Why Education Isn't a 2016 Campaign Issue
The conservative education reformer, Rick Hess, tells the uncomfortable truth that teachers and school patrons must recognize. Politicians often embrace education, but they typically do so in "symbolically potent ways," as opposed to making it a real-world priority. When noting that education is not as important of an issue in this election year, Hess explains:
Education has generally been how conservatives show themselves to be compassionate and how liberals show they're practical and responsible. This election, candidates face intense pressure on the left and the right to demonstrate that they're ideologically reliable--and education is less helpful on that count.
Hess recalls that the last three presidents "made their thinking on education an integral part of their persona." He reminds us that:
For George W. Bush, it was a way to demonstrate a real commitment to equal opportunity. For Clinton and Obama, it was a way to talk about new public spending in terms of investment and personal responsibility, and to distinguish it from old-style tax-and-spend liberalism.
This year's election is so polarized, however, that candidates don't need to wrap themselves in school issues in order to seem kinder and gentler, or tougher and meaner than they really are.
Liberal education reform is rooted in a "Sister Souljah tactic" where "New Democrats" can show they aren't wimps by beating up their longtime allies, teachers and unions. In the big picture, it has never been so much about helping poor children of color as it has been about repeatedly using the word,"Accountability!," "Accountability!," "Accountability!" Only the most idealistic Why Education Isn't a 2016 Campaign Issue: