Hillary Rodham Clinton’s role in policymaking is considered unconventional for a First Lady, but it doesn’t come as a surprise to those who have observed her work on education and child-welfare issues. One example is the health-care task force she leads, which shares similarities with the education-reform panel she chaired in Arkansas. However, the size and scope of the health-care task force are much larger. During her husband’s governorship, there was evidence that Mrs. Clinton had a hand in shaping education policies in his administration.
There have been rumors that Mrs. Clinton is routinely consulted on education issues that are forwarded to the White House, but these claims could not be verified. However, sources in the Education Department have stated that Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley discusses pending issues with Mrs. Clinton. Marshall S. Smith, who is set to be nominated as undersecretary of education, clarified that Mrs. Clinton is not the final decision-maker but has been involved in the process. It seems that Mrs. Clinton also played a role in selecting top appointees for the departments of Labor, Education, and Health and Human Services. Some attribute Donna E. Shalala’s appointment as head of H.H.S. to Mrs. Clinton’s influence, as they had served together on the board of the Children’s Defense Fund.
Mrs. Clinton’s influence can also be seen in the Administration’s budget and its rhetoric on issues that she has long been passionate about. Sid Johnson, president of the Arkansas Education Association, noted that Bill and Hillary Clinton worked closely together, making it difficult to discern whose ideas belonged to whom. It is widely assumed in Washington circles that Mrs. Clinton played a significant role in shaping policies. When asked during his campaign if his wife would help set education policy in a Clinton Administration, Mr. Clinton responded that he values her expertise and will continue to listen to her.
However, not everyone sees Mrs. Clinton’s powerful role in a positive light. Some conservatives view her as a liberal supporter of big government, concerned that she may steer her husband away from centrist ideas. Some education representatives worry that traditional advocacy channels may fail to reach her. These concerns reflect the views of critics, including those uncomfortable with a nontraditional First Lady.
Nevertheless, the education community generally admires Mrs. Clinton’s background in education. During the campaign, it was often noted that having both Bill and Hillary Clinton in the White House would provide two education advocates. Michael Cohen, an education analyst who now consults for Mr. Riley, praised their involvement in the education-reform movement.
In 1983, Mrs. Clinton herself admitted to having little knowledge about education when Mr. Clinton appointed her to chair a committee tasked with recommending new standards for Arkansas schools. This appointment mirrored Mr. Clinton’s recent decision to assign her to the health-care task force. According to Cora McHenry, executive director of the Arkansas Education Association, Mrs. Clinton’s role was not to be an expert but to keep the committee focused. Her lack of expertise actually proved advantageous as she could ask critical questions and push for new approaches. After months of hearings and deliberations, the committee issued a set of recommendations to improve graduation and curriculum standards, as well as to merge underperforming districts.
Mrs. Clinton had an extensive involvement in various national education committees and boards. In 1987, she served on a panel that recommended expanding and implementing a new governance structure for the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Additionally, she was a member of the W.T. Grant Foundation Commission on Youth and America’s Future, which published a report called "The Forgotten Half" in 1988. This report emphasized the importance of improving occupational training for young people who were not attending college.
Samuel Halperin, the executive director of the commission, noted that Mrs. Clinton recognized the link between older adolescents and the work she had done on issues like child care and the needs of working women. She understood the broader context of these issues. Furthermore, Mrs. Clinton was on the board of directors for the National Center on Education and the Economy, a think tank based in Rochester, N.Y. She worked alongside Ira Magaziner, who chaired a commission that produced a report titled "America’s Choice: High Skills or Low Wages." This report criticized the state of worker training in America and advocated for reforms such as youth-apprenticeship programs. Mrs. Clinton actively promoted this report. Marc S. Tucker, the president of the National Center on Education and the Economy, praised Mrs. Clinton for her ability to create a legislative agenda that the current administration is now pursuing.
In terms of advocacy groups, Mrs. Clinton is closely associated with the C.D.F., which stands for Children’s Defense Fund. She has described Marion Wright Edelman, the president of the C.D.F., as her mentor. Mrs. Clinton served as the chairperson of the C.D.F. board for many years before stepping down during the campaign. She entrusted the leadership role to Ms. Shalala. Mrs. Clinton and her husband made their first post-election appearance in Washington at a C.D.F. fund-raiser. Moreover, the Clinton Administration has proposed substantial funding increases for programs that the C.D.F. has strongly advocated for, including Head Start. A House appropriations aide pointed out that the Clinton budget clearly reflects the C.D.F.’s agenda. The C.D.F. and the administration maintain a close relationship, demonstrated by a recent news conference where Ms. Shalala unveiled a plan to provide free immunizations for all children by 1997. During the conference, Ms. Shalala expressed regret that Hillary Clinton couldn’t be there, as they were fulfilling a promise made to the C.D.F. However, Ms. Shalala clarified in an interview prior to the November election that Mrs. Clinton’s personal agenda might not align completely with that of the C.D.F.
Ms. Shalala emphasized that Mrs. Clinton, coming from a state rather than Washington, might have a different perspective on these issues. She believes Mrs. Clinton has confidence in the ability of state and local governments to collaborate with programs. While Mrs. Clinton will be an advocate for these programs, she will also bring attention to the work being done in communities and will focus on ensuring that these programs can work together effectively.
Lastly, Mrs. Clinton’s association with the C.D.F. has led some to label her as a big-government liberal, advocating for expansive government involvement.
"In both education and healthcare, we do not believe that increased government interference is the solution," he expressed during an interview. Mr. Hurt, who established a local program to assist underprivileged children with private school tuition, presented a range of statistics on Arkansas education to counter the effectiveness of the Clintons’ reforms. The results, however, are a mixture of successes and shortcomings. On the positive side, there have been noteworthy improvements in school curriculum, graduation rates, college admission rates, as well as significant increases in education spending and teacher salaries. However, student test scores have shown only marginal improvements, college entrance exam scores remain stagnant, and over half of Arkansas students require remedial courses upon entering college. Nevertheless, despite previous opposition from teachers regarding the competency test, Arkansas educators commend the reforms and appreciate Mrs. Clinton’s role in implementing them. National education experts who have familiarity with Mrs. Clinton also express similar admiration. "She is undeniably one of the most knowledgeable individuals in the field," stated Albert Shanker, president of the American Federation of Teachers. "This can undoubtedly be advantageous."
Comments are closed.