It’s a classic political face-off: a seasoned professional with a mile-long résumé and a host of influential backers versus a relative neophyte with a fervent grassroots base.
It happened in last year’s presidential contest between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and it’s happening in Wisconsin now, in the race to run the state Department of Public Instruction.
Standing in for Clinton is Tony Evers (tonyevers.com), currently deputy superintendent to retiring DPI head Elizabeth Burmaster. Evers, 57, is the choice of the state’s education establishment, including unions and professional groups representing teachers and administrators.
This kind of backing has been critical to Burmaster and her predecessors, who’ve had little trouble dispatching challengers over the last two decades. The easy analysis is that heavy union spending should ensure Evers’ victory April 7.
That is, unless Rose Fernandez (changedpi.com) pulls an Obama.
Fernandez, 51, who finished a close second in the five-way Feb. 17 primary, is a pediatric nurse who became a parent activist on behalf of families of children enrolled in “virtual” schools. She led the charge for the online academies after their existence was threatened by a court ruling sought by DPI.
The race is officially nonpartisan, and both candidates eschew identifying with political parties. But as in past races, the candidates and their supporters seem to fall into two camps: center/left (Evers) or right (Fernandez). And the campaigns reflect the ideological fissures dominating discourse regarding education reform.
e = get, head
Dive into said
Fernandez looked like a viable candidate until she appeared with clearly incompetent politicos and the ever popular with the brain-dead Joe the Plumber.
The company one chooses to keep and accept to speak for you really is determinative. Clearly shows her educational qualifications are at best shallow.
I give both Evers and Fernandez credit for running. You certainly are aware of the challenges a candidate faces who runs for office without the support of the usual interests. Fernandez, if history is a guide, must climb a mountain for a position typically won by candidates backed by the education establishment.
I emailed both campaigns a few weeks ago asking for an interview to be posted here in mp3 and video formats. I heard from Evers camp, but have nothing scheduled. The Fernandez camp has been silent.
Both candidates answered the League of Women Voters questions in the Candidates Answers insert in Isthmus. To see the answers online go to: http://www.danenet.org/lwvdc/answers.html . Answers will be available in the March 26 isthmus and on the website on March 27th.
I don’t know if I understand — though I do recognize my own naivety. Nonetheless, especially when vying for a post that involves improvement of education, it behooves one, in words, deeds and associations, to be and to model an educated person.
There are many reasons for the seeming decline of school achievement, but my own sense is that the schools, and teachers, in their failure, are merely symptomatic of a larger issue. Regardless of educational achievement, we as adults do not consistently and publicly model intelligent behavior and discourse, choosing instead to follow paths of expediency and group think, choosing allies and positions that will increase our odds of “winning” some battles, but ultimately failing to communicate real solutions because we, and too many of those listening are only persuaded by emotionalism, exaggeration, and appeals to the basest of instincts. That, and only from one’s personal perspective.
An old college roommate of mine was fond of saying, in response to some mindless blather, “Don’t confuse me with the facts!”. Honest appraisal is not something I’ve seen recently; experts do not seem all that expert, professionals are often very unprofessional.
“People whose principles always follow their self-interest, have no principles. ” Replace “principles” with any of “facts”, “morals”, “arguments”, “justifications”, and one has encompassed the vast majority of public and private discourse.