With Election 2016 underway, and the cadre of
Republican candidates prepped for initial debates, the attacks against
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker have not abated, and from the right opponents
have faulted Walker for his stance on Common Core.
Breitbart’s Dr. Susan Berry reported
in a heavily slanted (perhaps overly-long piece):
in a heavily slanted (perhaps overly-long piece):
Wisconsin
Gov. Scott Walker has a history of shifting his stated positions on the
controversial Common Core standards and inviting the federal government into
his state’s education policy plans. Experts say his current position, of
allowing school districts to “opt-out” of Common Core, would not rid his state of
the nationalized initiative. . .
Gov. Scott Walker has a history of shifting his stated positions on the
controversial Common Core standards and inviting the federal government into
his state’s education policy plans. Experts say his current position, of
allowing school districts to “opt-out” of Common Core, would not rid his state of
the nationalized initiative. . .
Walker has been a critic of the Common Core
Standards, and in late September, he told reporters
he would like “Wisconsin have its own unique standards that I think can be
higher than what’s been established.” However, according to the Associated
Press, Walker has not committed to actually rescinding
the standards.
Standards, and in late September, he told reporters
he would like “Wisconsin have its own unique standards that I think can be
higher than what’s been established.” However, according to the Associated
Press, Walker has not committed to actually rescinding
the standards.
To her credit, Berry identifies that his Democratic
predecessor, Jim Doyle, adopted Common Core and initially sought the funding. Somewhat
misleading, her statement “shifting” implies a lack of character, or an
overdose of political calculation. For Walker, it was a recognition of facts.
(For further history on Walker’s shift on Common Core, read
here.) As for HuffPo’s argument that Walker did not want to remove the
standards: that is patently untrue
predecessor, Jim Doyle, adopted Common Core and initially sought the funding. Somewhat
misleading, her statement “shifting” implies a lack of character, or an
overdose of political calculation. For Walker, it was a recognition of facts.
(For further history on Walker’s shift on Common Core, read
here.) As for HuffPo’s argument that Walker did not want to remove the
standards: that is patently untrue
Granted, Walker signed onto Common Core’s implementation
in his first budget. Critics forget his pressing political battles during his
first two years in office: budget crises, collective bargaining reforms, unprecedented
Democratic-Labor Union opposition, plus a recall effort in 2012. Clearly, he
had other issues on his mind besides Common Core. After those victories, he
announced his intentions to repeal Common Core.
in his first budget. Critics forget his pressing political battles during his
first two years in office: budget crises, collective bargaining reforms, unprecedented
Democratic-Labor Union opposition, plus a recall effort in 2012. Clearly, he
had other issues on his mind besides Common Core. After those victories, he
announced his intentions to repeal Common Core.
!["File:Governor]("https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/Governor_Scott_Walker.jpg") |
| Scott Walker (Gage Skidmore) |
Still that has not been enough for some critics.
Before Walker’s Presidential campaign kick-off, Berry
commented an open letter from Common Core opponents to Walker. Specific indictments included
the following:
Before Walker’s Presidential campaign kick-off, Berry
commented an open letter from Common Core opponents to Walker. Specific indictments included
the following:
On
April 20th of this year, you were directly asked during a major media interview
if you would repeal Common Core . . . You replied affirmatively, adding,
“Absolutely! I proposed it in my budget.”
April 20th of this year, you were directly asked during a major media interview
if you would repeal Common Core . . . You replied affirmatively, adding,
“Absolutely! I proposed it in my budget.”
Yet,
contrary to claims you stand against the Common Core standards, you are
effectively entrenching those standards in Wisconsin via Common Core-aligned,
high-stakes assessments.
contrary to claims you stand against the Common Core standards, you are
effectively entrenching those standards in Wisconsin via Common Core-aligned,
high-stakes assessments.
For
months, you have justified taking no definitive action against Common Core,
insisting that local school districts have the power to decide for themselves
what standards they will use.
months, you have justified taking no definitive action against Common Core,
insisting that local school districts have the power to decide for themselves
what standards they will use.
For the facts, consider his veto statement for the
latest budget. The governor presented a budget which “[i]ncreases
local control by affirming the authority of school districts to choose their
own academic standards, provides a pathway to offering multiple student
assessment options and prevents the mandatory application of the national
Common Core Standards.”
latest budget. The governor presented a budget which “[i]ncreases
local control by affirming the authority of school districts to choose their
own academic standards, provides a pathway to offering multiple student
assessment options and prevents the mandatory application of the national
Common Core Standards.”
Regarding a key veto, Walker explained:
This
provision is unnecessary and would have codified assessment criteria in state
law that are closely aligned with national standards I oppose and which local
school districts should not be mandated to adopt. Ultimately, local school
boards across Wisconsin should be able to determine what test they administer
and what standards they adopt.
provision is unnecessary and would have codified assessment criteria in state
law that are closely aligned with national standards I oppose and which local
school districts should not be mandated to adopt. Ultimately, local school
boards across Wisconsin should be able to determine what test they administer
and what standards they adopt.
In Wisconsin, the governor can adjust or remove
funding regarding standards, but he has no control over district decisions on
the matter. The Governor does not have ultimate authority over the educational
standards in local-control Wisconsin. Conservatives have excoriated President
Obama for his unconstitutional executive overreach. Walker respects school
districts and constitutional rule, and yet partisans cry “Walker the RINO!” In
Wisconsin’s statutes and the state Constitution, partisans will find plenty to
affirm Walker’s limited power on dealing with Common Core implementation in
local schools. Legal precedent established this in Thompson v. Craney:
funding regarding standards, but he has no control over district decisions on
the matter. The Governor does not have ultimate authority over the educational
standards in local-control Wisconsin. Conservatives have excoriated President
Obama for his unconstitutional executive overreach. Walker respects school
districts and constitutional rule, and yet partisans cry “Walker the RINO!” In
Wisconsin’s statutes and the state Constitution, partisans will find plenty to
affirm Walker’s limited power on dealing with Common Core implementation in
local schools. Legal precedent established this in Thompson v. Craney:
Since
Wisconsin achieved statehood in 1848, the administration at the state level of
public education in Wisconsin has been the duty of the Superintendent of Public
Instruction, who is elected in a non-partisan statewide election pursuant to
Article X, § 1 of the Wisconsin Constitution.
Wisconsin achieved statehood in 1848, the administration at the state level of
public education in Wisconsin has been the duty of the Superintendent of Public
Instruction, who is elected in a non-partisan statewide election pursuant to
Article X, § 1 of the Wisconsin Constitution.
Wisconsin
state law clearly outlines the state superintendent’s final authority on
curriculum. Despite legal realities, Common Core critics expect Walker to stand
before the cameras every day and preach the evils of the curriculum (and
indeed, there are plenty). However, even if he talked about it at speaking
engagements every day, and removed all statewide testing aligned with the
nationalized standards, Wisconsin schools districts must adopt the
responsibility and adapt their own standards.
state law clearly outlines the state superintendent’s final authority on
curriculum. Despite legal realities, Common Core critics expect Walker to stand
before the cameras every day and preach the evils of the curriculum (and
indeed, there are plenty). However, even if he talked about it at speaking
engagements every day, and removed all statewide testing aligned with the
nationalized standards, Wisconsin schools districts must adopt the
responsibility and adapt their own standards.
As a dedicated constitutional conservative, Walker
expanded school choice, vouchers, welfare-to-work programs, froze state college
tuition, and removed tenure for college faculty: an impressive array of
accomplishments for a red-state governor in a blue state. With his limited,
legal resources, Walker pushed for the repeal of Common Core, has affirmed the
power of local control in school districts, and vetoed provisions in his budget
which would upend his opposition to the unpopular curriculum. Walker made the
right decision, opposing its implementation respecting local control.
Conservatives have blasted Obama for his executive overreach at the federal
level, yet his critics want him to do the same regarding education? Frankly,
opponents of Common Core in Wisconsin, as well as around the country, need to
stop “Waiting for Superman” and take the fight to their school boards.
expanded school choice, vouchers, welfare-to-work programs, froze state college
tuition, and removed tenure for college faculty: an impressive array of
accomplishments for a red-state governor in a blue state. With his limited,
legal resources, Walker pushed for the repeal of Common Core, has affirmed the
power of local control in school districts, and vetoed provisions in his budget
which would upend his opposition to the unpopular curriculum. Walker made the
right decision, opposing its implementation respecting local control.
Conservatives have blasted Obama for his executive overreach at the federal
level, yet his critics want him to do the same regarding education? Frankly,
opponents of Common Core in Wisconsin, as well as around the country, need to
stop “Waiting for Superman” and take the fight to their school boards.
Besides, even if one wants to believe the snide,
worst-case scenario about Walker and Common Core, National Review’s Ian Tuttle presented the following
pithy and positive political appraisal:
worst-case scenario about Walker and Common Core, National Review’s Ian Tuttle presented the following
pithy and positive political appraisal:
[I]f Walker has a Common Core problem, he also has (for
the moment, at least) this small advantage over his opponents: A large swath of
likely Republican primary voters view him as the strongest alternative to Jeb
Bush and the Republican “establishment.” He has a grassroots brand (as opposed
to Christie), national viability (as opposed to Huckabee), gubernatorial
experience (as opposed to Rand Paul and Marco Rubio), and electoral success in
a purple state (as opposed to Rick Perry). And that may be enough for voters to
give his conversion the benefit of the doubt.
the moment, at least) this small advantage over his opponents: A large swath of
likely Republican primary voters view him as the strongest alternative to Jeb
Bush and the Republican “establishment.” He has a grassroots brand (as opposed
to Christie), national viability (as opposed to Huckabee), gubernatorial
experience (as opposed to Rand Paul and Marco Rubio), and electoral success in
a purple state (as opposed to Rick Perry). And that may be enough for voters to
give his conversion the benefit of the doubt.
The analysis above
should lend further benefit to these doubt.
should lend further benefit to these doubt.