The crowded Democratic field has marched in near lockstep when it comes to education: shunning school choice, pandering to teachers’ unions, and criticizing charter schools. Democrats have little nuance (though where there are differences, as on charter school policy, they are significant), and no variety to their education policy platforms.
Worse, several candidates (including Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden) once took sensible positions on charter schools, and at one point, a robust school choice agenda was part of the Democratic platform itself. All have since recanted after they began running for president.
Enter former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. He has disrupted the traditional modes and mechanisms of the electoral contest. Given his no-sacred cows approach to the primary, he should also take a different stance on education.
His record authentically aids this effort: Though imperfect, it is clear that Bloomberg’s tenure as mayor of New York led to educational gains.
Under Bloomberg’s leadership, 173 charter schools opened, and New York City schools increased graduation rates for black and Latino students. Bloomberg took control of the behemoth bureaucracy that is the New York City school district, recognizing that the system was working only for adults, not students.
Moreover, Bloomberg stood up to the most powerful lobby in education: teachers’ unions.
Championing this record could help rally key democratic constituencies, such as African American women, for whom charter schools and school choice are popular. Taking a strong stance on education may have a broader appeal, too.
To really differentiate himself from his Democratic competitors, all of whom are clamoring for teachers’ union dollars and votes, Bloomberg could also reiterate the recently revealed statements he made while mayor about this powerful special-interest group. He knows that dissonance exists between leadership and membership, highlighted by the fact that teachers’ unions favor far-left candidates while the teachers they represent have more moderate views.
He also knows that teachers’ unions enjoy a bully pulpit, or, in his words, “are single-issue-focused” with a “disproportionate percentage of power.”
He also enjoys the distinct advantage of not needing union money, a concern that has driven every other candidate to adopt the same set of policies. Bloomberg’s spending on campaign ads recently topped $338.7 million, more than President Barack Obama’s total spending throughout his entire 2012 campaign. Additionally, Bloomberg’s choice to self-fund insulates him from lobbying pressure from special-interest groups writ large, a potential bridge to libertarians, and those who fear a “rigged” political system generally.
Though Bloomberg cannot dispense with his record on stop and frisk and other factors that may discourage the African American community, emerging as the one Democratic candidate to support educational choice could rally this key constituency.
Polls already show Bloomberg is popular with older African American voters. Embracing a suite of education reforms that are already benefiting minority children could certainly help.
Bloomberg has largely built his campaign around the idea of “electability.” This is a hollow promise unless he embraces an education agenda meant to maximize his coalition, not punish parts of it.
If nothing else, it would set a precedent that Democrats can still stand for students, rather than special interests.
Kate Hardiman (@katejhardiman) taught in a Chicago high school and is currently a law student at Georgetown University Law Center.
