R.G.’s Take: Perry Gets His Way Again
Oh, ye liberals, Democrats and college professors, weep. There is no doubt now that the man you love to hate – Governor Rick Perry – will be the biggest winner of the 82nd Legislature.
Perry has gotten his way on almost every item on is legislative agenda and squeezed the state budget turnip until it bled. Perry is the flavor of the week nationally for the politicos and pundits looking for a candidate of principled policy and pizzazz to join the Republican presidential contest. And Perry’s biggest public relations flop of the session – meddling with higher education – hasn’t fazed him in the least. If you believe the higher education community and alumni and newspaper backlash to Perry’s support of Jeff Sandefer and his proposed “Seven Breakthrough Solutions” for university reform have prompted Perry to back off, think again.
Sources close to the governor tell me that in either late June or July, Perry will unveil his own proposal for higher education reform. While the details are still being worked out, it is sure to contain his call for $10,000 undergraduate degrees, greater efficiencies in the teaching of undergraduates, teacher accountability and a potential rebalancing of instructional and research budgets with a goal of lowering the cost of a bachelor’s degree. Perry, in his Austin American-Statesman op-ed, said academia wants him to “butt out.” He’s not going to: “Our knowledge-dependent economy and you — the taxpayer footing the bills — deserve better.”
With the knowledge that the battle with Perry is never over, Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst and Speaker Joe Straus appointed a “Joint Oversight Committee on Higher Education Governance, Excellence and Transparency.” A shorter name would be The Committee to Rein in Perry’s Regents.” One source told me the point of the committee is to make sure whatever reforms occur are done with a scalpel rather than a meat cleaver. Conservative columnist William Lutz noted the most transparent thing to the right about the committee is its purpose.
There is some room for legitimate debate about the current role of the Ivory Towers. A bachelor’s degree today essentially has become what a high school diploma was four decades ago – a requirement for a good paying job. However, tuition deregulation in 2003 dramatically increased the cost of a college education, and it is not being helped in the currently proposed budget by cutting Texas Grants financial aid funding for 41,000 students.
One of Sandefer’s proposals for making a college degree more affordable is to bring in experienced professionals to augment academics. Here’s a real-life story that gives validity to that argument. Lobbyist Jim Arnold told me that in the 1980s, he was was an adjunct professor of government at Austin Community College. He also worked at the Legislative Budget Board and in the governor’s office. Then he concentrated on working on Texas political campaigns, followed by stints with the National Republican Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Arnold managed Perry’s successful 1998 campaign for lieutenant governor before becoming a lobbyist. When Arnold decided he wanted to return to part-time teaching several years ago, he was told the accrediting Southern Association of Colleges and Schools would not allow him to teach government because his Master’s Degree was from the U.T. LBJ School of Public Affairs rather than the government department. To teach, Arnold had to return to college and obtain nine additional hours in political science study. “You’ve got twenty to twenty-five years of working in government and politics and you’re still not qualified to teach an introduction to Texas government,” Arnold told me as we spoke in the lobby outside the state House chamber.
However, it is unlikely this is all about just improving higher education. Remember, it was the college campuses in 2008 that give President Obama the edge over Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries and then provided him with a volunteer army in the general election. If students and academics are having to defend their turf over the next year, they are less likely to fight other battles, such as re-electing Obama. The Young Conservatives of Texas put out reports in 2008 on how the lion’s share of political donations made by employees of Texas A&M University and of the University of Texas are given to “leftists.” Dick Armey, whose FreedomWorks helped fan the flames of the national Tea Party movement in the last election cycle, is backing Perry in his higher education battle. This is not just about Texas. It’s also about the 2012 presidential campaign.
Which brings me around to this week’s hot rumors of Perry entering the GOP presidential contest. It’s fueled by the fact there are no candidates that excite the party regulars. They’re either yesterday’s news or unexciting. Perry has the ability to fire up a room. Evangelical activists are talking about a draft Perry movement. Perry told Fox News host Greta van Susteren he would be “tempted” to run for president. “I can’t say I’m not tempted, but the fact is this (being governor) is something I want to do…Until I get my legislative session over with, I’m not going to get distracted from the work at hand.” He just can’t say No, sort of like Scarlett O’Hara promising all the boys a dance at the barbecue: “I just couldn’t risk being a wallflower.”
There are absolutely no signs that Perry actually plans to run. His top political aides are working for Newt Gingrich, and his schedule through the summer has some Republican Governor’s Association travel to North Carolina, New Orleans, St. Louis and Alabama, but nothing for Iowa or New Hampshire. Conventional wisdom at the moment is that the GOP nominee will be a sacrifice to Obama’s re-election. The better play for Perry is to wait. As the head of the RGA, he can help bring four swing states into the GOP column next year. Combine those states with ones already in Republican hands, and Perry could have a political base of 321 Electoral College votes in 2016, more than the 270 needed to win the presidency. Of course, he might have some other governors to fight with for the nomination in an open-election year. But the ever-youthful Perry would only be 67. Even if he did not seek re-election as governor, he would leave office in January 2015, giving him a free year to run.
So look at where our governor stands now. The Legislature on Thursday/yesterdayMay26 hammered down a current-revenue budget for the next two years as demanded by Perry. Even if a breakdown on school finance causes a special session, the question is over how to spend the money, not how much. On items Perry set as emergencies, the Legislature passed or is on the verge of passing eminent domain restrictions; requirements for a sonogram before an abortion; photographic proof of identification before voting; loser pays lawsuit restrictions; and a resolution calling for a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Perry’s only apparent loss will on the so-called “sanctuary cities” crackdown on illegal immigration.
Sure, I know you liberals and moderates hate him. The polls tell me so. But Perry is not a man seeking to be loved by all. Perry is a Plus-One politician for whom winning is enough, because winning begets the power to implement policy. Perry has told me before that he believes what is good for attracting new business to Texas is good for everyone in the state – new businesses mean additional tax revenue to pay for education and services for the poor. And with this budget, Perry has enforced that philosophy.
So all ye liberals, Democrats and college professors, shed your tears of frustration. Rick Perry has won again.
By R.G. RATCLIFFE
Tagged: higher education, Jeff Sandefer, president, rick perry
David Guenthner says:
”However, tuition deregulation in 2003 dramatically increased the cost of a college education.” See slides 5 and 6. http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2010-03-24-PPT-tuitiondereg-ey.pdf
Reply »
Anon Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 8:46 am
I think the good folks at TPPF may need a lesson on how percentages work.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Not at all sure Perry cares about policy, R.G., except to the extent it allows him to line the pockets of those who line his. In the end, it’s all about Perry for Perry — nothing more and nothing less.
Reply »
Jed says:
here’s an idea, while you’re meddling DG:
what about differentiating between the 30-some public 4-year universities in texas, in terms of missions and approach.
then everybody wins. you get your $10K diploma from one school, your teaching focus from another, and cutting edge research from another.
you might need a few more slides.
Reply »
Cow Droppings says:
In 1997, Perry showed impeccable timing by getting in the race for lt. gov, not waiting on Dewhurst or even Bullock to make a public proclamation.
Timing says now is the time to strike, if ever. We can’t know what the landscape is like in 2016. But we do know we have an extremely vulnerable president whose record on jobs, spending, debt and health care is easily assailable.
We have a Republican field that causes insomniacs to yawn. Romney so wants to be the my turn, establishment guy. He won’t get there. Pawlenty is attractive but lacks a wow factor right now. Daniels out, Barbour out, Huckabee out. Newt in trouble. Huntsman, yawn.
Strike while the iron is hot, define the race on fiscal terms, eject Obama-Carter in 18 months.
Reply »
Jed Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 9:02 am
all national elections are on fiscal (well, “economic”) terms. no need to define it thus. it just happens. that’s about the only variable voters have proven able to track.
bring it on, mofo.
Reply »
Carmela08 Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 2:44 pm
Yeah, CowDroppings, bring it on.
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
May 28th, 2011 at 11:21 am
Those are all excellent points Cow Droppings. So why is Perry being such a tease about running? What is holding him back. He is known to be hyper ambitious … yet he let his campaign staff work for the Newster?
Why all the hesitation at jumping into the pool of boiling hot water, intense media scrutiny of a presidential race. I mean, Tim Pawlenty isn’t scared to run; so what makes Rick Perry different than Pawlenty?
I think we know.
Rick Perry will never be VP because Pawlenty or Romney will never pick him because of all the attendant political risk that comes with that move.
So Rick just gets to watch and wish on the sidelines… Pawlenty is going to lose to Obama anyhow. I would vote for Obama over all these Republicans except Ron Paul.
Ron Paul – now there is a good family man! And he would cut government, too, rather than just talk about it.
Reply »
Cow Droppings Reply:
May 29th, 2011 at 7:08 pm
I think he really didn’t want to do it. He knows the brutal grind of a presidential race. He also know, however, this country is on the brink of ruin because of Obama. And lacking any compelling candidate in the current Republican field, I think he now finds himself considering it for the sake of the party and the country.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Perry is like that bad penny that keeps turning up over and over…
or that “stick um” that you cant’ get off your fingers….
Reply »
Professor Publius says:
The proposals for cookie-cutter, assembly-line higher education will not cut it, no matter how popular the bottom line is. Low-cost education is a great idea, but you get what you pay for — online courses and students who cannot write or think critically. Universal college education is a great idea, but the production of college grads who fail to demonstrate basic thinking and communication skills cheapens the value of a degree. Nothing that the Perry crowd and conservative reformers have proposed will change that, nor will it satisfy the needs of the Texas business community.
If we want to provide students with a good education, we need rigid degree standards that cannot be waived and professors who will advise and spend time with individual students. The larger the classes, the less time with the students because of the demands of grading and student consultations.
Reply »
Professor Publius says:
As for the Arnold story, SACS is an accreditation organization for institutions. They did not deny Jim a job. More likely, they insisted that ACC have a certain educational level for those teaching required general education and core classes, and ACC felt they could not risk the consequences. This is the sort of administrative nonsense and analysis that comes from thoughtless application of rules, but this is just the sort of rules- and stats-based performance measures that conservative legislators and pundits want to impose as a measure of how the faculty is doing. Caveat emptor, folks.
Reply »
Jed Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 9:06 am
ding ding. demanding more accountability, uniform standards, and more teaching by professors, then complaining that businessmen aren’t being allowed to teach college classes because they don’t meet the standards already in place is, well, sort of funny, really.
Reply »
Kirk says:
“Sure, I know you liberals and moderates hate him.”
Lots of conservatives hate him, too.
Remember that Perry is anything but a conservative. He is a modern-day Machiavelli.
Reply »
Blue says:
“Conventional wisdom at the moment is that the GOP nominee will be a sacrifice to Obama’s re-election.”
I gotta say, I flat out do not understand why anyone believes this. Unemployment is high, isn’t improving, and will likely stay high through next summer. Obama is very, very vulnerable.
Reply »
Jed Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 9:08 am
through next summer is the key. research shows that the best predictor of swing voters is based on economic performance in the year preceding the election.
so today’s economy is completely irrelevant. next summer’s economy will be what voters remember.
Reply »
Blue Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 11:51 am
Jed, the problem is that the sheer number of jobs needed to be created between now and next July or August is stunning–and there’s absolutely no evidence that employers are beginning to hire at anywhere near that rate. You’ve also got (as we’ve just seen this session) huge cutbacks in state and local government coming down the pike in the next 12 months.
Reply »
Jed Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
yes. this budget is beginning to make sense …
rw says:
The word “wisdom” does not apply to the mainstream media.
Reply »
R.G. Ratcliffe says:
I will say this on conventional wisdom: In December 1992, the conventional wisdom was the George HW Bush could not be beat. No one was taking the Democratic field of candidates seriously. I was doing an election set-up for the Houston Chronicle that was to run over the Christmas holidays. So I went to Dallas to try to catch Bill Clinton for a quote at a fund-raiser. I was the only print reporter there. I had trouble getting away from him. Two months later, I was on his campaign airplane jammed with reporters and he was well on his way to becoming the Democratic nominee.
So, yes, conventional wisdom can change very quickly.
Reply »
n-g Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 1:57 pm
You must mean December 1991. In December 1992, the conventional wisdom was that George HW Bush had already lost.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
I think Cow Droppings has it right. Perry will run, but he’s going to have lots of questions to answer and he’s not going to be able to avoid them as he’s so artfully done in the past. Brushing inquisitors away with a smirk and wave of the hand is not going to work with the national press.
With regards to education reform, I think Perry is on the right track. Recent reports on teaching loads really got my attention. Looks like many reach tenure level and start slacking off. Quality education at state universities has to be made more affordable. Start by making professors teach full loads or take a pay cut.
Reply »
Jed Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 9:14 am
right now, we have affordable education at some campuses and passable education at others.
you’re not going to make the top campuses better while also making them cheaper. simple math.
you could, however, take the schools that are already affordable and make them higher quality.
this entire conversation is focused on the wrong schools. we should be talking what it will take to make places like A&M-Commerce or UT-PanAm more credible, rather than how we can dismantle Austin and College Station.
of course, since the answer is “money,” i can see why we’re focused instead on the impossible.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 11:19 am
I’m I reading you right? You think it is OK for 20% of the staff to carry most of the load, while the rest get paid big money for doing very little?
How is making the 80% work for their money going to adversely affect the quality of education?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 11:51 am
Absolutely. Full professors are often the ones who are bringing in their own salaries and financing the university’s operating costs by their research grants. I want those people to be given the time needed to innovate. Sure, they should teach, but they should be protected from a heavy teaching burden in order to further advance the field.
Paris Emerson Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 12:05 pm
well anonymous, it seems you’ve been duped by TPPF propaganda. The 80% do more than their fair share of the work: they teach upper division courses, they teach honors courses, they teach graduate courses, they engage in cutting edge research and direct theses and dissertations. They also serve on editorial boards of journals and presses and vet manuscripts in their diciplines. The 20% who teach the introductory courses are usually required to do little else. Their “load” as you call it, is comparatively small.
Reply »
Confused Reply:
May 30th, 2011 at 9:57 am
@anonymous, and others–
I’m not yet a full professor, just a newly tenured one, but I brought in twice my salary in external grants this year.
I had a reduced teaching load, and if I hadn’t had it, I couldn’t have gotten those grants.
I helped get two jobs for my graduate students and at least two for my undergrads in the last three months alone–something that takes a lot of time and for which I get no official credit, but is well worth it.
I’m also not a leftist.
When I put these variables into the conversation happening here, I end up with nothing but confusion. How is the TPPF helping Texans get jobs? To compete these days, my students can’t just have an education, they have to have research experience!
Reply »
Rog says:
I’ll vote for Perry when Anita (his wife) does.
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
May 29th, 2011 at 6:02 am
Rog, you have no idea how right you are. Google “Why Anita Perry Never Smiles”
Reply »
R.G. Ratcliffe says:
I actually think the Texas press has done a pretty good job over the years of writing about and editorializing about Perry’s personal and campaign finances. However, a real difference is that when I write about something or the DMN does or the Statesman does or the Tribune does, it’s a blip of a couple of days and most of the time television doesn’t pick it up as anything other than a brief anchor-reader with a picture of Perry in the background. But if he runs for president, this stuff becomes fodder for the 24-hour news cycle.
Reply »
Peter Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 9:33 am
That’s an important point. People like to complain about the sad state of affairs when it comes to daily press coverage of state government. But that’s really not the case. The papers, the blogs, Texas monthly, and the Tribune do a pretty decent job of finding out what’s happening and then writing about it. But, once it’s written, the story goes away except for the most part.
But, Perry won’t have that luxury in a national campaign, where the cable networks will talk for days and days about his taxpayer-funded $10,000 a month mansion and his property deals and his attempts to paper over the truly awful way he allowed Cameron Todd Willingham to die for a “crime” that likely did not even happen, ad infinitum.
He may try to pull a Palin and manage his own appearances, speaking only to Fox types. But the rest of the cable talkers are still going to be talking. All the damn time. It’s what they do, and he will come out looking worse for it.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 5:16 pm
Maybe he can offer an explanation as to how, as a governmental employee for all of his adult life, he became a millionaire. Similar to Palin, he can explain who buys his wardrobe of Italian suits, custom french-cuff shirts, and $1K boots.
Reply »
AreYouKiddingMe says:
If Perry will agree to step down as Governor the minute he decides to concentrate on his White House bid, I say Run Rick, Run!!!
His national campaign will be a disaster and a joke. There is no way he can carry anybody but the fringe groups in the U.S. When he is the choice of wingnuts like Rush, and Ingram, that should tell you all you need to know. I’ll even contribute some money to his exploratory campaign if he agrees to leave the governors office immediately. I would love to see the trainwreck of RP on a national stage. Go get ‘em Rick…
Reply »
Tnix says:
R.G–Can you tell me what the difference is between Perry, Palin, and Bachman. All are mouth breathing conservatives that appeal to the same base. Not really much differentiation. Result will be split base depending on how many enter. Seems like a losing prop to me.
Reply »
R.G. Ratcliffe says:
Maybe temptation is getting the best of Perry: http://bit.ly/mccpLG
Reply »
R.G. Ratcliffe says:
The difference between Perry, Palin and Bachman? Perry comes across as having a better grasp of the issues than Palin, and he seems less scary than Bachman. The big bottom line for the moment is this: Perry can look like a winner in November whereas neither Palin nor Bachman can at the moment. That’s a perception that can change in a flash, but I think that’s where it is at the moment.
Reply »
Vernon says:
To all those who underestimate Perry’s capability to run a successful campaign: don’t.
Underestimating one’s opponent is probably the biggest reason for losing a race/battle/war/business/etc.
While I’m certainly no fan of Perry’s policies, keep in mind that Perry hasn’t lost a race in, what, 27 years? That’s not just luck, folks. He’s a consummate professional, strategic politician.
He’s no fool.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 11:53 am
Fool, no.
Douchebag, yes.
Reply »
Peggy Venable Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 1:14 pm
Now, now – “anonymous”. If you can’t say anything nice, at least say something intelligent.
Reply »
Kirk Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 3:21 pm
That’s right–anonymous. You’re being unfair to douchebags.
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
May 28th, 2011 at 6:22 am
Peggy you have to understand it’s democrat “intellectual” discussion.
Peggy Venable says:
Why such a fuss? Taxpayers WANT every public entity to be subject to review and reform. With college tuitions in Texas increasing a whopping 70% since 2003, and the average college student with student loans averaging $22,900, it is clear we need to look at ways to deliver a quality education less expensively. College student loans total more than credit card debt and top nearly $1 trillion — TRILLION. Sitting in the ivory towers and refusinng to consider reforms is not acceptable to taxpayers.
Reply »
Jed Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 2:42 pm
seriously which are you suggesting: we fire the state’s most prominent academics for failing to teach enough freshman courses, or we force them to teach said courses, thereby taking time away from their research and/or leadership, or we abandon all generation of knowledge and turn our entire state university system into a series of teaching colleges?
you want “quality less education less expensively?” fund it. meanwhile, if you want reform, model how it’s done in more successful systems.
Reply »
respectful dissent Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 3:47 pm
Peggy, are you talking about the 30 taxpayers on the payroll at your office or do you have access to credible statewide data? Making a blanket, wholesale, unsupported claim about each and every taxpayer in the state of Texas’s opinion is at best silly and untruthful at worst. Further, is that student loan debt figure for the state of Texas or nationwide? Come on. Give us some unbiased research so we can verify your claims. Bandwagon fallacies: gotta love ‘em.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
May 27th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
You’re so right, Peggy: Taxpayers WANT every public entity to be subject to review and reform.
This includes the Governor’s Office and Perry’s sleazy slush funds.
Reply »
Jed says:
i wish the south texas nuclear project got as much scrutiny as UT.
Reply »
coastalag says:
Beat the hell out of Rick Perry.
– Texas A&M Alumni
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
Is it me or have the democrats taken these intellectual discussions to new lows?
Nope I don’t think its me.
Reply »
Jed says:
glad that’s settled.
Reply »
jpt51 says:
Can’t think of better justification why it’s necessary to establish term limits, a Republican favorite in the 90s, for all Texas officials holding statewide office.
Reply »
Ted J Striker says:
Perry needs to make higher ed. more affordable and probably will need to dumb down college curricula as well, after he and his cronies finish gutting the public school system.
Reply »
best rakeback says:
I cherished up to you’ll receive carried out proper here. The sketch is attractive, your authored subject matter stylish. nevertheless, you command get got an edginess over that you wish be turning in the following. ill certainly come more before again as precisely the similar nearly very steadily inside case you shield this increase.
Reply »