Is Huckabee Triangulating on Education?
Campaign journalism often consists of too many reporters chasing too little news, so the question of where Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee stands on education is garnering more attention than it might otherwise.
As I noted last Monday, Huckabee is drawing support on education from ideological opposites, represented on one end by conservative home-schoolers and on the other by NEA New Hampshire. This is causing other ideological opposites to question his sincerity. Is this really so unusual a strategy for an Arkansas governor to use?
Huckabee’s education stance arose in two contexts this morning. The first was a smack from columnist George Will, who is appalled by NEANH’s endorsement of Huckabee.
“It likes, as public employees generally do, his record of tax increases, and it applauds his opposition to school choice,” wrote Will.
Huckabee’s campaign states unequivocally: “Governor Mike Huckabee is a supporter of school vouchers, and has always been a supporter of school vouchers; he supported them as far back as his first run for public office, as a U.S. Senate candidate, in 1992.”
Michele McNeil of Education Week isn’t buying that line. In a post headlined “Should Huckabee Be Wearing Flip-Flops?” she turns up a paper trail that depict Huckabee as not quite the voucher champion he now claims to be.
“Incidentally, Huckabee has not been out on the campaign trail, jumping up and down asserting that the NEA got it wrong,” McNeil wrote.
I’m inclined to take the Huckabee campaign at its word – that he supports vouchers. But so what? Has he instituted vouchers? No. Has he proposed a voucher initiative? No. Has he taken any action in any form on vouchers? No. Would he consider alienating some of his supporters by championing vouchers in a practical way? No.
If NEA New Hampshire has been deceived by Huckabee, it can only be because it wanted to be deceived. A teachers’ union can “endorse” someone – even a voucher supporter – while privately hoping he crashes and burns (ref. Joe Lieberman) if it serves a greater organizational purpose. Equally telling was the admission by NEANH President Rhonda Wesolowski that the union “didn’t ask Huckabee much about No Child Left Behind, since he wasn’t a member of the Congress that passed the law.”
Ha! He’s running for President of the United States. If it were a serious endorsement, wouldn’t they want complete details of his position on their biggest national issue? Barack Obama wasn’t a member of the Congress that passed NCLB. Did they let him blow it off, too?
Huckabee’s “support” for vouchers is no different from Obama’s “support” for merit pay. It’s rhetorical. So I don’t think it’s inconsistent for Huckabee to receive a rhetorical endorsement from NEA New Hampshire.
