Captiolists

Last week's donnybrook at Superintendent

Janet Barresi's first State Board of

Education meeting was riveting political

theater. And it was nothing more than a

preview of coming attractions.

Despite all the high-minded rhetoric

about improving education, reducing the

number of dropouts and better preparing our students

to compete in the global economy, the state's public

schools actually have become pawns in a battle for

political power.

As a result, there will be more skirmishes at state

board meetings. There will be more fl are-ups in the

legislature. And there eventually will be more clashes at

school board meetings, as well as within school districts

and communities.

There are two powerful forces driving education

"reform" in Oklahoma -- neither of which is devoted

to actually improving academic outcomes. The fi rst

is the state's deep-pocketed, anti-union business

elite.

fundamentalists and theocrats that prefers home

schools and church schools to the melting pot of

public education.

You would think the state's corporate leadership

would be the most serious about improving

Oklahoma's education. Don't they need a welleducated

workforce to compete in the 21st century

global economy?

It's clear, though, that not enough of the business

elite ever really cared about upgrading the state's K-12

schools. If they did, Oklahoma wouldn't be 47th in what

we spend per pupil. After all, Oklahoma's business

leaders -- and biggest campaign contributors -- usually

get what they want.

The real "reform" that many top business leaders

want doesn't involve the classroom. Rather, it's aimed

at the teachers' unions -- particularly the state's largest,

the Oklahoma Education Association. What they really

want is to destroy the OEA.

As a Republican lawmaker put it recently, "We

don't hate teachers. We hate their union."

I've never understood that logic. If the OEA is so

powerful, why are Oklahoma educators 49th nationally

in pay? Why does the state owe billions of dollars to the

teacher retirement system? Why isn't the state fulfi lling

its pledge to reward National Board Certifi ed teachers

and speech pathologists their promised $5,000 bonus?

The second group of major players -- including

religious fundamentalists and theocrats -- tenaciously

promotes vouchers that would allow students to divert

scarce tax dollars from public schools to religious

schools, even home schools.

One of the key actors is the Oklahoma Council

of Public Affairs (OCPA), a conservative, Oklahoma

City-based think tank fi nanced by some of the state's

deepest pockets. They're constantly churning out

"research" that supports their agenda, which amounts

to this: anything but public education.

For the most part, groups insist they're not antipublic

schools, asserting instead that competition will

strengthen public education by forcing it to compete.

Their altruism would be more credible if they'd been

in the trenches in past efforts to bolster the existing

system. Some, though, fought Gov. Henry Bellmon's

marvelous HB 1017 reforms tooth-and-nail and

worked since to systemically dismantle them.

The State Board's pushback against some of

Barresi's staff choices -- one of the fi rst skirmishes

in what promises to be a session-long battle over

education reform -- ignited a GOP fi restorm.

The meeting was still in full uproar when the

OCPA issued a press release, urging state lawmakers

to clip the board's authority. Two Republican

legislators -- Corey Holland of Marlow and Charles

Ortega of Altus -- suddenly showed up to watch the

proceedings. An hour after the meeting adjourned,

Gov. Mary Fallin and other GOP leaders joined Barresi

at a Capitol news conference to denounce the board.

Inside baseball? Perhaps. But what's happening

here is important -- and Oklahomans who care about

public education should take note.

Yes, the State Board of Education is comprised

of members appointed by the previous governor,

Democrat Brad Henry. (Of course, no one would

mistake him for a partisan.) But the constitutionally

established board has a legally defi ned management

role to play -- duties set up through laws enacted over

decades by the Legislature.

It is true that lawmakers could neuter the board

but they do so at their own peril. It's almost always

foolhardy to make radical changes in the midst of a

hissy fi t. Even so, some GOP legislators are discussing

it, no doubt spurred on by the OCPA and others.

Barresi and her Republican allies argue that hiring

her own management team is routine for a new boss.

True enough. But there are legal issues to consider:

Some of her team were already on the job -- and being

paid with private funds -- while they operated out

of taxpayer-fi nanced offi ces and directed taxpayerfi

nanced employees.

This isn't a partisan issue. It's a good government

issue. It's a matter of transparency. Taxpayers deserve

to know who's paying these salaries -- and what their

agendas are. Barresi reported that Devon Energy and

Bank of Oklahoma are among the contributors to

a tax-exempt group called 3R Initiative Inc., which

is paying the salaries through the Oklahoma City

Communities Foundation. Who else in involved?

Barresi, Fallin and other Republican leaders seem

to be taking the position that it shouldn't matter --

it's not costing the taxpayers anything, for now, and

Barresi ought to be allowed to hire whomever she

wants because she won statewide election last fall.

The new superintendent made clear she believes

she has a mandate from the voters to overhaul

Oklahoma's educational system. The implication is

that anyone who questions her decisions is part of

an old guard seeking to protect their power within a

failing system.

It makes for a good sound bite, but it fails to

appreciate the complexities. For example, Barresi's

choice for chief of staff, Jennifer Carter, was her

campaign manager. You'd expect a newly elected

statewide offi cial to surround herself with those she

knows best. But here's where it gets murky: Carter

doesn't possess the academic and career qualifi cations

required to be second in command at the state

education department, according to administrative

rules approved by the board. This is red meat for critics

-- especially when you throw in a $96,000 annual

salary, which sounds like an awful lot of money to most

Oklahomans.

Almost every statewide elected offi cial who wins

by a comfortable margin asserts a mandate. Asserting

it, as part of the political give-and-take, is one thing.

Believing it is another. In fact, it's more plausible that

Barresi was swept into offi ce in a Republican tidal wave

spawned by anti-Obama sentiment in Oklahoma --

not because the electorate was seconding her every

proposal.

Republicans face a major challenge as they exercise

dominion over state government: how to guard against

overreach. The political graveyard is littered with those

who asserted a mandate where none existed.

--Arnold Hamilton is editor