Now who's standing in the schoolhouse door?
Commentary by Phil Valentine / November 2, 2000

Back in the '60s, a Democrat governor created an image which is now indelibly etched on the American psyche as he stood in the schoolhouse door, refusing to let a young black girl enter. His rationale being that the girl should go to the school for which she was zoned. Never mind that the school for which she was zoned was substandard, not nearly the environment for learning of its white counterpart. The issue was not to upset the status quo. Black students just didn't go to school with white students. Forget the arguments otherwise, that's just the way things were done.

Today we confront a new kind of bigotry. It's what Governor Bush calls "the soft bigotry of low expectations." In some schools, students are shuffled to the next grade regardless of whether they've mastered the material. Too often, those students who are shuffled through are minorities. Societal bigotry dictates that we not expect as much from them because of historical disadvantages among minorities. This so-called compassion hurts only the young students on which it is heaped. The very people who claim to hate bigots give these students the nod in an effort to help them along but they are, in fact, perpetuating the bigotry. That's what liberalism is all about. It's condescending. It's looking down one's nose at a group of people and determining that they are too stupid to help themselves therefore the government must do everything for them. This is how affirmative action, which was meant to open all doors to all people, became a quota system. It evolved to a point where percentages meant more than qualifications or results. The highest profile success story for black people in America is professional sports. If you think about it, this is an area in which there is no such thing as a quota, just affirmative access. When Eddie George was drafted by the Houston Oilers which became the Tennessee Titans, nobody questioned how he got there. In an atmosphere of zero quotas there has never been any doubt why Eddie George is a star.

We should be applying the same standards to educating our children. We should be demanding excellence regardless of race or financial background. But, first, everyone needs equal access to the same tools. I'm convinced that the majority of public schools are good schools. However, there's no denying that some are unacceptable. If I find my children zoned for a bad school, I have the resources to move to a better school zone or send them to private school. Many of the people in the inner city and elsewhere don't have that choice. They're stuck with the school for which they're zoned, even if that school is a bad school. Governor Bush wants to "close the achievement gap, set high standards, promote character education, and ensure school safety." He also wants to hold state programs which receive federal money accountable. "Performance will be measured annually," he says "and parents will be empowered with information and choices." Governor Bush, whose wife is a public school educator, sent his own children to public school. Al Gore, on the other hand, sent his to private school. Now he wants to deny inner city children the same tools he gave his own children. He has vowed to protect the teacher's unions from vouchers. He's vowed to protect the schools from a so-called violation of the separation of church and state (which, by the way, is never mentioned in the Constitution). He's vowed to help everyone and everything except what matters most. Our children. Governor Bush wants to empower parents and children to have the same advantages as Al Gore's children. Al Gore wants you to stay in the school you're zoned for, no matter how bad it might be. Now who's standing in the schoolhouse door?