Privatizing Schooling and Policy Making

EPXXXX10.1177/0895904814528794Educational PolicyAnderson and Donchik 528794research-article2014 Article Educational Policy 2016, Vol. 30(2) 322 –364 Privatizing Schooling © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: and Policy Making: The sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0895904814528794 American Legislative epx.sagepub.com Exchange Council and New Political and Discursive Strategies of Education Governance Gary L. Anderson1 and Liliana Montoro Donchik1 Abstract In this article, we examine the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) as an example of a unique node within larger policy networks composed of new policy entrepreneurs (e.g., venture philanthropists, think tanks, private “edubusinesses” and their lobbyists, advocacy organizations, and social entrepreneurs). These new policy networks, through an array of new modalities of governance and political and discursive strategies, have come to exert an impressive level of influence on public policy in the last 30 years in the United States. We describe and analyze several model education bills that ALEC has promoted and describe the political and discursive strategies ALEC employs. We found that these strategies, which are employed by corporate leaders and largely Republican legislators, are aimed at a strategic alliance of neoliberal, neoconservative, libertarian, and liberal constituencies with the goal of privatizing and marketizing public education. Keywords policy formation, politics of education, educational reform, governance 1New York University, New York, NY, USA Corresponding Author: Gary L. Anderson, New York University, 100 Bleecker St. 12E, New York, NY 10012, USA. Email: [email protected] Downloaded from epx.sagepub.com by guest on February 5, 2016 Anderson and Donchik 323 In rapid succession, laws were passed in three different states that caused national protests. In Wisconsin, the new law was aimed at limiting the rights of public sector unions; In Florida, it was the Stand Your Ground law that made George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin household names; and in several states, Pennsylvania’s being the most comprehensive, voter ID laws were passed that some claimed were a thinly veiled attempt to take Democratic voters off the roles. Journalists around the country began connecting the dots and identified a little known organization, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), as a central culprit in all three cases. What they often did not say was that ALEC did not act alone, but rather was part of a large and proliferating network of new policy actors who have over the last four decades worked largely behind the scenes to accrue significant policy influence at the state and national levels. Still, the fact that ALEC was highly influential in setting new policy agendas in multiple states across policy sectors points to the importance of studying its successful political and discursive strategies. While not as controversial as other of ALEC’s task forces, its Education Task Force is quietly sponsoring bills in state legislatures that promote a particular set of education policies informed by a free- market, libertarian ideology. New Policy Entrepreneurs and New Policy Networks In the new world of educational reform, it has become apparent that the old interest group politics of the era of the Keynesian Welfare State have shifted as new policy actors and networks have entered the political arena (Ball, 2008, 2012). In the post–World War II decades until the 1980s, U.S. educators, represented by their professional associations and unions, had less com- petition from other policy actors and, therefore a more significant voice in education policy (DeBray, 2006). These interest groups were also part of a knowledge regime based on what Harvey (2005) calls “embedded liberalism,” that is, markets, personal freedoms, and individual choices were embedded in regulatory and social welfare policies aimed—in theory, at least—at a common good. The schooling of low-income children was viewed as embedded in out-of-school societal supports. Today educators are competing with a new neoliberal knowledge regime promoted by wealthy philanthropists, corporate-funded think tanks, private “edubusinesses” and their lobbyists, and other policy entrepreneurs (Ball, 2009; Scott, 2009). These relatively recent policy players have formed powerful policy networks aimed at disembedding markets and individuals from regulatory policies and social welfare protections. Schooling is viewed as Downloaded from epx.sagepub.com by guest on February 5, 2016 324 Educational Policy 30(2) disembedded from out-of-school factors that impact children (Berliner, 2009). This process of disembedding requires new policies and new ways of thinking about the individual and society. While we will refer to these networks as neoliberal, they are actually a strategic alliance that draws from proponents of neoclassical economics, social conservatives, libertarians, and liberals. New neoliberal policy networks have three interconnected goals: (1) a critique of and attempt to change public perception of current policies and the creation of a new “common sense” (Gramsci, 1971; Lakoff, 2004); (2) the creation of new policies that dismantle the current infrastructure of embedded liberalism and its replacement by libertarian, free market-friendly policies (Friedman, 1962; Hill, 2010); and (3) the privatization of the policy process itself (Ball, 2012; Brenner & Theodore, 2002). These three goals form the basic conceptual framework for our analysis of ALEC. There is some research that identifies these networked policy actors and some of the new forms of networked governance they are employing to gain influence (Anderson, 2009; Ball, 2008, 2009; Henry, 2011; Miskel & Song, 2004; Saltman, 2010; Scott, 2009; Scott & DiMartino, 2009: Williamson, 2012). Some education policy scholars are also beginning to produce critical scholarship on specific policy entrepreneurs and nodes of new policy networks (see Saltman, 2009, on Eli Broad; Kovaks & Christie, 2009, on the Gates Foundation; Coffield, 2012, on McKinsey and Company; Heilig & Jez, 2010, on Teach for America; and Miron, Urschel, Yat Aguilar, & Dailey, 2011, on the Education Management Organizations [EMO]). While their suc- cess at privatizing significant portions of public education is well docu- mented, less is known about how and to what extent they have privatized the policy process itself. This privatization of public policy goes beyond private citizens using their considerable wealth to influence policy, and even beyond the usual corporate lobbying. In the case of ALEC, legislators and corporate leaders sit down together to write public policy, making ALEC an important and unique node of this broader neoliberal policy network. We have chosen to study ALEC and its role in privatizing public education and the policy process for several reasons. First, it is a powerful policy advocacy organization that has flown under the radar for decades, and, other than journalistic accounts, has not been closely studied. Second, a cache of 800 model or template bills produced by ALEC were recently made available by the Center for Media and Democracy, presenting a unique opportunity to study trends across bills. Third, it is a unique policy organization that com- bines several older modalities of governance (special interest lobbying and advocacy) while it also exemplifies many of the newer modalities of governance, such as its use of internal “partnerships,” its location as a node within Downloaded from epx.sagepub.com by guest on February 5, 2016 Anderson and Donchik 325 larger policy networks, its “think tank” status, its complex or creative political and discursive strategies, and its largely successful attempt to privatize the policy process. The central questions that guided the study were the following: Which issues has ALEC focused on in education over the last 20 years? What are the themes that tie ALEC’s model bills together and what is the nature of the knowledge regime ALEC is promoting? What political and discursive strategies does ALEC deploy to effectively promote its neoliberal ideological agenda? Through content and discourse analysis, we will analyze ALEC’s model bills and political and discursive strategies, and its importance as both a networked policy entrepreneur and new modality of governance in education that has made important inroads into discrediting embedded liberalism and promoting a free-market, neoliberal knowledge regime (Aasen, Proitz, & Sandberg, 2014). New Modalities and Strategies of Governance Most Americans are familiar with the influence of powerful lobbyists on Capital Hill and the revolving door of politicians and private sector CEOs. Most are aware, particularly in the wake of the Citizens United Supreme Court decision that gave corporations the rights of individuals and declared money a form of free speech, that our elections and government are flooded with mass amounts of cash and influence peddling. However, this growing privatization of the policy process also takes place through corporate-funded new policy networks aimed at influencing policy discourses as well as the bills that are introduced into the state legislatures. This process of influence is accomplished not only through bringing together powerful public and private sector actors but also through new modalities of governance and effec- tive political and discursive strategies. While modalities and strategies sometimes overlap,

Load more