By Abdul Hakim-Shabazz
IndyPoltics.Org
You may not be aware of this, but Democratic Superintendent of Public Instruction Glenda Ritz announced her re-election bid the day before the election. And on Tuesday, she lost.
At an education forum on the west side of Indianapolis, Ritz told the “pro-public education†(PPE) crowd that she was going to run again for the job. She said she was going to- no shadowprotect teachers and stop the anti-public education agenda being pushed by Gov. Mike pence and the Republican-controlled legislature. And then the election happened.
Although the superintendent of public instruction wasn’t on the ballot, the tidal wave of GOP victories throughout Indiana basically took any hope Ritz and her supporters had of stemming the waves of education reform and accountability and threw it in the trash heap where it belongs.
For example, Democratic auditor candidate Mike Claytor tied his wagon to the Glenda train. Claytor campaigned saying that as part of his watchdog duties he would protect her from the evil GOP agenda. All he got for his trouble was a 36-point defeat.
A number of Statehouse candidates who ran on a PPE platform found themselves back where they started from at the beginning of the campaign, not in public office. And even several incumbent lawmakers found themselves out of a job after Organization Day. Most telling was Shelli VanDenburgh of House District 19 in northwest Indiana. She lost to Republican Julie Olthoff by a couple of points.
In what has to be even more frightening news for the PPEs, was in the Terre Haute area where Republican John Ford beat Tim Skinner, who was the epitome of the PPE/anti-reform movement. That race went Ford’s way, 52-48. In fact, most PPE candidates who lost did so by double digits. And if a PPE candidate won, it was more than likely because they didn’t have an opponent on the ballot.
Even in the IPS school board race “Hoosiers for Public Education†(aka the Indiana State Teachers Association) spent thousands of dollars trying to defeat reform-minded candidates Mary Ann Sullivan, Lanier Echols and Kelly Bentley. The end result, exactly, Sullivan, Echols and Bentley will be sworn in as new school board members.
But back to Ritz. If her supporters were trying to recreate 2012, it didn’t work. Ritz campaigned on behalf of a lot of losing candidates this cycle. She cut several ads and made numerous appearances and none of them worked. Ritz and her allies accused Republicans of trying to destroy public education, but that didn’t work either.
Now of course there are a couple of other factors at play. This was a mid-term election and all things are happening against a backdrop that includes a president who is not all that popular, thus Republicans controlling Congress. And turnout was at near record lows, by some estimates averaging about 32 percent. But even with those factors at play, we were warned that we ignore teachers and public educators at our own peril and this mighty army would take out any lawmaker who stood in the way of their mission which was to educate Indiana’s children. Well, apparently somebody forgot to tell them.
And to be honest, I think it’s rather ironic. Back in August my esteemed colleague John Krull wrote about how the education reform crowd’s antics were backfiring and raising Ritz’s political profile.
Krull wrote “they have done it in a way that has cemented her image with her constituency as a kind of latter-day Joan of Arc defying and fighting an array of bullies who seize upon every opportunity to oppress, belittle and demean her.†Looking at Tuesday’s results, I can definitely agree with the Joan of Arc reference.
Abdul is an attorney and the editor and publisher of IndyPoltics.Org. He is also a frequent contributor to numerous Indiana media outlets. He can be reached at abdul@indypolitics.org.
The first paragraph said it all. Someone announces a re-election bid that will take place in two years, the day before midterms election and is proclaimed a looser two years in the future. What AM political “blabber station” is this fellow?
Ritz beat her opponent at the ballot box back in 2012 for a mandatory state “elected” position. Then with the republican lost, Pence sidesteps “all” voters of this state with a “appointed board” to manipulate her. Why doesn’t Pence just sidestep us voters again and sidestep the state legislators with a “all” legislation appointed board?
She is toast! From the get go a perception has been fostered that the position had authority and powers that it did not. Glenda Ritz has been unarmed and tilting at windmills.
So you approve of any “appointed boards” to supersede any legitimate “voted” position. I DO NOT APPROVE of “any” political parties that does this because it undermines the “vote of the people”, PERIOD. You love it because your party did it. Maybe you rather be under a dictator style government from which this move is more common. Maybe you need to move to one of those countries and leave the “vote of the people” here!
Your response is to put words in my mouth I did not utter then continue to build a narrative on it? Typical hollow defense.
You and others trying to elevate her position to one of power and having meaningful influence is what is laughable.
Appointed boards are a way of life from the federal level down to the local level. Those appointing the boards are held responsible by the voters for their actions and inactions.
Your advanced mind reading abilities then try to expound on what I love and what type of society I would feel comfortable living in. My compunction and that of those I associate with would gladly except the retribution of the sheeple masses and dispatch the dictator. Film at eleven.
You really need to put down the worn out playbook you constantly refer to and try some original material. In a debate setting you would end up in a fetal position weeping softly in the corner.
Intent of Ritz position being elevated? Really? “Maintaining” the powers that Ritz was elected to do is the issue. Same power that your candidate wanted, but “lost”. The same power that previous republicans had with that position. The same power that since your candidate lost, you governor is wanting to undermine. The voters spoke
with the ballot! What is there not to understand?
Comments are closed.