THE HILL
 

Obama hurt schools with speech to kids

By David Hill - 09/22/09 05:24 PM ET

President Barack Obama’s recent speech to America’s schoolchildren broke a cardinal rule of politics: Don’t get your friends into trouble. Why didn’t the brain trust advising the president figure this out before they embroiled public school districts across America in an awkward political mess? My guess is they wrongly thought the speech and controversy surrounding it were of no significance.

I do a lot of work for public school districts. My job is to help them wage “the permanent campaign,” the ongoing effort to build a large enough reservoir of good will to pass a bond issue or mill levy if the need ever arises. This is tough business. May voters, especially empty-nest seniors, tend to think that schools waste a lot of money, even when they don’t.

Working around schools has impressed on me some hard truths. First, Democrat voters are almost always a school’s best friends. In trial heats on school-finance measures, Democrat support typically exceeds that from Republicans by 10 to 20 points, even in the most GOP-friendly school systems. So, in a sense, school politics are partisan, even if not formally labeled as such.

Second, I have discovered that the passion for most local school issues outstrips enthusiasm for major “national” issues that Washington dotes on. If most voters are offered the choice of participating in a focus group discussing the next congressional election or one that will thrash out topics facing community schools, Congress gets stomped. Topics that most readers of The Hill would consider arcane, like whether third- and sixth-graders should be on the same campus or whether the first day of school is before or after Labor Day, are very salient to most adult Americans. To use pollster-speak, there is considerable intensity surrounding school issues.

So here comes the Obama speech. The president, leader of the Democratic Party as well as the nation, wants to deliver a homily to school students about staying in school and working hard. It sounds like the sort of personal-responsibility and accountability message that most Republicans would endorse.

But they didn’t. Some even threatened to keep their kids home. Democrats called complainers “crazy.” The only poll I could find with any credibility was an online survey by the Baltimore Sun. Of 5,288 participants, 57 percent thought Obama should speak to the kids, 36 percent opposed the speech in class time and 7 percent wanted to know more about the speech before deciding. If Obama didn’t have 43 percent fully on board in Baltimore, he was upside down in many other communities.

Inside the D.C. Beltway, though, this was a non-event. Pollsters focused on Obama’s approval ratings doted on reactions to his healthcare speech while giving little thought to the possibility that many Americans might have paid more attention to the school speech and possibly were more prone to discuss it with others. So they overlooked the prospect that the president’s ill-advised decision to force himself on schools hurt some allies and reinforced his enemies. Some school districts will still be getting grief for this long after Obama’s moved on to other issues.

Republicans were on solid ground challenging this potentially partisan intrusion into our schools. As distinguished American historian V.O. Key once observed, “One of the first tasks of new rulers is to rewrite the textbooks and to purge the school system of adherence to old ways ... the educational machine might be used to imprint the goals of the new order upon the plastic minds of the youth of the land.” Obama should have been wiser than to go there, arousing latent passions. It will be much more difficult now for his friends in public education to earn the community support that many school districts deserve.


David Hill is a member of the research faculty at Auburn University and has been a Republican pollster since 1984.

Source:
http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/david-hill/59883-obama-hurt-schools-with-speech-to-kids

Comments (7)

Short term menory! Bush spent a lot time IN CLASSROOMS and did not here a peep from you…Think he was looking for safe placeBY K L Davis on 09/23/2009 at 12:58
It wasn't the speech ,it was the lesson plan that was the problem, an Obama didn't write that. An they changed it. so no worries after that part was changed.BY ANN on 09/23/2009 at 17:50
It wasn't the speech; the people who opposed hated Obama and that is no reason not to listen the speech. My friend hates Obama and didn't even want to listen;she said she didn't agree with him at allBY Hailey on 09/23/2009 at 19:59
I am a senior citizen and the idea of a president making a speech to young children was not to my liking. They do not understand and train of thought is 5 minutes. Presidents should stay in Washington and do what they were elected to do. Take care of the country's problems. I disagreed with Bush-Kennedy policy NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND. Much money spent on education very little learning.BY ania on 09/23/2009 at 20:12
Once again, doormats- it wasn't him speaking to the students; it was the lesson plans that were sent, from the White House ahead of time, so the teachers could have students discuss and write about how they could help Obama achieve his plans, how wonderful he is, etc. NO U.S. president nor his white house has EVER done this before, and this is not what our schools are for! I am speaking as a certified teacher, in a very liberal state- Bush spoke about not doing drugs, George was visiting a single school, reading a story, when 9/11 occurred- no lesson plans- I was working in a middle school when 9/11 occurred, and know how impressionable children are, at all ages. Obama can speak to inspire children to hold high aspirations, in a 5 minute, cheerful kick off the school year well, but that is it. Would you all like to have had Bush come in, send in a complete lesson plan, dictating how teachers can support him, encourage all to love him, etc.? How would you feel about that?BY BarbFD on 09/24/2009 at 13:29
The president did nothing wrong in speaking, or attempting to speak, to the nation's schoolchildren on the value of staying in school. The president's opponents express their economic and class anxieties in the language of paranoia and culture war, grasping at every passing issue in the hope of finding a controversy that will stick. Republicans can reasonably disagree on health care and bailouts, which are expensive policy initiatives that merit debate. The partisan kerfuffle over an anodyne speech to schoolchildren, however, is irrational, baseless and downright silly. Politicians who attempt to exploit mob mentality for short-term gain are as cynical as they are contemptible. Journalists who act as apologists for the same are no better.BY Morris Newman on 09/24/2009 at 14:27
Ania- not all students have an attention span of only five minutes. In fact, considering the achievements of today's students, I'd say just the opposite. And many children are very capable of understanding what a President or anyone else says. They should be allowed to form their own opinions and hear all sides of an argument, including his. I am not defending or admonishing President Obama, I am pointing out the flaw in your argument. If children are not teachable, why would they be in school? President Obama has two young children- I'm sure he is well-aware of what a child's capacity for understanding is. Do not forget- this generation will someday lead the world. Is it good for them to remain politically uniformed and uninvolved? I think not.BY Liz on 09/24/2009 at 15:19

Add Comment

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Your Comments

You need Flash Player 8 (or higher) and JavaScript enabled to view this content

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.