Education

A World Without Public Schools If the consensus underlying American public education has disappeared, why shouldn't the institution? by David Gelernter 06/04/2007, Volume 012, Issue 36 Should America have public schools, or would we do better without them? Nothing is more important to this country than the transformation of children into educated American citizens. That's what public schools are for, and no institutions are better suited to the role--in principle. They used to fill it with distinction. But there's no reason we must have public schools. Granted, the public has a strong interest in educating America's children, at a cost that's divided equitably among all taxpayers and not borne by the parents of school-age children alone. But these requirements don't imply any need for public schools. We need an Air Force, and the Air Force needs planes. Taxpayers pay for the force and the planes. But the pilots are supplied directly by the government, the airplanes by private companies (with government oversight and assistance). Schooling might be furnished on either model: mainly by public or mainly by private organizations. We know that private schools are perfectly capable of supplying first-class educations. So the question stands: Why have public schools? How should we decide whether to have them or not? Vouchers have been a popular and promising (and controversial) idea for years. Under voucher plans, the public pays part or all of the bill when a child attends private school. But here I am talking about the whole hog, not just the tail and a couple of trotters. If sending some children to private school at public expense is worth discussing, why not sending all children to private school? Why not liberate all the vast resources we spend on public schools to be re-channeled to private schools chosen by the nation's parents? Any public school offering an education that parents will actually pay for (of their own free will) would presumably be replaced by a private school offering essentially the same thing. But a vast array of new private schools would germinate also. And a vast number of failed public schools would disappear. In the system I am picturing, education would continue to be free and accessible to every child, and all taxpayers would continue to pay for it. Parents would be guaranteed access to "reasonable" schools that cost them nothing beyond what they pay in taxes. It would all be just like today--except that public schools would have vanished. Would private organizations be capable of providing enough new schools to replace our gigantic public schools establishment? Private enterprise is alleged to be smarter and more resourceful in America than anywhere else in the world. So let's suppose that private schools can indeed meet the needs of nearly all parents. Do we actually need and want our public schools, or do we keep them around out of fear of the teachers' unions--and habit, like a broken child's toy we are too sentimental to throw away? The basic law of public schools Many sources agree that, on the whole, American public schools are rotten. In 2000, a whopping 12 percent of graduating seniors were rated "proficient" in science, and international surveys rank our graduating seniors 19th overall out of 21 nations. In 2002, the Washington Post summarized a different survey: "Nearly six in 10 of the nation's high school seniors lack even a basic knowledge of U.S. history." And so on. Our public schools are widely agreed to be in bad shape. But these are only problems of incompetence. Others cut deeper. The basic law of public schools is this: Public schools are first and foremost agents of the public. They exist to transform children into "educated citizens" as the public understands this term --in other words, as a public consensus defines it. Of course the United States is a large country; standards have always differed from state to state. So each state has its own public schools, charged with satisfying the consensus definition of "educated citizen" in that state. In 1898, Nicholas Murray Butler (soon to be president of Columbia University) described universities in terms that make explicit this connection, one that is almost forgotten today. "In order to become great--indeed, in order to exist at all," he wrote, a university [or public school!] must represent the national life and minister to it. When the universities of any country cease to be in close touch with the social life and institutions of the people, and fail to yield to the efforts of those who would readjust them, their days of influence are numbered. The same is true of any system of educational organization. Public schools even more than universities must "represent the national life and minister to it." They must "minister to" the consensus definition of an educated citizen. And what is a "consensus"? "Unanimity or general agreement on matters of opinion," according to Webster's; solid agreement by a large majority. And in states where there is no public consensus or general agreement on the meaning of "educated citizen," public schools are in an impossible position. They can't act for the public if the public can't decide how they should act. This is true without regard to whether the schools are working well or badly. Today there are few states or none where a public consensus or general agreement exists on what "educated citizen" means. Schools exist not only to teach skills but to mold character. (Although many object to this old-fashioned language, few Americans disagree that schools must teach an approach to life, a worldview, a moral framework.) The culture war that has been underway since the late '60s is precisely a war over approaches to life and worldviews and moral frameworks. Our politics mirror that divide. In the 2004 presidential election, Kerry and Bush differed on politics, but stood also for two different worldviews in the larger sense--Kerry the globalizing man-of-the-world with his European experience versus the plainspoken, ranch-living, Bible-quoting Bush. In simplest terms, Kerry stood for "globalism," Bush for "Americanism." As between these divergent visions, the country split down the middle. It's pretty clear that no consensus or general agreement on the nature of education is likely to exist in a country that's so divided. Which suggests in turn that, for now, the age of the American public school is over. Obviously we shouldn't make such judgments on the basis of short-term disagreements or divisions. But America's culture war has been underway for a generation at least. You might argue that the solution is to have two varieties of public school, roughly "moderate left" and "moderate right," each with its own curriculum, textbooks, and standards, and its own version of a worldview or moral framework to teach children. Every neighborhood or local region would vote on left versus right local schools. In many areas such elections would be extraordinarily hard-fought and bitter--yet the solution might work, except that the school establishment's bias is so consistently left (and not moderate left either) that it seems unlikely we could trust it to operate "moderate right" schools--or even "neutral" schools, if there were such a thing. (The public schools' bias often shows itself in exactly the form of "neutrality," as I'll discuss. If you declare yourself neutral as between America and her enemies, or normal sexuality and homosexuality, your neutrality in itself is bias.) Of course this whole analysis might be wrong. Maybe I misunderstand the point of public schools. Was there ever a consensus in this country on what an educated citizen should be? Maybe we always have been content for the schools to speak for just one section of American society, never the whole. But this view is wrong. Once upon a time there was indeed an Age of Consensus on public education, and it is worth remembering. Age of consensus The American public school enjoyed consensus for roughly a century and a half, from its beginnings in the 1820s through the 1970s. Obviously the existence of segregated schools meant that this Age of Consensus agreed only on some things. But the evidence suggests that black parents wanted basically the same things for their children as white parents did for theirs. Segregation (after all) was condemned not for neglecting black culture but for failing the test of equality, failing to supply black students with the same quality of education that white students got. Nor did newly arrived Jewish parents from Eastern Europe, for example, want their children studying Yiddish in public school; they wanted them to learn English and grab hold of American culture with both hands. During these years there was broad agreement on skills-teaching and character-building (or the teaching of worldviews and moral frameworks). The two areas were intertwined. Since the 1970s, consensus in both departments has fallen apart. Both areas are important, but not equally. Disputes about the teaching of skills can be patched up or compromised. Disputes about morality, worldviews, and character-building make public schools untenable. Samuel Johnson (the great essayist and lexicographer) said virtually the same thing in a different way. "Knowledge of external nature," he wrote (in his Life of Milton, 1781), "and the sciences which that knowledge requires or includes, are not the great requirement or the frequent business of the human mind." He continues: Whether we provide for action or conversation, whether we wish to be useful or pleasing, the first requirement is the religious and moral knowledge of right and wrong; the next is an acquaintance with the history of mankind. . . . Prudence and justice are virtues and excellences of all times and of all places; we are perpetually moralists, but we are geometricians only by chance. Which is still true in the 21st century. We remain perpetual moralists, and geometricians only by chance. First our children must learn right from wrong, and how to approach life; then they must learn history (assuming they have already learned how to read and write). If the public can't agree on how to teach these things, it has no business maintaining public schools. And nowadays it can't. The eleventh edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica (1910) is a good guide to American attitudes of roughly a century ago, in the age of consensus. "The great mass of the American people," it reported, "are in entire agreement as to the principles which should control public education; and the points in which the policies of the several states are in agreement are greater, both in number and in importance, than those in which they differ. An American educational system exists, therefore, in spirit and in substance, even though not in form." Once, it was possible to argue that all America agreed on the educational basics. It's fair to object that the Britannica spoke for Middle America, and no doubt overstated the actual degree of consensus. But there must have been some sort of consensus; the public was not bitterly divided, was not split in half as it is today. The Encyclopedia continues: "Formal instruction in manners and morals is not often found, but the discipline of the school offers the best possible training in the habits of truthfulness, honesty, obedience, regularity, punctuality and conformity to order." And by the way, "religious teaching is not permitted, although the exercises of the day are often opened with reading from the Bible, the repetition of the Lord's Prayer and the singing of a hymn." In the Age of Consensus, public schools taught skills and built character in ways the public endorsed. In the 19th century, there was general agreement that "no teaching is worthy of the name if it does not have a moral and ethical end" (according to the eminent progressive educator Francis Parker, 1898). And there was broad agreement on which moral standards to uphold, and their rootedness in the nation's religious traditions. Butler quotes the president of Bowdoin College on the purpose of a liberal education--which again applies to schools and colleges. Such an education is "for combining sound scholarship with solid character; for making men both intellectually and spiritually free; for uniting the pursuit of truth with reverence for duty." (And by the way, a college faculty should consist of "professors who are men first and scholars afterward.") One of the best ways to hear the Age of Consensus over the intervening gap of many years is to listen to the "readers" that were so important to public elementary schools (or "common schools" as they were called) during most of the 19th century and into the 20th. They were graded collections of stories, poems, and maxims; McGuffey's beat all others in popularity and became an American legend. Readers came into use in the 1820s. Mark Sullivan discusses them in his classic multivolume cultural history, Our Times (1935). There are still thousands of copies circulating through the nation's old-book dealers. Modern public school teachers should take a look. They might learn something. The Readers taught children the national consensus on ethics and morals as well as reading, writing, and literature. An 1879 version of McGuffey's Fifth and Sixth Readers gives a statement of purpose: To obtain as wide a range of leading authors as possible, to present the best specimens of style, to insure interest in the subjects, to impart valuable information, and to exert a decided and healthful moral influence. They were designed first and foremost to instill the community's ethical principles. "Much as you may have studied the languages or the sciences," one pupil remembers, "that which most affected you was the moral lessons in the series of McGuffey." Sullivan believes that "McGuffey's was the source of that stock of points of view and tastes held in common, which constituted much of America's culture, its codes of morals and conduct, its standards of propriety, its homely aphorisms, its 'horse-sense' axioms. . . . At all times and in every respect, McGuffey's Readers had a strong flavor of religion." "Great indeed were the old McGuffey's Readers," said one pupil. "This whole country is literally full of their ardent admirers. Nothing like them ever existed in any age, anywhere in the world." "I received more inspiration from McGuffey's Readers than from any other books in my experience," said another. Try eliciting admiration from your kids (or mine) about any textbook series in use today. Public schools in the Age of Consensus were far from perfect. Often they taught science badly--as schools usually do. On the whole they weren't much interested in classical and foreign languages, or the arts. They taught American history in a mildly distorted way--patriotism is good, but the schools of that era tended to resolve disputes between patriotic impulses and the truth in favor of patriotism. (Today's schools tend to resolve such disagreements by rejecting patriotic impulses and the truth as well.) And American education in that era was often served with a twist of anti-intellectualism, for flavor. The celebrated author Elbert Hubbard believed that "it is not book learning young men need, nor instruction about this and that, but a stiffening of their vertebrae which will cause them to be loyal to a trust, to act promptly, concentrate their energies"--so he says in his immensely popular essay in sort-of journalism, "A Message to Garcia," 1899. (Not a bad thought, if you disregard the anti-book slur.) Many urban schools were overcrowded, especially as more and more immigrants piled in. Segregated schools for blacks were often miserable. Yet throughout America--rich and poor, black and white, urban and rural--schools in general and teachers in particular were regarded with respect. And America's various creeds and colors agreed on the fundamental skills and principles with which a child should be equipped. You can see what it all looked like in Winslow Homer's remarkable paintings of teachers, pupils, and schoolhouses in the late 19th century, full of sunshine and grave, reticent dignity. A teacher (for example) reads to a scattering of casually attentive, remarkably comfortable-looking pupils in the quiet sunlight of a country school (1872). Several generations later, America's rural schools still seemed like pleasant but formidable institutions, and teachers were heroines. E.B. White, 1939: "I have an increasing admiration for the teacher in the country school where we have a third-grade scholar in attendance. She not only undertakes to instruct her charges in all the subjects of the first three grades, but she manages to function quietly and effectively as a guardian of their health, their clothes, their habits, their mothers, and their snowball engagements. . . . My boy already regards his teacher as his great friend, and I think tells her a great deal more than he tells us." Where the schools stand today There's reason to believe that when it comes to the all-important issue of teaching worldviews and moral frameworks, American public schools are so sharply and consistently biased, they disqualify themselves for the core task of educating citizens. There are many ways to see the school establishment's bias. One is to look at the SATs--the standard tests that virtually all college-bound high school students take, that deeply influence high school teaching. Reading The Official SAT Study Guide ("#1 Best Seller," "The only book with SAT practice tests created by the maker") is one way to get some idea of the state of mind in the education world. Here's a sentence from a passage that students are quizzed on. "The First World War is a classic case of the dissonance between official, male-centered history and unofficial female history." You might object that the idea of "official history" is a sham and a crock, unless you refer specifically to accounts commissioned by the combatant governments themselves. But this silly assertion is presented as if it were fact. Or: "The reluctance in accepting this obvious fact comes from the Eurocentric conviction that the West holds a monopoly on science, logic, and clear thinking. To admit that other, culturally divergent viewpoints are equally plausible is to cast doubt on the monolithic center of Judeo-Christian belief: that there is but one of everything--God, right way, truth--and Europeans alone knew what it was." Breathtakingly absurd, breathtakingly offensive. "Europeans alone" were sufficiently interested in foreign cultures to find out what they were about. Europeans have been subject to periodic bouts of obsession with non-European cultures, from medieval fascination with Muslim philosophy and architecture through Picasso and his colleagues' 20th-century fixation on African art and onward to the present. Does Christianity hold that there is one Testament, one virtue, one sin, one Gospel, one martyr, one saint, one great man, one art, one science, one planet? Are Rousseau and Shelley part of "European culture," and all the aggressive radicals who came after? And what will Jewish, Christian, and Muslim parents think of an exam that describes monotheism as a "Eurocentric" conceit? What kind of imbecile could write such a passage?--and offer it to unwitting high school students as fact? Naturally there are countless passages about downtrodden women and minorities, and famous women and members of minorities. One set of questions mentions these names: Duke Ellington, Margaret Atwood, one "Lois" (a student), Maya Angelou, and Rilke (who doesn't rate having his first name mentioned). It often seems as if white men just barely exist. Psychoanalysis, for example, is apparently mentioned once in this big book, in this question: "Anna Freud's impact on psychoanalysis was------, coming not from one brilliant discovery but from a lifetime of first-rate work." Her father might have had some "impact" on psychoanalysis too, but evidently it isn't worth speaking of. Manifestations of this aggressive left tilt aren't restricted to SAT preparation books. In a memorable article in these pages, Pamela Winnick described the bizarre distortions wrought by political correctness in science textbooks. A Houghton Mifflin fifth-grade text devotes half a page to the Navajo physicist Fred Begay but doesn't mention Albert Einstein. Kay Hymowitz (also in these pages) has described the depredations of the National Council for Social Studies (NCSS), which wants students to see themselves as citizens of the world, not of any such old-fashioned, irrelevant entity as the United States of America. A keynote speaker at an NCSS conference "warned against patriotic displays like the singing of 'God Bless America.' 'The Swedes,' he noted, 'the Kenyans don't think God blesses America over all other countries.'" And this isn't mere irrelevant theorizing. "Many states," Hymowitz reports, "have embraced the NCSS's idea that you don't need to know any American history to be an effective citizen. . . . Those in our schools who are shaping the civic imagination of the next generation discourage not just a love of America and its guiding principles, but any interest in the fortunes of our nation in particular." Thus the irrelevance of suggesting that the schools ought to be ideologically "neutral." They can't produce American citizens who love and care for and plan to protect this country if they teach "neutrality" instead of patriotism. A notorious 2005 dispute in the schools of Lexington, Mass., is highly revealing. The participants behaved and spoke with memorable directness; a student's father went to jail to make a point. It suggests that our disagreements over education go right down to the ground. David Parker and his wife Tonia had a 5-year-old son in kindergarten. They got wind of the topics on the kindergarten agenda--and asked to be notified and allowed to remove their son from class when same-sex marriage and similar topics were on the day's syllabus. Mr. Parker went to school to insist. He refused to leave until administrators granted his request. They did not grant it. Instead, after two hours of arguing, they called the police and had him arrested. He spent the night in jail. Few parents have the courage and persistence of the Parkers. But many are deeply angry at the schools for teaching ideas that specifically contradict their child's moral and religious upbringing. The Boston Globe quoted Mrs. Parker: "We're not giving unfettered access to the psyche of our son when he enters the school." Orthodox Jews and many Christians believe that homosexuality is a sin. (Which doesn't mean they are "homophobes" or "hate homosexuals," any more than they hate sinners in general. This ridiculous, mean-spirited libel turns religious doctrine upside down. Both religions teach that the sin is hateful, not the sinner. They also teach that male and female are equally essential in the rearing of children. If Jews or Christians who call homosexuality a sin are "homophobes," supporters of same-sex marriage are misogynists or misanthropes, as the case may be. But none of these ad hominem accusations is helpful.) For the schools to take it on themselves to contradict and "correct" the religious and moral instruction parents give their children represents (for many Americans) the height of statist arrogance; and exactly what they have come to expect from today's public schools. Of course you might reply that if the public is deeply divided, public schools ought to step forward and offer a compromise. Ought to help lead the nation to common ground; help close the wound and stop the bleeding. Maybe the schism in public thinking means that we need our public schools now more than ever. But the schools are not acting as if they want to bridge the great divide. Once more the Parker case is illuminating. Lexington School Committee chairman Thomas Griffiths said: "We don't view telling a child that there is a family out there with two mommies as teaching about homosexuality, heterosexuality, or any kind of sexuality. We are teaching about the realities of where different children come from." A profoundly ideological statement masquerading as sweet reason. The syllogism "if a thing exists 'out there,' the nation's 5-year-olds must be notified at once" will strike many Americans as cracked. But of course others will applaud Griffiths's statement. We are a divided nation. In America today, there is no consensus for our public schools to embody. (A related dispute arises when schools insist on teaching young children about the Holocaust in all its revolting evil. Sensitive children get nightmares, are scared of going to bed--I've seen this happen in my own family. Yes, American children must be taught about the Holocaust--but intelligently, dammit, with some regard for the child's own well-being. Children are not mere adults in miniature. We are supposed to have outgrown that primitive idiocy sometime in the 19th century. But it has returned to plague us in America's dim-witted schools establishment. Evidently common sense is another divisive issue in modern America.) What happened? Wow on earth did we reach this pass? It's an oft-told tale, but worth repeating. Two simultaneous processes combined (like drugs and booze) to create America's culture war. In the generation following World War II, intellectuals took over America's universities. The transformation was dramatic. Before World War II, elite schools like Princeton or Yale were social institutions first and foremost. They harbored some intellectuals on their faculties and among their students, like raisins in a sparsely populated oatmeal cookie. But on the whole, they were run by the social elite for the social elite. When Woodrow Wilson became president of Princeton in 1902, he denounced it for (social, not intellectual) exclusiveness--"The American college must become saturated in the same sympathies as the common people," he demanded. "The colleges of this country must be reconstructed from the top to the bottom. The American people will tolerate nothing that savors of exclusiveness." His demands went unsatisfied. Scott Fitzgerald summed things up in his 1920 Bildungsroman, This Side of Paradise: "Amory [the hero] had definitely decided on Princeton. Yale had a romance and glamour . . . but Princeton drew him most, with its atmosphere of bright colors and its alluring reputation as the pleasantest country club in America." In the decades after World War II, things changed: student admissions, faculty hiring, standards for tenure; eventually even university presidents were chosen from among the academic intelligentsia. Today America's elite universities are run by intellectuals, for intellectuals. Another related transformation was underway during these same years (although it had begun earlier): the professionalization of American life, and consequent huge increase in the university's influence. Business, journalism, and education schools became immensely more important than ever before. The importance and prestige of law and medical schools continued to expand. Combined, these two processes made a revolution. Once, intellectuals had been peripheral to American life. Now the American university had been placed in their hands--and American culture in the university's hands. The university was the power chord, and henceforth the electric buzz of U.S. intellectual life would drive American culture--which was plugged right into it. So intellectuals inherited the kingdom--and came to control American culture, which (naturally) veered sharply left as soon as they took charge. American public schools were especially susceptible to the leftward swing. Public school teachers were educated at education schools, which turned even harder left than many other graduate and professional schools. (The less substance to a school or degree program, the more lightweight its courses, the more apt it is to be affected by the ideological climate. A magnet is more apt to cause lightweight objects than heavy ones to skitter towards it.) Moreover, the public schools had always admired and imitated the prestige universities. As for private schools, they felt the leftward pull too--but were less likely than public schools to require their teachers to hold ed school degrees; and in some cases had enough religious, spiritual, or intellectual heft to resist the seductive attraction of the leftwing magnet. The religion of the Left Today's left-liberal faith despises the Bible, Judaism and Christianity, family life, and "the patriarchy." It believes in a "globalism" that holds divisions within nations (race and class divisions) to be terribly important and divisions among nations to be trivial. It believes in multinational government and (naturally) hates patriotism on principle, just as it does Christianity, with all the fervent hatred that new faiths reserve for older ones. Its fundamental principle is that men and women are not just equal but interchangeable. This left-liberalism is no mere political ideology. It is beyond doubt a religion, and has been since the 1930s. (There is no God in the left-liberal religion, but the same holds for other accepted and acknowledged religions.) Religious beliefs are ones that you take on faith, that you cannot be talked out of, that show you a broad, comprehensive, high-level picture of the world. They are doctrines you believe for internal spiritual reasons, not external factual ones. Listen to the eminent critic Alfred Kazin on the 1930s: "I was a socialist as so many Americans were Christians." "The condemned Communists in [André Malraux's] Man's Fate--Russian, German, Chinese--embodied the fundamental element of a new religion." Listen to Mary McCarthy, whose stories (according to the author herself) are thinly disguised nonfictions: Most '30s converts to socialism "resembled the original twelve apostles in the New Testament. . . . But Jim was like the Roman centurion or Saint Paul." To these and dozens of other writers, it came naturally to speak of left-liberalism in religious terms. Jonah Goldberg wrote that "modern liberalism has taken on the trappings of a religion" a few years ago (2005, in National Review). He's certainly correct, and his thesis is important; but the development is not new. So we reach another disqualifying problem with America's public schools. They are teaching our children religion. The apostles and propagandists of American left-liberalism speak of their new faith as blatantly and aggressively as public schools of bygone ages ever spoke about biblical religion or Americanism. And thus our public schools blatantly, aggressively violate the Constitution. Americanism (to be fair) can be a religion too--a biblical religion; the application of Judeo-Christian principles to the problem of the modern state. In general terms modern Americanism is the exact inverse of left-liberal globalism. It holds that divisions within the nation (race and class divisions) are unimportant as compared with divisions among nations. It distrusts multinational government and (naturally) believes in patriotism on principle. Good left-liberals are apt to ask themselves, What do France and Germany think of us? Americanists are more apt to ask themselves, What would my ancestors and the nation's founders think of us? Americanism and its creed (liberty, equality, and democracy for all mankind), and its devout belief in the United States as the shining city on the hill, and its faith in the teachings of its greatest prophet ("with malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right") was once the consensus religion of the United States. The revolution of the intellectuals during the post-World War II generation created a successful secession movement. Today a substantial minority of this country has renounced Americanism in favor of left-liberalism, or "globalism," or (as Milton Himmelfarb memorably put it) "soft-boiled paganism." The future What would the nation look like without public schools? Nearly all existing public school buildings would be leased to private schools. All the private schools in any town or district would discuss programs and fees among themselves (which would not count as illegal price-fixing), and with the public too, via local government or town meetings. Any public school whose staff believes in it would be allowed to keep its building and reorganize on a new basis. Some large public schools, especially high schools, would reorganize as confederacies of separate schools sharing one building: a science and math school, humanities school, arts school, sports school. Many students could attend more than one simultaneously. The Internet's most important role might be to help coordinate such complicated arrangements. (Though it's also true that a well-designed Internet school might attract students from all over the country.) One final question: Is there any chance that Abolition will be acted on, or even discussed? Don't hold your breath. Yet it would take just one prominent (even medium-prominent) politician or public figure to get America talking. We desperately need this national discussion. And what could be healthier for America's public schools than to learn that they might not be immortal after all? David Gelernter, professor of computer science at Yale and a national fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, is a contributing editor to THE WEEKLY STANDARD and author of the forthcoming Americanism: The Fourth Great Western Religion. The author would like to thank Joshua Gelernter for research assistance. © Copyright 2007, News Corporation, Weekly Standard, All Rights Reserved. Mitt Romney's Education Policy Press Releases, Quotes, Speeches, and Videos from Mitt Romney about Education organized by year     Education Brian Lamb In you history, it includes Stanford for how long? You finished first in your class at Brigham Young University in Utah? Why did you go to Brigham Young ? How did you -- how were able to get an MBA and a law degree at the same time ? And clearly it would be why you did well and, as you know, you finished well enough to give the valedictory address -- the question I want to ask you though is why do you think you did well? Other than having a lot of brainpower, did you have an approach to education?   Governor Mitt Romney and Education   "The least of learning is done in the classrooms." Thomas Merton   "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." Mark Twain   "My education was dismal. I went to a series of schools for mentally disturbed teachers." Woody Allen Major Speeches   05-17-2005; U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce; Hearing on "High School Reform: Examining State and Local Efforts" 01-11-2006, Romney testifies on education reform     Educational Advancement   One of Governor Romney's top priorities is reforming the education system so that young people can compete for good paying jobs in the global economy of the future. In 2004, Governor Romney established the John and Abigail Adams Scholarship Program to reward the top 25 percent of Massachusetts high school students with a four-year, tuition-free scholarship to any Massachusetts public university or college. He also championed a package of education reforms, including merit pay, an emphasis on math and science instruction, important new intervention programs for failing schools and English immersion for foreign-speaking students.   Major Press Releases   04-07-2003, Romney wins student support for higher education plan 09-22-2005; Romney files comprehensive education reform package   2006 Governor Mitt Romney Education Press Releases   01-11-2006, Romney testifies on education reform 07-20-2006, Romney proposes $8 million for national guard college fee waivers   2005 Governor Mitt Romney Education Press Releases   01-25-2005, Romney moves to make science a graduation requirement 03-14-2005, Romney names nine-member early education and care board 06-22-2005, Romney announces 2006 teacher of the year 07-14-2005, Romney administration awarded $2 million high school reform grant 07-18-2005, Romney unveils capital budget, major focus on Higher Ed 09-13-2005, Romney honors 2005 commonwealth compass schools 09-22-2005, Romney files comprehensive education reform package 10-19-2005, Romney lauds nation-topping performance by Massachusetts students 10-28-2005-, Romney joins in surprise presentations of national educator awards to top Massachusetts teachers 11-07-2005, Romney honors six educators for excellence in math and science 12-15-2005, Romney awards free tuition to 14,000 Massachusetts students   2004 Governor Mitt Romney Education Pree Releases   01-15-2004, Romney focuses on education in 2004 state of the state 01-16-2004, Romney targets lowest performing districts 01-20-2004, Romney opens door to college for top scoring students 02-20-2004, Romney applauds students for early MCAS preparation 02-25-2004, Romney endorses findings of Grogan task force on education 05-05-2004, Romney vows charter school moratorium veto 06-15-2004, Board of higher ED overwhelmingly okays Adams scholarship 07-28-2004, Romney, as part of ED agenda, signs school building reforms 10-05-2004, Healey recognizes 2004 commonwealth compass schools 10-19-2004, Board of higher ED gives green light to Adams scholarship 12-10-2004, 13,000 Massachusetts students win free college tuition   2003 Governor Mitt Romney Education Pree Releases   03-03-2003, Romney releases latest MCAS retest results for class 2003 04-07-2003, Romney wins student support for higher education plan 09-03-2003, Romney lauds students' high scores on 2003 MCAS 10-29-2003, Romney taps Grogan to head education task force   2006 Governor Mitt Romney Education Quotes   "At some point, I think America -- and, importantly, the minority communities -- are going to say, 'it's time to split with our friends, the unions and the Democratic Party, and put our kids first here.' Unequal educational opportunity is the civil rights issue of our time." Governor Mitt Romney; Tulsa World, March 7, 2006   "The world is growing more competitive every day, and it's no secret that skills, education and knowledge will be crucial to success in the workforce of the 21st century," said Romney. "Unless our kids are fully prepared to meet the challenges that lie ahead, Massachusetts will fall behind in the competition for the best jobs." Governor Mitt Romney, 01-11-2006 Press Release   "The men and women of the Massachusetts National Guard perform admirable service for our Commonwealth and for our nation," said Romney. "By making a public college education entirely free for Guard members, we recognize their tremendous dedication and sacrifice." Governor Mitt Romney, 07-20-2006 Press Release   2005 Governor Mitt Romney Education Quotes   "We cannot continue to have an excellence gap with the rest of the world and intend to remain the economic superpower and military superpower of the planet. That's just not going to happen. We're in a position where unless we take action, we'll end up being the France of the 21st century: a lot of talk, but not a lot of strength behind it in terms of economic capability." Governor Mitt Romney , AP, November 16, 2005   Governor Mitt Romney : "If we are going to compete in the global economy, we have to set our education goals higher." Governor Mitt Romney , AP, May 16, 2005   "It's going to take teachers, superintendents and parents talking to their legislators saying yes, we want more money of course ... but we also want changes in the way our schools are managed. We want our principals to have the ability to manage their schools." Governor Mitt Romney , AP, January 27, 2005   "Massachusetts has a choice," Romney said. "We can provide our kids with a first-rate science education today or we can learn to live with a second-rate economy tomorrow." Governor Mitt Romney, 01-25-2005 Press Release   "I am grateful to each of these individuals for volunteering their time and expertise to helping my Administration successfully integrate all of our early education services under one roof," Romney said. "Not only will this new agency ensure that taxpayer dollars are being spent more wisely and efficiently, it will also improve the care we provide to our youngest citizens and their families." Governor Mitt Romney, 03-14-2005 Press Release   "This is a great day for education reform. Massachusetts is nationally recognized for its leadership on education reform, and we need to continue down the same path if we're going to help our kids maximize their potential." Governor Mitt Romney, 07-14-2005 Press Release   "This is a huge shot in the arm for our public colleges and universities. By targeting these resources to construct new facilities and upgrade existing ones, we can put our higher education system in a position to deliver the first class facilities that our students deserve." Governor Mitt Romney, 07-18-2005 Press Release   "I applaud the students, teachers and staff of these excellent schools for the hard work and creativity they have demonstrated as we continue making progress toward higher achievement for all students in Massachusetts," Romney said. Governor Mitt Romney, 09-13-2005 Press Release   "If we're serious about keeping our kids at the forefront of a highly challenging and competitive world economy, then we have to take the necessary steps to energize our education system," said Romney. Governor Mitt Romney, 09-22-2005 Press Release   "We're making progress, there's no doubt about it, but we have more work to do. These test scores reflect the hard work and creativity of our students, teachers and schools, but they also reveal that some are still struggling. It is increasingly critical that we advance bold reforms to ensure greater accountability and performance in every classroom." Governor Mitt Romney, 10-19-2005 Press Release   "teachers like Jasmine Lellock and Thabiti Brown are critical to the success of our education initiatives and are doing an outstanding job preparing our children for future success in the classroom and the world," Romney said. "Teaching professionals are the backbone of our educational system and the best should be recognized and rewarded." Governor Mitt Romney, 10-28-2005- Press Release   "Our Presidential Award nominees set a great example, not only for educators in Massachusetts, but for the nation," Romney said. "Distinguished math and science teachers like these are the critical components of a public education system that will prepare us for the next century, and they deserve to be recognized for their hard work, creativity and dedication." Governor Mitt Romney, 11-07-2005 Press Release   "Paying for college is one of the largest financial challenges facing Massachusetts families," said Romney. "For the second year in a row, I'm pleased to reward some of our most promising and hardworking students. When it comes to figuring out how much it will cost to send a son or daughter to college, the Adams scholarship will help ease some of that burden." Governor Mitt Romney, 12-15-2005 Press Release   2004 Governor Mitt Romney and Education Quotes   "Massachusetts has some of the best schools and teachers in the nation," Romney said, speaking tonight from the historic House Chamber at the State House. " Education reform, adopted a decade ago, raised standards and closed funding gaps. But it was the first step, not the last." Governor Mitt Romney, 01-15-2004 Press Release   "We're horribly backlogged in renovating and rebuilding old and dilapidated schools," Romney said. "I will propose a series of construction reforms and a refinancing program that will jumpstart over 100 new and remodeled school projects." Governor Mitt Romney, 01-15-2004 Press Release   "Legacy of Learning puts people first, kids first. We'll be putting our money where our future is," Romney said. Governor Mitt Romney, 01-15-2004 Press Release   "There are critical investments we can and should make in our children," Romney said. "But those investments will only be made possible if we continue down the road to reform. I hope you will join with me in working for change." Governor Mitt Romney, 01-16-2004 Press Release   "Families all across the Commonwealth are struggling to pay to send their children to college," Romney said. "The new Adams scholarship will make the dream of obtaining a college education a reality for thousands of Bay State students and keep our most talented students right here in Massachusetts." Governor Mitt Romney, 01-20-2004 Press Release   "We can praise the virtues of parental involvement all day, but until we actually get parents to follow through we are simply singing to an empty music hall. Voluntary programs will not get the job done. It is essential that mandatory training be put in place. This will not be a strain on parent who are already hard-pressed, as some have suggested. This is mandatory counseling they are already receiving. We are simply updating it with information they will need to make their child's education a success." Governor Mitt Romney, 01-21-2004 Press Release   "I am committed to unlocking the potential of every child, no matter which school they attend," Romney said. "Our children cannot wait for slow, methodic changes. They need our help now and this report will serve as a blueprint for immediate reform." Governor Mitt Romney, 02-25-2004 Press Release   "Let there be no doubt, I will veto any charter school moratorium that reaches my desk," said Romney, appearing at Roxbury Preparatory Charter School with parents of children affected by the proposed moratorium. Governor Mitt Romney, 05-05-2004 Press Release   "Families all across the Commonwealth are struggling to afford to send their children to college," Romney said, during a rare appearance before a meeting of the Board of Higher Education. "The new Adams scholarship will make the dream of obtaining a college education a reality for thousands of Bay State students and keep our most talented students right here in Massachusetts." Governor Mitt Romney, 06-15-2004 Press Release   "Massachusetts has often been at the forefront of educational reform. In the spirit of that reform, less than seven months ago, I stood in the House Chamber surrounded by members of the General Court and asked them in my State of the State address to work with me to 'take every step, to prepare every child, for an ever more competitive future,'" said Romney. He added, "The centerpiece of my Legacy of Learning initiative included an ambitious school building program. Today I am pleased to say that, working with the Legislature, we delivered on that promise." Governor Mitt Romney, 07-28-2004 Press Release   Mitt Romney's education related press releases while governor of Massachusetts.   2003   "Seeing this groundswell of student support only boosts my belief that what we are trying to do in our higher education system is right," Romney said. "I am committed to our plan, which guarantees quality, affordability and accessibility to all of our campuses for all Massachusetts residents." Governor Mitt Romney, 04-07-2003 Press Release   "education reform is working in Massachusetts," Romney said. "I am proud of the progress shown by our students," said Romney. "My Administration will continue to push for high standards that will restore the value of a high school diploma and better prepare our students for life after school." Governor Mitt Romney, 09-03-2003 Press Release   "We need to get our underperforming school districts back on track. It is time for the interests of the entrenched educational bureaucracy to take a back seat to the interests of our children and teachers." Governor Mitt Romney, 10-29-2003 Press Release     Mitt Romney's Wikipedia education Entry In 2004, Governor Mitt Romney established the John and Abigail Adams Scholarship Program to reward the top 25 percent of Massachusetts high school students with a four-year, tuition-free scholarship to Massachusetts' state university or colleges. He has also drafted other education reforms, including the recruitment of 1,000 skilled math and science instructors, bonuses of as much as $15,000 a year for top-performing teachers, and new intervention programs for failing schools.   Additionally, Romney began advocating for a nationwide focus on education through the recruitment of and better pay for math and science teachers, and allowing state governments to take control of underperforming schools after three instead of the six-year period that is now in place.   Speaking of the education provided to minority students, Romney said, "I really believe that the failure of our urban schools and, in some cases our suburban schools, to help minority students achieve the levels that are necessary for success in the workplace is the civil rights issue of our time."   In 1994 Romney, as a candidate for US Senate, pledged to vote to establish a means-tested school voucher program to allow students to attend the public or private school of their choice. He also supported abolishing the federal Department of education and favored keeping control of educational reform at the lowest level, closest to parents, teachers, and the community (Boston Globe review of 1994 campaign issues Mar 21, 2002)   In April of 2006, Romney outlined his 6-point plan for improving the country's education in an Op/Ed in the Washington Times.   Governor Mitt Romney and education Blogs Blogs on education education Essay that I like Brain Training 06-26-05 Call for help Please help me organize the best stuff first. I want it to be comprehensive. Lets links to all the blogs, and anything. education Sub-Categories Abstinence education Charter Schools education Reform] Politics and Schools Mitt Romney's Education:   Undergraduate at Stanford and Brigham Young University (Highest Honors and Valedictorian). J.D. and M.B.A. from Harvard University (Baker Scholar).   Romney graduated from the Cranbrook School in Bloomfield Hills (now Cranbrook Kingswood School). He met his future wife, Ann Davies (born in 1949), when she was at the Kingswood School.   After attending Stanford University for two quarters, Romney served for two and one-half years as a missionary for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in France. Upon returning from his mission, he transferred universities and subsequently received his B.A. with Highest Honors and as valedictorian from Brigham Young University in 1971. In 1975, Romney was awarded an M.B.A. from Harvard Business School and was named a Baker scholar. In 1975 he also received his J.D. cum laude from Harvard Law School.

Governor Romney on Iraq

Gov. Romney Stresses The Importance Of Winning In Iraq And Defeating Radical Islam Globally. "The congressional debate in Washington has largely, and myopically, focused on whether troops should be redeployed from Iraq to Afghanistan, as if these were isolated issues. Yet the jihad is much broader than any one nation, or even several nations. ... The jihadist threat is the defining challenge of our generation and is symptomatic of a range of new global realities." (Gov. Mitt Romney, "Rising To A New Generation Of Global Challenges," Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

Iraq Questions for Governor Mitt Romney

1. George Stephanopoulos
1. Do you keep Bush or let him go?
2. But how do you explain why all that planning wasn't done ?
3. Yet, you support the president's decision to send more troops right now ?
2. Are you confident the surge is going to work?
3. Bill O Reilly
1. Would you agree that we can't stop the Iraqi from killing each other?
4. Tom Bevan
1. What's your impression of the job Rumsfeld did ?
2. Do you believe it's still fixable at this point?
3. What happens if Iraq is not successful?
5. Chris Wallace
1. Where do you disagree with Bush on Iraq ?
6. Wolf Blitzer
1. Do you have a time frame in mind?
7. Hugh Hewitt
1. Do you support sending more troops into that country?
8. Robert B Bluey
1. Do you think right now the US is losing the war in Iraq?
9. Katherine Jean Lopez
1. What did you make of the Iraq Study Group?
10. Mary Katharine Ham
1. What do you think about Harry Reid saying the war is lost ?
11. Greta Van Susteren
1. Would you have gone into Iraq?
2. Do you think enough questions were asked in March of 2003 ?
12. [1st Debate
1. Should we be in Iraq when the American people do not victory is possible?
13. ''2nd Debate''
1. Can you foresee any circumstances under which you would pull out of Iraq without leaving behind a stable political and security situation?

Governor Mitt Romney on Iraq

ABC'S GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: "National security, you're a management consultant again. You've come into the United States looking at the commander-in-chief. Do you keep him or let him go?"

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, you have to look at Iraq and Iraq was superbly executed in terms of taking down Saddam Hussein's government. But I think everybody recognizes, from the president to Tony Blair to Secretary Rumsfeld that post the period of major conflict, we had major problems in the way we've managed the war in Iraq, and that has contributed to much of the difficulty we have today. It was under-planned, under-prepared, under-staffed, too low a level of troops, under-managed."

STEPHANOPOULOS: "But how do you explain why all that planning wasn't done? President Bush is a Harvard MBA, too."

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, everybody has their own management style and their own approach and I respect enormously the approach other people. Mine is just different. And if you read "Cobra II" and "Assassins' Gate" and "Looming Tower" and some of the reports of the events leading up not only to 9/11, but to the conflict itself, there's a sense that we really weren't ready for the post major conflict period. And that has resulted in a blossoming of the sectarian violence, of insurgents within the country and from without, and a setting which is a very troubled, difficult position."

STEPHANOPOULOS: "Yet, you support the president's decision to send more troops right now."

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Yeah."

STEPHANOPOULOS: "How much time do you give it to work?"

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, it's not years. I think you're going to know within months."

STEPHANOPOULOS: "Mayor Giuliani said the other night he's not confident it's going to work. Are you?"

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, you know, I think it's hard to predict whether this troop surge will work, but I'm absolutely confident it's the right thing to do."

Press Releases

• Jan 10, 2007; Governor Mitt Romney on Iraq

Quotes

2007

• "She can do what she likes – but I take exception to her conclusions. I don't think we should run our foreign policy based upon elections, election schedules or anything of that nature. We should look at the interests of America and our friends and our citizens and our solders and do what it's our collective best interests. This president has taken action which he believes is calculated to make America a safer land. We should not make decisions based on an election schedule...I would not move to those choices unless we were convinced there was no prospect of success with the current strategy...A number of mistakes have been made and those mistakes have contributed to some of the challenges we now face...I'm glad we're seeing a change in strategy. I'm glad we're adding to the mission of our military the protection of the safety of citizens in and around Baghdad., I don't know how you could rebuild a country and an economy if you have your capital city is literally all covered by what we call a red zone. You know you've failed if you have a red zone. The conduct of our policy in Iraq has been fraught with a number of mistakes."
  • Governor Mitt Romney, Adam Nagourney, The New York Times, January 29th, 2007
    • In Responce to Hillary Clinton, who said that President Bush needed to resolve the war he started before he left office and not hand it off to his successor

2006

• "I wouldn't presume to present a plan different from that of the President. But I believe he was right to take on the war on terror on an aggressive front rather than a defensive front. We toppled the government ... walking away would mean a humanitarian disaster. We're there and we have a responsibility to finish the job." Response to Bill O'Reilly Sept, 27 2006

"I agree with the President: Our strategy in Iraq must change. Our military mission, for the first time, must include securing the civilian population from violence and terror. It is impossible to defeat the insurgency without first providing security for the Iraqi people. Civilian security is the precondition for any political and economic reconstruction.

"In consultation with Generals, military experts and troops who have served on the ground in Iraq, I believe securing Iraqi civilians requires additional troops. I support adding five brigades in Baghdad and two regiments in Al-Anbar province. Success will require rapid deployment.

"This effort should be combined with clear objectives and milestones for U.S. and Iraqi leaders.

"The road ahead will be difficult but success is still possible in Iraq. I believe it is in America's national security interest to achieve it."

• Governor Mitt Romney has been to Iraq.
• If you go to Google Video and type Mitt Romney, you will find this video, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4362623183954478320&q=tvshow%3ACharlie_Rose, The Governor Mitt Romney interview takes about 20 min. If you just want to watch the part about this topic, go to this portion of the video: Iraq: 20:05 Min

Romney on Iraq Videos

Governor Romney On The War In Iraq

Thursday, May 03, 2007 08:29 EST

Link to YouTube Video #1
Link to YouTube Video #2
Link to YouTube Video #3
Link to YouTube Video #4
Link to YouTube Video #5
Link to YouTube Video #6

Mitt Romney talks about China

http://myclob.pbwiki.com/Competing+with+Asia

Governor Mitt Romney and Asia


Quotes from Governor Mitt Romney on Asia

* "China and Asia are on the move economically and technologically. They are a family oriented, educated, hard-working, and mercantile people. We must be ready and able to compete. This means ensuring our children are educated to compete in this new market, our trade laws are fair and balanced, and our economy and tax laws welcome new investment. If America acts boldly and swiftly, the emergence of Asia will be an opportunity. Trade and commerce with these huge new economies can further strengthen our economy and propel our growth. If America fails to act, we will be eclipsed."
o Governor Mitt Romney,



* "We have to keep our markets open or we go the way of Russia and the Soviet Union, which is a collapse. And I recognize there are some people who will argue for protectionism because the short-term benefits sound pretty good, but long term you kill your economy, you kill the future. What you have to do in order to compete on a global basis long term is invest in education, invest in technology, reform our immigration laws to bring in more of the brains from around the world, eliminate the waste in our government. We have to use a lot less oil. These are the kinds of features you have to invest in, you have to change in order to make ourselves competitive long term."
o Governor Romney, Kudlow and Company, March 22, 2006



“Our generation has not had a Sputnik moment…yet. But our Sputnik is on its way. It is coming from Asia. One of the great developments of our time is the economic emergence of China, India, and other nations of Asia. Their poverty is thankfully being reduced. And new opportunities for our employers are opening, but so are new challenges. Asia is not content with making our Christmas tree ornaments: they want to build commercial jets and MRI machines, create software and breakthrough drugs. They are planning for the innovation and technical capital of the world to move from America to Asia.”

“And it is on its way. Corporate investment in Asia is exploding. CEO’s in my high tech state tell me they plan to transfer major operations there, not for the low cost, but because of the highly educated, highly motivated and plentiful workforce. Bill Gates reports that Microsoft’s new ideas come increasingly from Beijing.”

“We take comfort in the fact that we spend many times as much as Asian nations on R&D but don’t forget that our engineers cost about ten times as much as theirs.”

“Two decades ago, American citizens and Asian citizens were awarded about the same number of Ph.D.s annually in physical science and engineering—about 5,000. Today, 4,400 US citizens receive those Ph.D.s compared with 24,900 Asian citizens.”

“America and America’s youth are less and less competitive. Yes, fixing our schools is a social responsibility. It is also a national economic and national security necessity.”

* Governor Mitt Romney, Oral Testimony of Governor Mitt Romney House Committee on Education and the Workforce

"Now America is also under attack economically if you will. Not really an attack but we got some challenges, some opportunities, but also an attack. I had lunch not long ago with the chief executive officer of one of our major corporations. He said something which gave me some concern. He said you know we've always lost low-end jobs in the United States. We've seen low-end jobs go to other countries. But now we're seeing high-end jobs--engineering jobs, software jobs, technical jobs. And I asked him, well you're a big employer here in Massachusetts, ten years from now how many of your manufacturing jobs--this is a high tech manufacturer--will still be in Massachusetts? He said 10 percent; 90 percent will move to Asia. I said why are they moving to Asia? Is it because of the low wage rates over there? He said no, it's not wage rates, it's because they're able to have an educated workforce with the skills we need and their suppliers are making cutting edge technology products. That's where we have to be to get those products. I said that can't possibly be true."

"Then I read some books about what's happening in China. Do you realize China is graduating five times the number of engineers that we're graduating in this country. Only 15 years ago the Asian citizens of the world and the U.S. citizens graduated about the same number of PhDs in math and physical science a year--about 4,500 a year. This last year we graduated about 4,700 American, United States citizen PhDs in math and in physical sciences and the Asian countries graduated 24,900. Indeed it's a place committed to higher education, to entrepreneurialism. This is a group of folks who are highly ambitious, who are committed and this is a nation which is thankfully coming out of poverty, China is."

"It represents a huge opportunity for American employers, but it also represents a competitive threat. And we're going to have to be serious about waking up to that threat. I remember what Will Rogers said. He said even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there. And America for too long has just been sitting there. We got to get serious about what we're facing on a global basis."

"Let me tell you some things we need to do."

"Labor. Labor needs to recognize that it needs to be just as concerned about the viability of the companies where they work as they are about get more money for themselves..."

* Governor Mitt Romney, 06-03-2005, NH Federation of Republican Women's Lilac Dinner


China and Asia Debate:

* China and Asia are on the move economically and technologically. America must be ready and able to compete with Asia.

Policy Briefing: Governor Romney's Global Initiative For Values and Freedom

Thursday, Jun 21, 2007

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Kevin Madden (857) 288-6390

Key Excerpts (As Prepared For Delivery):

Governor Romney: "I know that our liberal friends shake their head when a conservative talks of a nuclear Iran, or bio-terror, or global Jihad. But for conservatives like me, facing reality is not a source of fear. It is a source of confidence. I am convinced that America - and our friends - can overwhelm any threat, but only if we acknowledge it, confront it, and respond thoughtfully and strategically." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At The AEI World Forum, Beaver Creek, CO, 6/21/07)

Governor Romney: "But the integration, sustainability, and breadth of this war against violent Jihad must now take on a new dimension. We must move from tactics to strategy." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At AEI World Forum, Beaver Creek, CO, 6/21/07)

Governor Romney: "I believe America must establish a Special Partnership Force, with a core leadership drawn from Army Special Forces personnel training in working with civilian governments and Intelligence personnel. This force would work hand-in-glove with local host governments. Together, in partnership, they would seek to target and separate terrorists from the local population, and to disrupt and defeat them. They would have the authority to call in all elements of civil assistance and humanitarian aid. And, where they felt it was necessary, they could call in Delta and SEAL resources. Their goal is to build national institutions of stability and freedom, and to promote the rule of law and human rights." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At AEI World Forum, Beaver Creek, CO, 6/21/07)

Click Here To View Governor Romney's PowerPoint Presentation: http://www.mittromney.com/News/Photo-Albums/AEI_PowerPoint  

Governor Romney's Global Initiative For Values And Freedom:

Today, Governor Romney Outlined His Global Initiative For Values And Freedom – A Comprehensive Strategy To Defeat Radical Jihad, Ensure American Security And Advance Freedom And Human Rights Across The Globe. To defeat the global jihadist threat, Governor Romney believes we must have a truly global strategy that combines our efforts with others, brings more tools of our national power to bear and implements specific, tailored strategies for every nation at risk. The strategy includes the creation of a new force to undermine jihadist efforts and win hearts and minds in contested areas.

Governor Romney Will Create The Special Partnership Force (SPF) To Mobilize All Elements Of Our National Power In Contested Areas To Defeat Jihadists. To meet today's challenges, we must mobilize and integrate all elements of national power in unstable areas where traditional civilian agencies cannot operate effectively and traditional military power alone cannot succeed. The Special Partnership Force will integrate all elements of national power under a new force with leadership drawn from a core group of our Army Special Forces trained to work with civilian governments and intelligence personnel to form a new capability that is: 

- Focused On Locally-Targeted Efforts To Win Support In The Community While Identifying, Isolating And Eliminating Terrorist Elements. 
- Highly Integrated And Able To Mobilize All Elements Of National Power, Including Humanitarian And Development Assistance And Rule Of Law Capacity Building. 
- Closely Coordinated In Partnership With Local Governments. 
- Intelligence Driven. 
- Agile And Flexible In Its Operations. 
- A Sustainable Effort In Contested Areas And Sanctuaries Of Jihadist Groups.

The SPF Will Build On A Long History Of Successful Efforts Against Terrorists And Insurgent Groups. While a new capability, this force draws on the lessons learned from a long history of successful efforts against terrorist and insurgent groups, including U.S. efforts under the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in World War II, post-9/11 efforts in Afghanistan, and recent Special Forces efforts in the Philippines.

As Part Of His Strategy, Governor Romney Will Strengthen American Capabilities And Revitalize Partnerships. America must move beyond our response to 9/11 and build a foundation for future security by acting to: 

- Protect The Homeland: While there has been much emphasis on protecting facilities and responding to attacks, a key priority must be prevention. Today, protecting the homeland must begin far from home. Intelligence and law enforcement efforts able to address threats before they reach our shores must be a priority for U.S. and international action. This will demand new U.S. capabilities, stronger international alliances and integration of our federal actions with international, state and local efforts. 

- Strengthen Intelligence By Eliminating Bureaucracy And Moving Resources To The Field: During the Clinton Administration, our intelligence community was critically weakened. The CIA workforce was slashed by almost 20% and recruitment reduced dramatically, undermining effective human intelligence. We have started to restore resources but Washington's response has focused on creating a new, expanded and duplicative bureaucracy in the Directorate of National Intelligence. We need to eliminate duplicative efforts, revitalize recruitment and prioritize efforts. 

- Strengthen The Military: The Clinton Administration also devastated our military capabilities and left us dangerously unprepared. Today we need to add at least 100,000 more troops and commit to spending at least 4% of our Gross Domestic Product to the defense of our country. Promises to support our troops mean little without devoting the resources needed for the equipment, modernization, training, and health care that is critical to our military and their families. 

- Strengthen Civilian Efforts And Strategic Planning: Many of our civilian national security and foreign policy structures were created decades ago. The lack of adequate planning and preparation for Iraq is one illustration of the breakdown of these Cold War capabilities. We need to ensure our civilian instruments have the ability to build joint efforts among our civilian agencies, and we need to empower Regional Deputies with clear lines of authority, budgets and responsibility to develop and execute regional plans and strategies. The National Security Council (NSC) needs strengthened capabilities to strategically integrate all elements of national power. NSC staff must be empowered and accountable for reaching out to divergent viewpoints and challenging policies and proposals. 

- Strengthen Global Alliances: The failure of efforts such as the United Nations Human Rights Council has given multilateralism a bad name. But America's strength is amplified when it is combined with the strength of other nations. We need to expand alliances such as NATO and efforts among the world's leading nations to face the new threat of radical Jihad and increase our homeland security. We need to build global and regional capacities and networks of law enforcement and intelligence officials to confront Jihadists and other transnational threats. 

- Launch A New Type Of Marshall Plan Unifying Non-Military Sources Of Power To Support Moderate Muslims: As President, Governor Romney will call together our Middle East allies and the major nations of the developed world to establish a Partnership for Prosperity and Progress. This Partnership will assemble the resources of all developed nations to assure that threatened Islamic states have public schools, micro-credit and banking, the rule of law, human rights, basic health care, and competitive economic policies. Resources would be drawn from public and private institutions, and from volunteers and NGOs.

GS Gregory said...

My Romney Experience
Romney does not just talk about problems; he fixes them. In 2001, I attended a training meeting for thousands of Olympic volunteers where Romney gave an inspiring speech. Afterwards, the parking lot exiting into a busy street was so backed up that hardly anyone moved for 20 minutes. Suddenly, traffic began to flow. Upon arriving at the exit, I saw why the gridlock had ended. In what is probably the purest example of leadership I have ever witnessed, there was Mitt Romney, the CEO of the Olympic Games, directing traffic in the middle of a frenetic six-lane road. He did not send an aide; he did not form a 'gridlock amelioration' planning committee. Romney headed into the traffic personally, and solved the problem effectively and immediately.

GS Gregory said...

During the Olympics, I was driving with the President of the Italian Ski Federation. He asked me how I thought the Games were going. I replied, "I think pretty well." He responded, "No. These are definitely the best organized and best operated Games ever. And you can take it from me. I have been to every one for nearly the last 40 years." Such efficient administration and excellent operations are the result of Mitt Romney's tremendous leadership.

Once Romney declared his candidacy, I estimated that Mitt had better than even odds of becoming the next US President. I expect Romney to win this contest because he has been successful in essentially everything he has ever done.

Consider Romney's historical trend:
- Education: Harvard MBA Baker Scholar & Harvard J.D. cum laude, BYU graduate with Highest Honors
- Career: Launched hundreds of impressive companies, such as Staples, Domino's and Brookstone; led one of the world's most prestigious management consulting firms; earned billions of dollars for others
- Olympics: Led one of the best organized and financially successful Olympic Games
- Family: Raised five productive boys and maintained a single, successful marriage while also serving in his faith
- Politics: Won as a Republican the Governorship of Massachusetts where Romney took every possible measure to protect the institution of marriage; now Romney looks to be the leader in key early states like Iowa and New Hampshire while possibly also leading in delegate-rich states like California.