How Did Education Measures Fare in the Midterm Elections?

How Did Education Measures Fare in the Midterm Elections?

How Did Education Measures Fare in the Midterm Elections?

The short answer: Pretty badly, but it could have been worse.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

One of the few (non–dope smoking) silver linings of yesterday’s election was Tom Torlakson’s narrow victory over charter champion Marshall Tuck in the race for state superintendent of education in California. Tuck’s loss will slow down efforts in the Golden State to gut teacher tenure, divert more public money to charter schools and increase high-stakes testing.

In most of the state school superintendent races beyond California (Arizona, Michigan, Oklahoma, Idaho, South Carolina), Republican champions of neo-liberal corporate school reform won handily.

Beyond the superintendent races, millions of voters in eleven states had the chance to vote on numerous education-related state initiatives, referendums and amendments. The number of education measures this election cycle was dwarfed in comparison to 2012, but the initiatives will significantly impact school funding, class sizes, the use of technology, teacher evaluation and tenure systems.

So how’d it go?

It’s a pretty grim landscape, albeit with one significant positive for progressives from the great state of Missouri, where the proposal to enshrine value-added assessment of teachers into the state constitution failed. Amendment 3 would have ended teacher tenure and put teachers on renewable contracts, with future employment tied to test scores. It went down by a large margin.

In other good news, Illinois voters passed Question 3, which will increase taxes on incomes greater than $1 million to help fund education; In Hawaii, voters turned down a proposed amendment to the Hawaii Constitution that would have permitted the state to spend public money on private preschools; Seattle’s Proposition 1B, which will institute a $58 million tax increase in the city to create a preschool program for 3- and 4-year-olds passed by a wide margin, and in New York, Proposal 3, which will authorize up to $2 billion in state bonds for school capital projects in three categories: beefed up technology, new pre-K classrooms and the replacement of classroom trailers, narrowly passed. (Though critics have charged, rightly in my view, that this bill is a boondoggle for the Common Core curriculum, I supported it as a way to get more money into the public school system.)

Now, the bad news.

Nevada voters turned down an education funding ballot measure that would have marginally increased taxes on large businesses in one of the most expensive ballot campaigns ever in the state. Support for the measure largely came from teachers and unions frustrated that Nevada ranks near the bottom in the nation in per-pupil spending. That will now continue.

In Colorado, voters approved Proposition 104, a measure that will require contract negotiations between school districts and employee unions to be held in public; and two anti-teacher incumbents held onto their seats on the State Board of Education in Tuesday’s election, leaving the board’s 4-3 Republican majority in place.

In Washington State, a bill that would have directed state lawmakers to increase education spending to help schools decrease class size and hire support staff went down in flames.

Most damaging and depressing, in numerous states where education was a major campaign issue, extreme conservative governors were re-elected despite having presided over vast cuts to their states’ education budgets and repeated efforts to roll back the collective bargaining rights of teachers’ unions. Scott Walker in Wisconsin, Rick Scott in Florida and Sam Brownback in Kansas are the poster boys here.

As I’ve been saying, this was the grimmest midterm election of my life.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x