Electioneering Education

A large, enthusiastic crowd greeted the renowned poet Maya Angelou as she gracefully stepped forward to the podium. Standing before a gathering of Democrats at their August convention in Chicago, Angelou put forth ideas applicable to both Republicans and Democrats. In her inimitable river of words, she urged Americans to "discuss the issues that separate us," yet maintain respect for one another "since we are more alike than unalike."

The keynote address delivered at the same convention by Indiana Governor Evan Bayh shone the national spotlight on a topic that epitomizes the schism of philosophy in this year's presidential election: "In this election, no issue more clearly defines the differences between the two major parties and their nominees than education."

At this summer's Republican National Convention, Bob Dole, the Republican presidential nominee, attacked the Democrat-favoring teachers unions for impeding education reform. In retaliation, the Democrats harped on Republican attempts to slash funding for education. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy '54-'56 (D.-Mass.) went so far as to label Dole's acceptance address as "the first anti-teacher, anti-education speech ever delivered by a presidential nominee of either major party."

Behind the political smoke screens and accusations lies the naked reality that neither party provides the cure for the fundamental disease gnawing away at education. The President offers band-aids to stem the horrific bleeding, while the former senator amputates the limb.

Bob Dole and the Republicans would have the voting public believe that "the center of all that afflicts our schools is a denial of free choice." They think special interest groups--read Democrats--have politicized education and, in doing so, have taken away power from the people. The solution? Abolish the Department of Education, grant families "choice" via vouchers, and empower parents, teachers and local school boards.

President Bill Clinton begins with education in detailing his blueprints for the bridge to the 21st century. His plan for education focuses on tax breaks for college tuition and literacy for America's children. Unfortunately, the highlight of his record only amounts to a Department of Education flyer introducing school uniforms. To frame his proposals, Clinton invokes the education panacea, otherwise known as the information superhighway.

Telling the American public that he envisions an America "where computers are as much a part of the classroom as blackboards" may win Clinton a few votes, but the fact remains that the vast majority of teachers still uses textbooks as the primary tool for learning. Computers and the vaunted Internet are merely supplements. Spending millions on computers to equip every classroom is not cost-effective. It is more important that students learn how to think than to surf the World Wide Web.

Right now, America has more pressing needs: better infrastructure, more teachers and still more textbooks. We can ill afford to pour precious money into technology that educators have not yet mastered. Yes, the information superhighway is a blessing. But not when it foolishly misdirects our scarce resources.

If the only baggage tying down American education was the weighty price of college tuition, then the President's tax cuts will do the trick. He wants to provide $1,500 per year for two years of post-high-school education and a $10,000 tax credit for college tuition. Dole's more modest proposal will give a $2,500 interest deduction for student loans and restore the federally guaranteed loan program through private banks.

But in assuming that cost is the primary inhibitor of higher education, both Clinton and Dole misdiagnose the disease. College students and their families will wholeheartedly embrace these gifts, but the benefits are directed towards the successful student who has survived the first 12 years of schooling. The easy way to appease young voters in college is to throw money at them.

The more difficult task, and the one that requires a greater investment, is to bring the rest of the nation up through middle school and high school to the point where every student can utilize college tuition tax cuts. Tax breaks are useless for an illiterate child. Sending an army of volunteer tutors to the nation's cities is a step in the right direction since it promotes literacy. Literacy, however, does not produce thinkers. It is a love for learning that drives successful students.

President Clinton's school uniform pamphlet simply changes the bandage on the wound; it does nothing to kill the virus. To suggest that altering a person's outer appearance will bring about inner renewal is an insult to the severity of the task at hand. Attitudes must be changed from the inside; this transformation will require more commitment than school uniforms. We must convince people that education will bring economic power. And we must prove it by awarding jobs to qualified individuals. For urban America to harbor hope, it must see examples of success. Keynote speaker Bayh endorsed tougher truancy laws, more drug prevention and school uniforms as means to achieve discipline. Missing were ways to replace the void with compassion. Disciplinary problems are just symptoms of a greater illness. Truancy ends where an incentive to attend school begins, not through tougher punishments. Attendance in body does not ensure fulfillment of the mind. It is only the first of many rungs on the ladder of education.

Meanwhile, the Republicans are ready to let the middle class escape ineffective public schools for private ones, effectively leaving the public schools deserted. School vouchers will lead to a mass exodus of the privileged. Who else can afford the increasingly high tuition of private schools? In many urban areas, school boards do not have the necessary resources to realize the benefits of a Republican empowerment plan. They, too, misread the charts and vital signs on education. If Republicans pull the plug on failing public schools, they must offer a successful alternative. If not, a further segregation between the elite and the poor will ensue. Poor school districts have a laundry list of needs, like money, energetic teachers, active parents and wise administrators.

Contrary to what Clinton says, we are not on the right track for education. The President's medicine does not combat the right disease. Dole's prescription is equally inadequate. Neither party accounts for the shamefully deficient institutions that poor students are forced to attend. Does Dole expect quality private schools to spring up in America's urban jungles? Does Clinton believe that schools with asbestos and lead paint really need wiring to the Internet?

The chasm between the haves and have-nots increases generation after generation because of the great difference in educational opportunity. Since education is mostly paid by local taxes, the affluent neighborhoods are able to provide their students with benefits poor children cannot have. What happens to Jesse Jackson's urban canyons of despair? A poor family, living in a poor neighborhood, that sends its children to a poor school that educates them poorly and awards them worthless diplomas only creates more poverty. No wonder welfare can be a such a frustrating cycle! When America gets serious about rebuilding its cities, it must start with refinancing public education.

Maya Angelou reminded her audience that our price was paid for by the generations preceding us, from the Irish potato farmers to the African slaves to the Chinese railroad workers.

Are we willing to pay the price for educating the next generation?