The decision of whether to endorse President Obama is not an easy decision for the NEA Representative Assembly. Friendships are being broken and a few strangers have even stooped to name-calling.With strong feelings on both sides, I expected our Tennessee Caucus to turn into a confrontational, uncomfortable event. I was wrong.
Rather than confrontation, our delegates presented clear, thoughtful reasons for their support or opposition. When Torian Hodges-Finch (Rutherford County Education Association) came to the microphone, we were given a thought-provoking lesson in government and the political process. His unique perspective, comes not only from being history teacher, but also from his previous career, working in politics. Torian made some important points:
*An endorsement is not a vote. It does not a guarantee our individual votes.
*An endorsement is only a first step, but without the first step, there can be no subsequent steps. After that first step, we can begin to negotiate and discuss what we have to offer each other and what we want from each other.
*An endorsement is simply a way of getting a seat at the table. We need to be at that table for the entire campaign, rather than trying to edge in during the last 4 months of the campaign. Consider all of the other groups who are vying for the President’s attention. They are jumping on board as soon as possible to be sure their interests are recognized.
*An endorsement does not encompass everything the candidate represents – it is an endorsement of the ONE, tiny slice (the education slice) of all of things that fall under his consideration.
Think of joining a “Trivial Pursuit” game that has already been going on for an hour:
When you arrive, most players have been around the board several times. They have asked and answered many questions. When you arrive, the other players have won a slice in almost every category, but you are unconcerned, because you only want to win one slice for yourself.
Just as you take your seat at the table, the game ends. The players who were at the table from the beginning, end up with almost everything they need, while you end up walking away with nothing. Later, you can say you were in the game, but you didn’t really play. You weren’t significant to the outcome. Your contribution didn’t matter. Other players may not even remember that you showed up.
Though our issues are certainly not trivial, politics is a game. As an Association, it is strategically important that NEA gets in this game and starts playing now. Later, if we see that the game is not being played the way it should be, we can stand up and leave the table.
The game has started. It’s time to play.
“*An endorsement does not encompass everything the candidate represents – it is an endorsement of the ONE, tiny slice (the education slice) of all of things that fall under his consideration.”
How can we possibly look at this president, who made Race to the Top possible and tossed the Central Falls teachers under the bus, and possibly endorse his education policies?
This isn’t a game of Trivial Pursuit; it’s like the South Park version of Ro Sham Bo, and we’re choosing to go first.
Dear Jennifer,
Once you toss in your endorsement, you’ve used up your leverage. In effect, the game is over. In a close election, it’s often the latest endorsements that matter the most.
Those of us opposing the early endorsement of Obama are opposing it specifically because of the current DOE’s policies. Heck, there are a lot of things I love about our President–none of them, however, fall under how he handles education.
I am not clear why the NEA decided to jump in early, especially given the concerns of its rank and file. Patronizing arguments aimed at those of us who oppose the motion further muddy the NEA’s stance.
I’m not anti-union, but I am opposed to a union that fails to act as a union. We’re either the NEA, or we’re not. If the NEA executives truly did not see the schism this action would produce, they are too far removed from the pulse of its members to serve our interests.
What did you get in return for this endorsement? Duncan has essentially declared war on the concept of public education hoping to privatize it for his corporate friends and donors.