As well as any bills can do, HB
588 and HB
696 will increase the chances of the myriad of higher education governing
boards in Louisiana having informed and accomplished members serve as opposed
to political hacks with minds set more on making sure certain interests get “theirs”
than with higher education.
Both proposed by Rep. Steve Carter, HB
588 would amend the Constitution to allow for additional qualifications to
serve on these boards, as well as to require appointments to attempt to reflect
diversity in race and gender for the Board of Regents and for the Board of
Supervisors of Community and Technical Colleges. HB 696 would spell out those
qualifications. Yesterday,
the former advanced, while the latter got hung up over specifics and will be
fine-tuned for later debate.
Presently, of the 75 members
across the boards, or 93 percent of their entire memberships, that the governor
appoints, the only qualification is that certain numbers come from certain
congressional districts. As written, HB 696 in all five instances would mandate
that a member be an experienced high-ranking officer of a company in a
prominent industry; and/or hold a master of business administration degree or have
lengthy private sector managerial experience; and/or be three graduates of
state public schools with associate, baccalaureate, and post-baccalaureate
degrees among them; and/or one be nominated from five by two “good government”
groups and a business interest group; have one who has experienced in economic
or workforce development in the public sector; and have one who has budgeting
and human resources experience in the public sector.
As written, these qualifications
strike a good balance between trying to inject some relevant background into
appointees and not making qualifications so specific that the governor or
groups would have a difficult time finding people to fill the cubbyholes
created. At the margins, some changes could be made. For example, gubernatorial
Democrat candidate state Rep. John Bel Edwards,
who can sound reasonable when he wants to, in the hearings of HB 696 by the House Committee on
Education said the inclusion of the Louisiana Association of Business and
Industry as one of the three selectors of nominees ought to be balanced with
another group whose interests lie opposed to business. No doubt Carter wanted
an odd number of selectors in order to hash out disputes among them, but
perhaps the best thing would be to keep just the two other groups and mandate
any nominations forwarded must get agreement from both.
Then there’s state Rep. Pat Smith, who only
sounds reasonable accidentally. During hearings, she began to complain that using
the good government groups and LABI as selectors were problematic as “many of
these organizations generally don’t have the wherewithal and points of
references to nominate individuals that are unlike themselves, to make it very ‘soft.’”
Not only might this come as a surprise to, for example, the several female executive officers
of LABI, but it also shows exactly what’s wrong with the present system.
That is, the Smiths of the world
see these appointments more as patronage sinks to pander to special interests
and ideological imperatives than as policy-making positions demanding maximal competence.
In her world, it’s more important what a person looks like than what they can
do, and that people who do not have certain characteristics are disqualified
biologically from being able to make informed decisions on the basis of right
reason, both as appointees or selectors. More generally, governors in the past
have been known to appoint people more known for who they represent and what
they have done to help him get elected than in their having expertise in the
issues that surround higher education and demonstrated good decision-making
ability that focuses on society as a
whole, not parts of it.
This isn’t to say that current
Gov. Bobby
Jindal necessarily has put unaccomplished stiffs hewing to parochialism on these
boards, nor that his appointees don’t have the ability to make wise higher
education policy. It’s just that without qualifications as suggested by Carter
it’s so much easier for any governor to appoint some hack as a sop to partisan
or special interests that helped elect him. And as long as people with Smith’s
attitudes infest pockets of Louisiana politics, that’s a very real possibility.
Something close to Carter’s bills
in form and content should pass out of the Legislature, with the one signed by
Jindal and the other ratified by the people. As such, as these bills wend their
way through the process, supporters need to be wary of those who might try
openly to derail them, but also those who seek to put so many qualifications
representing so many thumbs stuck in the pie that it becomes unworkable and
therefore providing the perfect excuse to stop it.
1 comment:
Professor Cockalorum - your comments (and attempted derisions of two Democrats who have never appointed even one of these board members) hugely beg the question.
If our current Governor, after six years plus, and appointing 93% of the members, had been appointing "accomplished" members, we would NOT NEED these reform attempts. (Aside: reform attempts brought by one of the Governor's education legislative leaders - irony)
Instead, as you write, we have ended up with "... political hacks with minds set more on making sure certain interests get 'theirs' than with higher education ..."
Your words, not mine.
Post a Comment