A few thoughts on John Reitmeyer’s commentary at The Record, which compares the education platforms of Gov. Christie and his challenger, Sen. Barbara Buono:
The stark difference between Buono’s and Christie’s positions when it comes to education policies and school funding illustrates a political shift in New Jersey, where candidates used to vie for the support of the powerful teachers union.
While Buono has courted and received the union’s support, Christie has openly clashed with the union and has pressed for a series of policy changes, including a successful rewriting of tenure rules.
The implication here is that NJEA’s ability to strong-arm the Statehouse is so diminished that Christie can “openly clash with the union” and suffer no consequences. I’m not sure it’s quite so clear-cut: NJEA has suffered some losses (pension and health benefits reform; tenure and teacher evaluation reform that, despite protestations that the actual bill duplicates NJEA’s proposal, isn’t quite all that) and some lapses in strategic-planning. The brand may be damaged, but it’s hardly Enron.
In fact, NJEA is still pretty powerful, and the leadership knows that. How powerful? Enough to back a teacher union-loving candidate who will lose (in part because she’s not being backed by most of the other unions, in part because she has no money or bedrock support, in part because no one knows who she is and Christie is Christie.) NJEA is sticking its neck out, not to mention its money. It regards itself as stronger than the Christie storm and the consequential Buono washout, and that’s probably the right call.
.
