DECEMBER 30, 2011

Calvin Coolidge, Tom Corbett, and Why Politics Isn't Like Business

My wife is awesome.  As proof, I submit to you the fact that she willingly parted with 35 bucks in order to give me The Autobiography of Calvin Coolidge for Christmas.  I just finished it, and I recommend it.  In particular, as I reflect on the last year of Harrisburg politics, I'd like to recommend the following passage—from a man who was, by the way, a lawyer-turned-governor known for being particular with his words and for cutting budgets.  (Sound familiar?)  I'd submit to you that generally speaking, if you replace the words "President," "Congress," and "Washington" with "Governor," "General Assembly," and "Harrisburg," you'll end up with some darn good advice with applicability well beyond the 1920s:

In determining upon all his actions, however, the President has to remember that he is dealing with two different minds.  One is the mind of the country, largely intent upon its own personal affairs, and, while not greatly interested in the government, yet desirous of seeing it conducted in an orderly and dignified manner for the advancement of the public welfare.  Those who compose this mind wish to have the country prosperous and are opposed to unjust taxation and public extravagance.  At the same time they have a patriotic pride which moves them with so great a desire to see things well done that they are willing to pay for it.  They gladly contribute their money to place the United States in the lead.  In general, they represent the public opinion of the land.

But they are unorganized, formless, and inarticulate.  Against a compact and well drilled minority they do not appear to be very effective.  They are nevertheless the great power in our government.  I have constantly appealed to them and have seldom failed in enlisting their support.  They are the court of last resort and their decisions are final.

They are, however, the indirect rather than the direct power.  The immediate authority with which the President has to deal is vested in the political mind.  In order to get things done he has to work through that agency.  Some of our Presidents have appeared to lack comprehension of the political mind.  Although I have been associated with it for many years, I always found difficulty in understanding it.  It is a strange mixture of vanity and timidity, of an obsequious attitude at one time and a delusion of grandeur at another time, of the most selfish preferment combined with the most sacrificing patriotism.  The political mind is the product of men in public life who have been twice spoiled.  They have been spoiled with praise and they have been spoiled with abuse.  With them nothing is natural, everything is artificial.  A few rare souls escape these influences and maintain a vision and a judgment that are unimpaired.  They are a great comfort to every President and a great service to their country.  But they are not sufficient in number so that the public business can be transacted like a private business.

It is because in their hours of timidity the Congress becomes subservient to the importunities of organized minorities that the President comes more and more to stand as the champion of the rights of the whole country.

President Coolidge was often accused of being taciturn (indeed, he's known as "Silent Cal") but in fact, he was one of the early masters of the then-new technology of the radio.  Why?  He says it above:  He knew it fell to him, as the executive, to rally the "unorganized, formless, and inarticulate" public in defense of their rights, lest the "compact and well drilled minority" be the only voice the "political mind" hears.  And the results speak for themselves:  He cut taxes three times, vetoed a farm subsidy bill, kept spending down, and retired a quarter of the national debt.

As the New Year dawns, I for one would like to raise a toast to President Coolidge's mode of governance.  May we see more of it in Harrisburg and beyond.

posted by CHARLES MITCHELL | 09:30 AM | 0 comment

DECEMBER 8, 2011

A Word on Hellholes

As I got in the car yesterday to begin a very long drive home from Pike County, I learned of a letter Sen. Vincent Hughes had sent requesting that I apologize for using the term "hellholes" to describe Pennsylvania public schools in which there is a violent incident every 17 minutes, and for noting that students whose schools fail them are likely to end up in jail and/or on welfare. I'm told Sen. Hughes voiced similar sentiments on the Senate floor and on Twitter.

It was appropriate that this occurred on December 7th, because that happens to be the birthday of my late grandfather and namesake, Charles F. Mitchell, Sr., or as I called him, Pa. December 7th was an important date in that South Philadelphia boy's life for another reason: Because of what happened on December 7, 1941, he ended up defending our country as part of what was then called the Army Air Force. Pa taught me that when a situation is terrible—as our nation's was on Pearl Harbor Day—you call the situation what it is and respond accordingly. That's what he did during the geopolitical crisis of World War II, and that's what I did when I was apprised of the data on the educational crisis in Pennsylvania cities like the one in which Pa grew up.

Folks didn't always like Pa's way, and obviously Sen. Hughes didn't like mine yesterday. I hope he'll change his mind after reading my response, which shows that I actually borrowed the word "hellhole" from a student who was rescued from one of our violent, failing schools and that based on Sen. Hughes' website, we actually have rather similar views on what happens to kids who don't get a good education.

My colleague Pearre Dean and I hand delivered that response to the Senator's office today, along with a box of our colleague Amy Grimm's famous homemade chocolate candies for his staff. Here it is, with links to supporting documentation:

Dear Sen. Hughes:

Thank you for your letter of December 7. As a graduate of Pennsylvania's public schools, I sincerely appreciate your interest in improving them, I welcome the opportunity to discuss the matter with you, and it seems to me we disagree a lot less than you think.

Specifically, your letter asks me to apologize to students, teachers, and employees for using the term "hellholes" to describe schools in which a violent incident occurs every 17 minutes. To be honest, Senator, I borrowed that term from a student named Anthony Herbert who escaped from one of those schools. Here is what Anthony told us:

Walking through the hallway for the first time, I really felt sorry for myself because, man, I got stuck in this hellhole.

I'm walking through the hallways, trash cans and barrels are on fire, people are fighting and yelling, and there was really no order around. And it was just crazy. Teachers are telling students, "Get in the class, get in the class!" and she was completely ignored. The respect level was below zero. Security guards are grabbing people, throwing them in classrooms. Classrooms behind bars, which was really extraordinary.

With all due respect, Senator, I find it hard to disagree with Anthony's choice of words. Moreover, I did not use his term to attack students or any other people who are trying to make the best of schools like the one he described. I used it to convince the adults who preside over the system in which those students are trapped, namely you and your colleagues, that it's time we tried something different. The solutions of the last decade—more time and much more money—have clearly failed when a violent incident occurs every 17 minutes and less than 40 percent of students are proficient in math and reading.

Your letter also indicates I had said the "only purpose" of the schools under discussion "was to prepare students 'for future jail stays and welfare.'" I did not say that, and what I did say is quite similar to text on your own website. A page I've enclosed from SenatorHughes.com says that students who don't succeed in school are likely to go on welfare and/or to jail. I agree with you: Our public schools are supposed to help students lead productive, independent lives, and when they don't succeed, it's terribly costly not just to them, but to taxpayers statewide.

Again, Senator, thank you for allowing me to explain further the Commonwealth Foundation's suggestions to bring about dramatic improvement in schools in which a violent incident occurs every 17 minutes. At this point, it would be premature for me to apologize to the students in these schools. So far, I have merely told the truth about the system to which our current laws condemn them. But I will owe them an apology if my colleagues and I are unsuccessful in convincing yours to throw them a long-overdue lifeline.

I would welcome the opportunity to continue this conversation with you in person or by phone.

Sincerely yours,

Charles F. Mitchell
Vice President & COO

It's unfortunate that Sen. Hughes found my language to be offensive. But as my late grandfather would have pointed out, what's really offensive is the reality students confront every day in Pennsylvania's violent, failing schools—an act of violence every 17 minutes. Please ask your legislator today to respond to those facts with sound policy that will save lives and save money.

posted by CHARLES MITCHELL | 06:55 PM | 0 comment