As the 2014 Louisiana Legislature regular session closed, Gov. Bobby Jindal has strived to have it both ways on the Common Core State Standards, and has a chance to reinforce that soon with a by-product of the session.
Jindal at one time gave
understated support (the only kind given for so long since there was no
controversy attached to it until about a year ago) to this framework agreed
upon by most states for concepts to be taught in schools, but earlier this year
reversed course and disavowed both the testing regime Partnership for Accountability and Readiness
for Colleges and Careers (largely developed from the state’s previous
testing framework) for CCSS and CCSS itself, saying they risked too greatly forcing
Louisiana into following a national curriculum. He appeared to be egged on by
some legislators, special interests, and concerned parents, first by a claim
that he could back out the state unilaterally from participating in PARCC, then
by the observation that promulgated rules for PARCC administration he could
veto.
The contract
withdrawal strategy seemed questionable as it also would take the acquiescence
of Board of Elementary and Secondary Education Pres. Chas Roemer and
Superintendent of Education John White, who have backed steadfastly CCSS and
PARCC. But the Administrative Procedures Act clearly
gave Jindal the ability to veto the regulations which, for whatever reason,
were issued only in early May. This meant that Jindal had until the end of that
month essentially to reject them, which would restart the process.
Theoretically, this loop could continue indefinitely and presumably CCSS/PARCC
opponents could use the time to induce the state’s withdrawal from them.
However, it also would throw the
state’s educational delivery into chaos, not knowing what would be assessed and
therefore not knowing what to teach, and could lead to a legal violation that
requires the state to use nationally-standardized exams in its assessment by a
certain date. As such, practically deferment by Jindal would prevent a train
wreck of this nature.
And, for whatever reason, the
deadline came and went without any action on Jindal’s part, although he never
acknowledged that he had considered this and only said that he would review possible
administrative actions if the Legislature failed to act to remove the state
from participation. It now has, with that same clock ticking to expiration also
eliminating this opportunity to accomplish rejection through his inaction,
which brought
him criticism from PARCC opponents.
With the contract withdrawal
strategy also appearing unlikely to succeed, this still remains available for
Jindal to attempt a symbolic blow against CCSS. He could try this, although if
both sides retain their resolves inevitably it would wind up in court with
anything but deciding in favor of keeping the contract intact highly
improbable, and thus would devolve into a waste of time and resources. Yet not
to try encourages amplifying the critique that he’s all talk but no action on
this issue. This perception damages his political standing among that
constituency, whose support could prove helpful in his final 18 months in
office and/or for any future electoral endeavors.
So it seems fortunate for him that
an escape
valve of a kind appeared from the Legislature at its end. HB
953 by state Rep. Walt Leger would
codify into law and extend an exemption from two to three years for schools to
use data from a national standardized exam (planned to be PARCC) in computing
accountability measures if that use lowers their scores and in computing
teacher evaluations. These measures already were promulgated by BESE for the
shorter period.
Obviously, the bill must go to
the governor for his disposition, and CCSS opponents now clamor for Jindal to
veto it, because it reaffirms that the state will use PARCC. This provides the
perfect pitch out over the middle of the plate for Jindal to blast out of the
park: he reaps all the benefits of credibly asserting he took action to reduce
the impact of CCSS, yet it does nothing to stop adoption of PARCC and actually
speeds up its full evaluative use by a year – meaning because of the extant
rules it still won’t go that far until he has left office. And, BESE could
accomplish everything in the bill through rulemaking simply by extending its
current manifestation by a year. There’s no cost to anyone with a veto.
Such an action within the next
three weeks provides further demonstration of how Jindal has tried to finesse
the issue. He articulates his opposition to all things CCSS, and this veto would
become the strongest signal to date, yet the implementation of it continues
unabated. He then can construct a tale whereby he fought against it utilizing
whatever powers he had, which did not turn out to be enough to derail it.
Of course, there are informal
powers he could have deployed, such as putting the screws on legislators recalcitrant
of negating CCSS or threatening BESE members he will work against their
reelections (after having helped some of them previously) unless they recant on
CCSS, but he didn’t. Undoubtedly this would have required a huge expenditure of
political capital to pull off with no guarantee of success and, given other
policy priorities, easily could be argued as an instance of discretion being
the better part of valor. Still, it was not tried.
Jindal may hope his dealing with
this issue has pleased all sides of it in some way and where casting this veto
may preserve that balancing. The problem with walking this kind of tightrope is
you can end up falling off it in pleasing none.
1 comment:
"...pleased all sides ..."
"... walking this kind of tightrope ..."
Where I come from we call all this LYING.
Fancier place call it duplicity and PANDERING.
Post a Comment