Rep. Alan Casavant, a dangerous man
Yesterday afternoon, the legislature released the committee assignment lists, naming each legislator to one of the myriad legislative committees. As an education policy guy, the first list I checked was the list for the legislature’s Joint Standing Committee on Education and Cultural Affairs, the committee to which all education-related bills are sent for consideration.
The list contained few surprises. Eight of the committee’s members were members last session as well, which means that, unlike last session, the majority of members will be committee veterans. Rep. Peter Edgecomb was on the committee two sessions ago, so he too is a veteran. Sen. Justin Alfond, who chaired the committee last session, is on the committee again despite also serving as Senate minority whip, and will doubtless be an important voice on the committee again this session. Sen. Brian Langley, who served in the House last session and who has proven to be a thoughtful and hard-working legislator, will co-chair the committee with Rep. David Richardson, a smart and seasoned legislative veteran in his fourth term.
One name, though, is curiously missing from the committee list, and that is Rep. Alan Casavant (D–Biddeford). Rep. Casavant, a high school teacher now in his third legislative term, was an important voice for education reform last session. He was an ardent supporter of charter schools and other school reform initiatives, and was one of the very few committee members who, presciently, as it turned out, expressed concern that the state’s Race to the Top legislation didn’t go nearly far enough.
It was Casavant, for example, who proposed replacing the Baldacci administration’s ludicrous “innovative schools” bill with a charter school bill. He did not prevail, ultimately, either in the committee or on the House floor, but he unquestionably led the charge and emerged as one of the committee’s leading voices, Republican or Democrat, in favor of meaningful school reform.
Now, instead of being returned to the committee that by all logic he should be on, he has been banished to the State and Local Government committee, which, I can tell you from personal experience, isn’t exactly a hotbed of legislative intrigue.
The question is, why?
Well, the answer is obvious, isn’t it? The MEA, which did not endorse Casavant despite his being a Democrat on the education committee, almost certainly leaned on House Minority Leader Emily Cain and got her to shove Casavant off the committee. How else to explain why a high school teacher in his third legislative term (only Rep. Wagner, among Democrats on the committee, has as much seniority) got bounced from the education committee?
They saw him as a threat, and got him booted. What other possible explanation can there be?
Other voices for reform will, of course, emerge from the committee, which is a strong and seasoned one even without Casavant’s presence. The MEA is obviously on the wrong side of history with regard to school reform, and meaningful reform legislation, some of it no doubt sponsored by Rep. Casavant, will be approved by the committee despite what I suspect were the machinations of the MEA. Maine people want school reform, and they’ll have it. But, unfortunately, because there are forces in Augusta that put politics before people, one of the legislature’s leading voices for school reform will not be at the table to help craft the reform legislation we need.
That’s a shame.
NancyEH
Posted on Dec 23, 2010
Although you may be right, I would guess that you are again giving MEA too much credit. It is possible that Mr. Casavant did not want to be reappointed. 2 years ago, I heard that Pete Edgecomb preferred not to be on the Ed Committee at that time.
Brian Hubbell
Posted on Dec 23, 2010
I think Senator Langley is going to be a very good addition to the Committee - and I'm not saying that just because he represents Hancock County. I may not end up always agreeing with him but he's a thoughtful guy with plenty of direct educational experience as a teacher. Like Senator Alfond, he's capable of thinking for himself and will bring a healthy skepticism equally towards not only the entrenched bureaucratic interests but also the varying agendas of the reformers-du-jour. Should be an interesting upcoming session.
Steve Bowen
Posted on Dec 23, 2010
My understanding is that Rep. Casavant wanted very much to remain on the committee. "Reformers du jour" - I love that. Yep, charter schools are a brand new, untested idea...oh wait, they've been around for 20 years, and today, 5000 of them educate 1.5 million kids in 39 states. Really radical idea!! Better be careful!!
Brian Hubbell
Posted on Dec 23, 2010
Ah, Steve, identifying charters as a "reform du jour" is your inference, not mine. I was thinking of a few other recent state-level top-down initiatives. But no doubt we'll get to spar a bit over charters soon enough. As you know, my interest will be in identifying which obstacles within the existing school system we expect charters to overcome. Once we know those, I'll be looking for why only charters should be relieved of them. ...But, sorry, I'm straying from your topic.
NancyEH
Posted on Dec 23, 2010
No matter whether charters (still to be defined) are incorporated into Maine law or not, they are never going to be a panacea. No single change will be. I can only hope that the new Governor and legislature will listen better to Maine people, especially those in rural parts of the state, than has been the case for the past few years. School consolidation (ah, yes, "reorganization") is a case in point. The law was hastily implemented without any public hearings (except as they pertained to the budget document that year) and has been an unpleasantly arduous experience for those school systems and towns actually affected since. Had the final law (written in the middle of the night by just a few people) contained language that would have required eliminating central office positions, the situation might have been tolerable. But all it did was halve the EPS amount for system administration and tell impacted systems to consolidate or else. Since the state subsidy can be spent however a school board or committee wants, cutting the EPS amount in half had no practical effect. In addition, the law required keeping superintendents (and a few others) who had long-term contracts employed. Some of those individuals are just now coming to the ends of those contracts. Charter schools may or may not be good for rural Maine. Portland can probably handle a few, but my town of New Sweden? Not unless the local pK-8 school is permitted to become a charter itself. We'll have to wait and see what the Legislature does before knowing how Maine schools, students, towns, teachers and staff will be affected.
Amy
Posted on Dec 24, 2010
Am I missing something, particularly about why you think it's outrageous for a high school teacher to be on the Education Committee? Wouldn't a teacher offer some perspective on how policy plays itself out in schools and classrooms? Charters don't have data demonstrating they are better on average. In fact, educational outcomes are worse on average. This suggests they are driven by ideology (and in some places, financial considerations) more than evidence. Now, it could be that the evidence can suggest which types of charters work best in particular settings and Maine can build that knowledge into policy. That would be worthwhile to explore with care and consideration, recognizing the common pitfalls in educational research (like self-selection) and with an attitude of respect toward students, parents, and teachers.
Mike
Posted on Dec 28, 2010
You ARE missing something; he thinks it's outrageous that Rep. Casavant is NOT on the committee.