually it leaves Democrats in a position of championing public education more or less as a day care or jobs program rather than an educational project. Over time, that’s not a good place to be politically or substantively. There are certainly legitimate arguments against choice in all its forms and also against accountability both in theory and practice today. But, in terms of today’s educational challenges, it’s really ridiculous to be against both.
Hang on! This can’t be right…the NEA wouldn’t give Democrats self-serving but bad political advice would they? According to last year’s USA Today exclusive, yes they would!