In the world of politics, not all issues are equal. For better or worse, our conversations are driven by media coverage. And while the most talked about issue in 2015 was the 2016 presidential election, certain aspects of the divisive and newsworthy campaign were often overlooked. Despite the political mudslinging, record-setting debates, and pundit predictions, the current slate of candidates, on both sides of the aisle, have ignored a plethora of worthy discussions. Perhaps the most glaring example is one that affects every child in America: education policy. While there are multiple reasons for the scarcity of coverage at this stage in the campaign, internal debates amongst the major parties could eventually make education one of the most polarizing issues in the general election.
But first, what does “education” even mean? Lumping all educational issues into one bloated topic can cause confusion. These educational issues include battles over the implementation of Common Core, affirmative action policy, the prevalence of standardized testing (see John Oliver’s expose), student loan debt, and access to college. The magnitude of this topic lends itself to a wide variety of opinions even among members of the same political party. “Education is a big tent,” said Katherine Merseth, a professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Education in an interview with the HPR. “I can imagine that these candidates are trying to appeal to different tables of people sitting in the tent.”
Silence on the Classroom
Yet, for all the differences in opinion, the issue remains one of the least talked about in the race for president, and for good reason, politically speaking. According to a recent Gallup poll, only 4 percent of voters consider education their top issue, compared to 33 percent for the economy and 16 percent for “poorly run government”. And with international terrorism rising as a topic of importance, education will likely remain a second- or third-tier issue for voters.
The few Americans eager to hear education debates are not likely to see much coverage on the networks running debates. Discussing economic issues and international affairs are considered better for ratings and imperative for candidate platforms. Cable networks have devoted entire debates to economic and tax policy as well as national security, while briefly allowing one or two candidates to give short statements about their education plans. In a world where soundbites and two-minute clips from debates are imperative to the campaign process, substantive debate about education reform is often left behind.
Education also suffers from a lack of political representation. While social programs like Medicaid and Social Security benefit from an organized and involved senior citizen populace, the majority of those affected by education policy cannot vote. Aside from powerful teachers unions like the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers and groups of concerned parents, K-12 education advocacy is relatively unorganized at the national level. Voters without children, or parents with children old enough to be out of the school system have no personal stake in school reform, while everyone, regardless of age, has a stake in the economy.
Party Civil War
Despite these examples, perhaps the most compelling argument for the lack of education chatter among the candidates is infighting within the parties. “The parties are internally divided,” said Jeffery Henig, a professor of political science and education at Columbia University, to the HPR. “It’s a slippery and risky issue for [the candidates] to on the one hand position themselves within their party and on the other hand try to be sensitive to the fact that if they win the nomination they’re later going to have to position themselves relative to the other party.”
For example, take the Republican candidates’ stances on Common Core. Republicans like Donald Trump and Rand Paul have proposed eliminating the Common Core standards and dismantling the Department of Education, a goal certain to rally their ultra-conservative base. Establishment candidates, on the other hand, are far more varied in their positions on the Common Core, with Marco Rubio suggesting a full removal of the standards and Jeb Bush, who recently dropped out of the race, standing alone in support of the education initiative. In a primary already fraught by sharp divisions, it makes sense for Republicans to avoid another divisive issue. Only until after a nominee is chosen will the party coalesce around a unified stance on education.
Similarly, Democratic candidates cannot agree on the best ways to deal with soaring college costs and increasingly limited access to higher education. While Bernie Sanders is a proponent of free four-year college, Hillary Clinton has followed suit with President Obama, calling for tuition-free community college.
Democrats may also be wary of discussing education openly for fear of association with teachers unions. “They don’t need to say that they are going to listen to the AFT and the NEA and be more responsive to them than the last two administrations … because the teachers and teachers unions know that,” said Henig. “And they don’t want to say it too clearly because the Republicans can use that as a cudgel against them.”
It seems unlikely that candidates will shift their positions on education anytime soon, which could lead to a perpetual silence on the topic. However, despite little representation, low polling interest, and a lack of coverage, there is hope for a real debate on the multi-faceted issue in the general election. “Once things have settled down and the candidates have identified themselves … then I expect the candidates to actually use education as an issue to distinguish themselves,” said Henig.
The Bright Side of a Forgotten Issue
There may be a silver lining to the divisiveness of the issue within the parties. Without two clear sides like those that characterize the gun control or abortion debates, politicians can be more fluid in their stances, and not feel bound by an overarching party ideology. “Education’s been generally an area where it’s easier to get agreement at the national level than other issues,” said Henig. The very scope of the issue and the array of solutions to persistent problems may make it easier to compromise.
This was exemplified at the end of 2015, in the heat of divisive primaries in both parties. In December, the House and Senate passed the Every Student Succeeds Act, a bipartisan bill that was lauded by President Obama as “a Christmas miracle”. The new law, a comprehensive reform of the K-12 system, removes many remnants of the controversial No Child Left Behind Act. “The Every Child Succeeds Act is a classic example of compromise,” said Merseth. Republicans celebrated that state control over education was reaffirmed and bolstered while Democrats praised the end of federal mandates on standardized testing.
Perhaps Americans can take solace in the fact that complex issues like education do see reform. Two-sided issues have a way of dividing the nation and making progress difficult. As James Madison wrote in Federalist 10, “So strong is this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions and excite their most violent conflicts.”
Indeed, the myriad views regarding education make it difficult for us to divide into two wholly partisan camps. “Education is such a personal topic. We’ve all been through it,” said Merseth. “With education, everyone’s been to school, so everyone has an opinion.” And perhaps that is why there is hope for discussion in the future. With education’s complexity and propensity for variance in viewpoints, the issue has proven to be one where compromise is possible, achievable, and hopefully in 2016, repeatable.
Image Credits: Gage Skidmore/Wikimedia