Gov. Mitch Daniels is already under fire for his decision to refuse to push for the passage of the right-to-work laws in Indiana. But supporters are pointing to two factors that they feel make Daniels’s action understandable: his 2005 executive order that banned collective bargaining for state workers and his determination to make education reform a priority in 2011.
In other words, comparisons to Wisconsin are unfair: right-to-work laws aren’t the same as collective bargaining powers. In addition, Daniels has publicly declared his support for Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s efforts.
“His reluctance on the right-to-work [law] right now is rooted in his desire to see this education [reform] work,” says Ryan Streeter, editor of ConservativeHome.com and a former colleague of Daniels in the White House. Streeter argues that Daniels has been planning for a long time to make this year about education reform — and that a huge battle over right-to-work laws could jeopardize that.
“He’s gearing up for a fight. This is not going to be an easy thing. He’s received a lot of criticism just in the local media for his plans,” says Streeter, talking about how Daniels wants to introduce vouchers and expand charter schools.
Daniels also wants more teacher accountability. “Teachers should have tenure, but they should earn it by proving their ability to help kids learn. Our best teachers should be paid more, much more, and ineffective teachers should be helped to improve or asked to move,” Daniels argued in his State of the State speech last month.
“In general, he wants to be able to rewrite the contracts so that people can be fired and moved along on merit,” Streeter remarks. “And that in itself is just a huge deal. He’s already part of the way down a path with the teachers and the unions in these discussions and so I think this whole right-to-work event right now just makes that whole other process all the more difficult.”
As I wrote last year, Daniels invested an enormous amount of energy in the 2010 state campaigns, fighting to gain a GOP majority in the state assembly. (The senate already had a Republican majority.) He personally called up potential candidates and urged them to run. He talked to and strategized with Republican insiders in the state for over a year before the election about how to best ensure he had the GOP majorities he needed to push through his legislation.
Daniels may be making the wrong call in thinking that a push for right-to-work laws will risk the outcome of his education reform. Or he may not be. But it does appear that what he’s doing is prioritizing one goal (education reform, with vouchers, charters schools, and teacher accountability) over another (right-to-work laws), not forgoing all conservative principles.
“This is a huge legacy item for him,” Streeter says, suggesting that education is more meaningful to Daniels than his “fiscal hawk” record or his privatization of toll roads.
“Getting the education part of his administration nailed down before he’s done is a really big deal,” Streeter adds. “It’s a deeply felt passion of his.”
leaders adapt to changing circumstances mitchy squishy.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo Daniels can't walk and chew gum at the same time? In other words, any issue that might interfere with his precious "legacy" will have to be surrendered, regardless of the consquences to conservatism or the country?
Yeah, some excutive talent we got here folks!
And can we please stop this beltway meme that Daniels is a stalwart fiscal conservative? CATO rated him a pathetic 57 in their latest scorecard of govenors (failing grade) below such massive fiscal conservative icons as Bill Richardson of New Mexico.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI certainly can't speak to the intricacies of Indiana's political-educational complex, but Daniels always seems to fall just short of the proper goal. Why, for example, should public school teachers ever get tenure? Why?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"But it does appear that what he’s doing is prioritizing one goal (education reform, with vouchers, charters schools, and teacher accountability) over another (right-to-work laws), not forgoing all conservative principles."
------------
"Prioritizing" is simply Danielsspeak for backing down on issues he's not committed to.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo good teachers should be paid more, much more? Leave alone how wrong it is to pay government employees on any basis other than the market for the skills the government needs; when Gov. Daniels is gone, what will outlive him will be just one of his reforms: higher pay for teachers.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAll well and good until the "huge legacy item" business.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAt some point the single most important trait in leaders is the ability to take and make a stand. If there ever was a time in this country to make a stand on the issue of public employee unions now would be it.
I have defended Daniels in the past but his wishy-washiness is just too much to bear.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDaniels' stance here gives one some clue as to how a McCain Presidency would have operated.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI don't care about his Indiana priorities, he has cut the legs out from others with more backbone by virtue of his comments.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBecause a governor and a state legislature can't do more than one thing at a time.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI wholeheatedly second AbeFroman's comment. Kaisich and Walker are fighting the Mongolian hordes and Daniels is, at best, voting "present". Weak!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI wish Governor Daniels a peaceful retirement and no stressful jobs in the future.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTenure? Some teachers should be paid much more? Who is he trying to kid? The kids? The nationwide revolution to get control of the unions is underway. The right to work is a fundamental principle of this country. And Daniels is siding with "Tenure"? Is this really the hard fight? I guess I'm missing something. But Daniels has put his name out there on the national scene, so I guess he going for the "moderates". Good luck with that.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOnly an establishment Republican can look at Democrats acting stupidly by fleeing the state and immediately surrender to them.
Sheesh ... talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory!!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNone of that excuses Daniels' behavior on this. Strategy is something that's worked out behind closed doors with your party leaders. You may not want your right flank to charge down the hill, but once they do, you have to advance with them, or you lose the battle. That's (arguably) how King Harold lost the Battle of Hastings.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFunny, I don't get tenure at work. I can show up at work one morning and discover I don't have a job anymore. Oh wait, that happened once. Why are teachers different? He now has the majorities to crush the teachers union, which would make a difference orders of magnitude larger than his precious reforms. His plans largely amount to modifying the status quo. How hard should it be for a Principal and elected school board to simply fire ineffective teachers? Here's an idea, why not just eliminate the state dept of education and let the local school districts teach kids. Who needs it? What purpose does it serve? Talk about setting an example for others! But Daniels isn't about that. If anything, he'd prefer to consolidate more power at the state level.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFirst Daniels wants a "truce" on social issues; then he refuses to support Right to Work law....he is not a conservative, he is an opportunist.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThank you for this fair approach. He's a good man doing a very hard job. His priority is Indiana not higher office. He's doing a good job.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe Indiana education bill is a good one, and will cause a huge fight, but the vouchers are severely limited. It's designed with fiscal conservatism in mind, so it won't cost the state money. Thus, it only applies to poor people who do not already have their kids in private school (which they might already through private school tuition forgiveness or their own severe economizing, as at the private school where I'm a trustee): "by its third year the bill would allow public school students whose families make no more than 130 percent of federal poverty guidelines -- about $29,000 for a family of four" (External Link
) Note that Indiana spends about $10,000 per public primary-school pupil, so the $4500 limit is not a generous one:
"Under the governor's proposal, low-income parents whose children qualify for free or reduced price lunches would get up to 90% of what it cost the state to educate that child in a public school, for private school tuition. That is capped at $4,500 for elementary school with no cap in place for high school.
While the bill could make private school a possibility for some, it will not help those students already enrolled in private schools. The bill will only apply to children currently enrolled in public school for at least two semesters or children already receiving education tax credits."
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe Indiana education bill is a good one, and will cause a huge fight, but the vouchers are severely limited. It's designed with fiscal conservatism in mind, so it won't cost the state money. Thus, it only applies to poor people who do not already have their kids in private school (which they might already through private school tuition forgiveness or their own severe economizing, as at the private school where I'm a trustee): "by its third year the bill would allow public school students whose families make no more than 130 percent of federal poverty guidelines -- about $29,000 for a family of four" (External Link
) Note that Indiana spends about $10,000 per public primary-school pupil, so the $4500 limit is not a generous one:
"Under the governor's proposal, low-income parents whose children qualify for free or reduced price lunches would get up to 90% of what it cost the state to educate that child in a public school, for private school tuition. That is capped at $4,500 for elementary school with no cap in place for high school.
While the bill could make private school a possibility for some, it will not help those students already enrolled in private schools. The bill will only apply to children currently enrolled in public school for at least two semesters or children already receiving education tax credits."
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse