The Atlantic explains Walker's Raison d'etre

For those hootin' and hollerin' about the work that Governor Scott Walker (and Mitch Daniels, and John Kasich) are doing to try to provide more flexibility to the taxpayers of their state to negotiate with public employee Unions the article by Joel Klein in the Atlantic Monthly should be something to read.  Ok, maybe it will be something to read only for those who aren't hootin' and hollerin' but have an open mind about the issues at hand.  Namely, the education of our students in the public school.  Joel Klein, a democrat, appointed to role of Chancellor for the City of New York Department of Education explains the impossibility of effective and efficient school operation with the existing power structure in public education.  Klein, on President Obama's shortlist for Education Secretary and a Clinton Administration appointee is no right wing hack.  He is a well connected public service employee who understands the ins and outs of politics.  You can read the full text or here are some excerpts (I suggest the full text.):

*Right now, if you were running for office, would you be more concerned with unemployment or education? Also, unlike terrorism, an educational crisis has a different impact on the powerful than it does on most of society. Their children, who are in private schools or elite public schools, receive a decent education, so it’s hard to get them fully engaged in the broader national debate.

*when making a lifetime tenure commitment, under New York law you could not consider a teacher’s impact on student learning. That Kafkaesque outcome demonstrates precisely the way the system is run: for the adults. The school system doesn’t want to change, because it serves the needs of the adult stakeholders quite well, both politically and financially.

*In short, politicians—especially Democratic politicians—generally do what the unions want. And the unions, in turn, are very clear about what that is. They want, first, happy members, so that those who run the unions get reelected; and, second, more members, so their power, money, and influence grow.

*The extent of this “no one gets fired” mentality is difficult to overstate—or even adequately describe. Steven Brill wrote an eye-opening piece in The New Yorker about the “rubber rooms” in New York City, where teachers were kept, while doing no work, pending resolution of the charges against them—mostly for malfeasance, like physical abuse or embezzlement, but also for incompetence. The teachers got paid regardless.

So here's the deal.  Governor Walker knows that if the school and the school systems are to have the flexibility to keep the very best teachers and delineate the very worst, then we must acknowledge that some teachers are really good, and others are...well...not so good.  President Obama in 2008 said: “The single most important factor in determining [student] achievement is not the color of [students’] skin or where they come from. It’s not who their parents are or how much money they have. It’s who their teacher is.”  A very astute observation, so why then in 2011 does the President criticize the bill that will more effectively allow the state to deal with teachers on a case by case basis and not assume that all teachers deserve equal pay? 

Collective bargaining against the profits of a corporation are one thing.  It's fairness arguable to some extent.  This is an entirely different issue.  When the teachers union comes up "against" it's foe, the foe it fights is the Tax Payer, the citizen of that state.  That state, produces no wealth, only services.  There are no "profits" to divvy up.  If a Governor, "plays nice" with the unions, he wins politically.  He wins untold thousands of votes from member teachers and union employees.  He earns untold thousands in campaign contributions from same.  He gains untold credit for running the government smoothly.  Where exactly is the incentive for those who negotiate on the behalf of the "people" - incentive to play hard ball and get the best deal possible?  This incentive doesn't exist.  Which is why it is very seldom you have a personality willing to risk the political capital to simply do the right thing and negotiate hard for the people of the state.  Hence, we end up with promises being made far beyond the availability of our state treasury to manage our debt - like that of the federal government debt - goes up exponentially.  Unfunded liabilities put to another day.  Eliminating the rules for collective bargaining will allow "the people" a stronger negotiating position, so long as the negotiator is strong enough to use it.  No matter the cost, who will pay this debt?  Our kids.  They get shafted with the quality of education, and they'll get to pay the bill too. 

The status quo isn't working for the student or the tax payer.  It works only for the unions and it's constituency.  Joel Klein reminds us of that and offers some insight on where we have to start to get to a solution.