Ed Supe Diane Douglas is making headlines again in her continuing power struggle with the Arizona Board of Education. The Board represents the Ducey education agenda, and Douglas wants—it’s hard to know exactly what Douglas wants. Based on her tenure on the Peoria school board and her pronouncements during the campaign, it seems like she wants Arizona education to take a hard right turn. But I don’t know exactly what that means, especially since she’s said some laudable things about education since taking office in January. When it comes to her long term plans, Douglas is holding her cards pretty close to her vest. What I do know is, she wants to have more power over education priorities at the state level, and she wants the State Board to have less.
They’ve been in court, Douglas and the Board, over the question of who controls what. The Board won the last round, so naturally, Douglas is appealing the ruling. Meanwhile, the latest is, she’s threatening not to get the state’s Move On When Reading web portal up and running, which is a problem, since there’s $40 million in funding waiting to be spent on reading programs for elementary school kids, and it can’t be allocated unless the website is working. It looks like Douglas has decided to open the Move On When Reading portal, but she says the Board has to kick in $50,000 to help it do its work, or something like that.
Yes, it would be awful if that $40 million isn’t used to help kids read, but for the life of me, I can’t get overly concerned about this whole Douglas/Board kerfuffle. (That $40 million will get spent on reading, by the way, very little doubt about that. Both sides want it to happen. They’re just waiting to see who blinks first.) Truth be told, I find it all amusing. “Pass the popcorn, honey, this is getting good!” The “Douglas vs. the Republican Establishment” battle is the national Republican Party writ small. We’re seeing similar battles playing out in the GOP’s cast-of-thousands presidential primary. For years, the Republican establishment catered to and fawned over its far right wingers to bring them into the fold as a voting force. The party power structure was playing the role of political Frankenstein, creating an ideological monster out of bits and pieces of the Republican platform. [Literary note: Frankenstein isn’t the monster. Mary Shelley created the fictional character Dr. Frankenstein, who then created the monster. When referencing the story, always say, “Frankenstein’s monster” or simply “The monster.” Never say, “They created a Frankenstein.”] But the Republican Frankenstein wanted its far right wing monster to be all mouth and fingers. It was just supposed to make noise and vote Republican. Instead, the monster escaped, ran amok and took control. The people who are supposed to be in control don’t know how to put the monster in chains and get him back into the laboratory where they can tell him what to do, instead of the other way round.
Douglas is a right wing ideologue who was never supposed to win. Huppenthal, a dependable cog in the Arizona Republican machine, was supposed to take the primary and the general. But Hupp—aka Thucydides, aka Falcon 9, anonymous, racist, batshit crazy blog commenter extraordinaire—self destructed, and Douglas won the primary. The party establishment was so frightened of her, lots of them openly or not-so-openly supported her Democratic challenger, David Garcia. But she won. And now she’s terrorizing the establishment villagers, giving them fits. She refuses to simply make right wing noises, then go along with the program. She wants as much power as she can grab so she can to push her own agenda.
This is a classic, you-reap-what-you-sow comeuppance for the Republican Party. True, we’ve all suffered from the Republican lurch to the right, and the crazies could do even more damage than they’ve already done—President Cruz, anyone?—but right now, at this moment, they’re great theater. The presidential primary is a political junkie’s delight. And Douglas is stealing the show here in Arizona.
Could things be worse for Arizona education than having Diane Douglas at the helm? Oh hell yes. We were supposed to have Huppenthal, that soulless, politically opportunistic technocrat who used TUSD as his political punching bag, at the helm. If he were in charge, the Tucson district would be under constant scrutiny. Anything Hupp saw as Latino consciousness raising, or anything vaguely radical happening anywhere in the district, would bring down a firestorm of news releases to the press and directives to the district. Diane Douglas, I honestly believe, has a good heart and wants to be the best Superintendent of Public Instruction she can possibly be. I’m hoping that, so long as she “hearts” the kids of Arizona, she won’t go on an ideological rampage that will hurt them educationally, in TUSD or elsewhere. I’m hoping she’ll be thoughtful and measured. Who knows? She might even do a wee bit of good.
So while we’re still in the early stages of the drama, Pass the popcorn, honey, let’s watch the show. No way to tell whether it will turn out to be a comedy or a tragedy, but in the meantime, right now, it’s a whole lot of fun to watch.
This article appears in Aug 13-19, 2015.
You must not work in a school. It is not entertaining that approximately 60% of the staff at ADE has quit or been fired due to the condition of fear she has created. High stakes reporting and data portals that taxpayers have spent millions of dollars on are crashing because Douglas forgot that she might have to actually lead an organization if she got elected not just use it as a pulpit sideshow. The Move on When Reading battle is public but schools are dealing with daily disruptions due to her incompetence. The Board are volunteers with full time jobs. This is her full time job that we are all paying her to do. So she should be held accountable to do it regardless of ideaology. Currently people are so amused as you are that they care less about the true harm that is occurring already in schools. People should also be concerned that the Department claims money is needed from the Board when Chief of Staff Bradley negotiated this line item be removed from Board budget and instead go to ADE budget. So they already have 500,000 dollars for this program. Where is that money? The costs of the lawsuits she is filing are going to reach that amount soon. Our schools could really use that money ADE is wasting on a power struggle. Thank heavens there is a Board/balance of power structure or there would be no stopping the undisclosed agenda of Douglas. From inside the schools, it looks like her agenda is to destroy AZ education.
You lost me when you said we need $40M to teach children to read.
Now I won’t support giving your types another dime. Teach the kids to read or find a new profession.
You lost me when you said we need $40M to teach children to read.
Now I won’t support giving your types another dime. Teach the kids to read or find a new profession.
Nothing new here, it’s Arizona politics as usual. It’s tought to see who’s the lamest of the bunch.
David, You certainly were in a writing mood. Some how, way, education needs to be lifted out of the political swamp and start climbing uphill again. Not sure the dual resources of money and human power is worth any further effort on the Super’s recall. Time to amend the Constitution to take “education” away from the Legislature and give a Independent Commission the “control”. Did pretty good on redistricting the Congressional Districts.
Right, Hakeson — because parents with kids enrolled in local schools certainly have the power to amend the Constitution and restructure the entire system from the top down, and they can get this accomplished quickly enough to keep the damage from flowing out of these battles taking place at higher levels of the system — battles which David Safier finds so amusing — from hurting their kids?
No, they cannot.
But would it help them, in the near term, to have people with the right priorities in local governance offices? It’s an interesting question, but one that can’t be answered properly by anyone who hasn’t been paying attention — CLOSE attention — to what is happening in the schools and on local governing boards. Doing tedious things like attending (or watching) governing board meetings is not as entertaining as observing the battles between Douglas and Ducey from afar. Safier has freely admitted elsewhere that he doesn’t have the patience needed to do it — not entertaining enough for him, no doubt. You can read his thoughts on this here (including the comments section, where he further elaborates):
http://www.tucsonweekly.com/TheRange/archives/2015/05/08/leave-the-tusd-board-call-and-response-policy-as-is
Safier also did not take Putnam-Hidalgo’s suggestion a while back that he sub in the district and get a better view of what’s happening on the sites. You can read his response to her in the comments on this post:
http://www.tucsonweekly.com/TheRange/archives/2014/11/10/is-tusd-a-failed-school-district
So what authority should people who don’t know the details of what’s happening in the schools have to issue opinions about or take sides in local struggles like the one you reference towards the end of your above comment? None. But no doubt the local Democratic party will take its usual role in supporting the powers-that-be without making any serious effort to find out what’s actually going on “at the ground level” in the district. The local level doesn’t really matter to some folks. All that seems to matter, when you get right down to it, is keeping certain people happy. And I’m not talking about the constituents with kids enrolled in these schools.
I got a good impression of the Democratic party growing up in another state. But this fall, as a result of what I’ve seen locally, I’ll be changing my registration, which has been Democratic for decades now, to Independent.
I did the same and won’t go back. Democrats have become the party of opposition and they are reliving the past with no eye on the future. They have to change or risk becoming extinct.
Hello “About”, you hit a raw nerve and opened a thought wave. You are absolutely correct in your assessment of governmental interaction. Each has their own fiefdom to protect and open lines of communication hardly exist. Decisions are often made without realizing the cross effects. All local government officials should have a day set aside every six months for open discussion and exchange. The left hand needs to know what the right hand is doing. A convenient schedule so part-time school governing board members, non-paid commission members and elected officials can meet and break bread. They need the fellowship and sharing to promote better governance. How many times has the elected fire district board met with local elected school board or for that matter city or county officials? Do they even know one another? Let’s at least be reading off the same page. Now for that other stupid idea, loose your input into the primary system, cancel out the opportunity to help pick Democrat or Republican candidates by registering “Independent” does absolutely nothing. Too often the candidate picked in the primary because of “party-line” voting is the winner even before the general election. No, just the opposite, get involved in the political party that most represents your values. Become a factor in the “picking” of candidates.
Concerned, you bring up a number of problems with Douglas’ management of the Dept. of Ed. that aren’t given much press coverage. You make it sound like people working in the schools are feeling the pain of her incompetence. I have a serious question. Do you think if Huppenthal were still Superintendent that things in our schools would be better for teachers and administrators — and of course, most important, for students?
And what is the local Democratic party doing, Hakeson, to promote the kind of interface you describe between TUSD governing board members and their constituents? Please be specific.
As for my “other stupid idea,” as you term it — if I drop my registration as a Democrat (and stop donating generously to Democratically endorsed candidates, as I have been doing) I may at least stop receiving the constant nauseating SPAM from the Clinton Machine. I’m voting for Sanders or the Lessig referendum — probably not for any candidate the party will endorse. Your nominating process is in the pocket of the money interests both locally and nationally, and it seems from what you write above like you’re smart enough to know it.
So tell me — what exactly is the point of getting involved with your party?
ABOUT, I don’t think the party has been too involved with the local school board. And that is probably a good idea as their decisions should not be tainted by local political concerns. Where the party has been involved has been on the state level with financing of education and perhaps quality and results. I definitely disagree with many including our State Superintendent on “Common Core”. This day and age with our mobile society uniformity and transformability are good things not bad. I do think the Democratic Party has been involved with education financing not just the k-12 , but with the Community Colleges which by the way I deeply respect and support to the university level. Education has been put on the block of greed from private for profit schools to for profit charter schools, right on through the tech schools and privately owned university levels. People have a need for school choice, but they also need to expect to pay for that choice. In my opinion dual systems of public education is not the way to run fiscally sound public policy. The terrible fleecing of veterans and others with pie in the sky employment results should have been exposed years ago, except for the partnership of political money and elected officials. As for individual political action, supporting candidates to issues I know many times it’s not a partisan political decision.
However to exercise choice as I indicated before it is within the political parties you find power in the election of candidates to office.
Got your attention with “stupid” for effect only, and I certainly didn’t mean you, but I disagree with the decision to ride it alone as an Independent. Money is the mother’s milk of politics and I have no disagreement with you on that. Might I add I did take petitions to the streets to get “clean elections” on the ballot a few years back. Likewise my personal experience with reapportionment or redistricting led me to support the Independent Redistricting Commission and getting the Legislature out of the business of guaranteeing their own and their own kind’s election. As to why you should stay involved with my Democrat party, because you would be able to face me and others down in great discussions and you know what, I think you enjoy it.
The democrats are too busy waging a war on poverty. And losing seriously. Sanders would continue it. We need jobs, industry and government to meet once week to figure out how to stop hurting our economy.
Go clean up the Animas River you polluters.
Hakeson:
Nicely played in your response and its closing, and thank you for whatever work you have done relating to clean elections and “getting the Legislature out of the business of guaranteeing…their own kind’s election.” That’s certainly needed in Arizona, though to date whatever has been done has not been sufficiently effective. We still seem to live in a state governed by people who, if they ever took Public Policy 101, flunked it. After every election cycle, the problem remains — and since November 2014, it seems it has worsened.
As for the assertion that the Democratic party “has not been too involved” with local school board issues, there are some who would beg to differ with you on that point. The correct decision not to endorse was made last fall, but for all practical purposes the party was behind a particular outcome, which was not a good outcome for the district, in my opinion. Watching what happened — and the ongoing problems in the district in the 9 months since the election — has not been confidence-inspiring.
The school board is heavily manipulated by the grijalvas.
Dear Mr. Hakeson: if you are an involved Democrat, then you must know about the meeting of the Dem Party LD chairs that took place during the last election. Under the ruse of “just come and state your positions so that our LD chairs know what to say about your candidacy to others”, the meeting actually focused on A) Ripping into Mark Stegeman for supporting Republicans and B) under the guise of ensuring that he would NEVER be head of the TUSD Board, unsuccessfully seeking the endorsement of a particular candidate (and her Board majority selected sidekick) for the 2 positions of Board members. Strangely, although some of us had been told that it was an “internal” Party meeting, and therefore guests were not invited, a TUSD Board member was present. So much for the local Democratic Party not getting involved in TUSD Board politics. Actually, perhaps it would be more accurate to say that some of the Democratic Party power players, including already elected officials, are very involved in TUSD politics.
Registered Independents have been able to vote in primary elections.
Absolutely, Independents can choose to request ballots in primary elections but most don’t. They let the party stalwarts pick the candidates then people vote along party lines. That is why you get IDEOLOGUES with narrow political views elected. Whether you are liberal or conservative, if you want to draw more mainstream candidates get involved in the party of your choice and work like heck to get candidates elected that fit your mold.
As for the “closed” meeting of the Democrat chairs and exercising party discipline
so what, get involved work yourself to get people elected then see how you feel when someone feels they are above the group.
Where do you draw the line? It is the ability of a parliamentary group of a political party to get its members to support the policies of their party leadership, the platform and resolutions the party adopts. You as a registered voter have the right to expect your political party to maintain certain values.
Anyone can register in a political party and seek election. If my name were Dick Tracy or John Wayne with my liberal/progressive views and I sought election as a Republican in a majority Republican district and got elected how much damage to your values could I do before you got me out of office?
Our political system works best with broad participation and expectations of our candidates to be true to the colors they fly under.
The main target at the meeting referred to by “Time for a Change” and “Hakeson” may have been Stegeman, but there was collateral damage, including the experienced and highly qualified board candidate Putnam-Hidalgo.
Last fall, the sitting board majority and all the major players in the local Democratic party pursued a strategy in trying to prevent Stegeman from regaining the majority (promoting Grijalva and her protege Darland aggressively) that sidelined Democratic candidates running grass roots campaigns and ended up resulting in the re-election of both incumbents and the preservation of a three person board majority that at the time of the election had an 11 month long documented record of improper management of the board and rubber stamping every decision the young, inexperienced Superintendent made.
Now parents with children enrolled in TUSD are looking at the on-the-ground, in-the-schools results of the approach the party took last fall. The legislature has further cut funding to the starving public school system, but the rubber stamp TUSD board majority has not improved the district’s funding prospects. They have approved an exorbitant Superintendent compensation increase that has gotten TUSD into serious trouble with the voters and has probably killed any possibility of passing bonds and overrides. A divisive recall campaign is underway against the board majority.
In this context:
I give the Pima Dems an “F” on behaving responsibly vis a vis TUSD and its students. The values and the priorities behind their behaviors last fall are not sound: they didn’t look at TUSD board positions in terms of their potential to safeguard the best interests of children in the district. They seemed to be looking at them in terms of their potential to achieve other, unrelated goals: perhaps to keep Congressman Grijalva happy, perhaps to give Darland a stepping stone into the state legislature. It’s a sad shame, and it looks from a parent’s perspective like the district is in very bad shape as a result of it.
PARENT, I was not referring to that particular meeting but exercising some limited party discipline. I did indicate, ” I don’t think the party has been too involved with the local school board. And that is probably a good idea as their decisions should not be tainted by local political concerns.” I am willing to stand corrected if at some time the party involved itself within decisions of the Board. I do think all residents of the district including organizations and political parties have a right and duty to speak out on issues before the board.
BUT…the Democrat party particularly needs to step carefully and consider its power in Pima County and not act on personalities. Being the majority party requires extra responsibility to make certain the broad public interest is served. We can see on the national level where concern for political power has tainted the whole process and where from day one of Obama’s Presidency the GOP has had one overriding goal, act as spoilers to the point of bringing a halt to government services. Tucson is so fortunate to have the leadership of Mayor Rothschild to push the City Council even with his limited official powers. In his second term as mayor hopefully with some added strength given to him by the voters even more can be accomplished. Look around folks, Tucson is moving forward and many of us retired people must realize how precious schools and education at all levels are all important to us. For our children’s future well-being but also for a little selfish reason, top notch availability of education protects our property values.