The Obama campaign fired back at Mitt Romney’s speech Wednesday on
education, in which Romney put forward school choice proposals, holding a
conference call with reporters in which they tied “Romney economics,”
of short-term gains, to their opponent’s positions on education.
“Mitt Romney might not want to talk about his lackluster record in
Massachusetts, but it’s an important window into what he would do as
president,” said Obama campaign national press secretary Ben LaBolt,
criticizing Romney for having sought cuts to early literacy programs,
and for sharp increases in public college tuition during his term as
governor.
LaBolt also pointed to Romney’s comments at a closed-door fundraiser
in April, where he said he would cut the size of the Department of
Education.
Obama campaign policy director James Kvaal also rebutted Romney’s
call for expanded school-choice, by pointing to the Obama
administration’s own reform efforts on teacher pay and performance, and
reforming the No Child Left Behind Act. “President Obama has also worked
to expand school choice, in public schools — in fact, Race to the Top
encouraged states to lift caps on charter schools, and increased the
number of charter schools.”
Kvaal also explained the campaign’s opposition to private-school
voucher systems: “We know from experience that private school vouchers
have failed to raise achievement, and they drain resources from public
school children.”
Romney, in his speech, attacked Obama for inequalities in American
education: “Here we are in the most prosperous nation, but millions of
kids are getting a third-world education. And, America’s minority
children suffer the most. This is the civil-rights issue of our era.
It’s the great challenge of our time.”
In response, Kvaal told TPM on the call that Obama agrees with the need to invest in education in order to build the economy.
“[Obama] is tremendously proud of his record on education, and
rightly so,” said Kvaal. “And in contrast, the answers that Governor
Romney is apparently offering, which include deep cuts to education
funding, and backing away from what has been a national commitment for
decades — to intervene in failing schools. I think voters that are
interested in education have a clear choice.”
No comments:
Post a Comment