Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
415892639
label
[G.I. Bill Op-ed, 7/21/91]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
415892639
contentType
document
title
[G.I. Bill Op-ed, 7/21/91]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13894-019
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Tony Snow Subject Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
415892639
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
d59f32d1d125d08a
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Snow, Tony, Files
Subseries:
Subject File, 1988-1993
OA/ID Number:
13894
Folder ID Number:
13894-019
Folder Title:
[G.I. Bill Op-ed, 7/21/91]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
18
29
2
2
July 21, 1991
MEMORANDUM FOR LAMAR ALEXANDER
ETTA FIELEK
JOHN YAHNER
FROM
TONY SNOW
SUBJECT
G.I. BILL OP-ED
I will apologize in advance for the length and number of
suggestions here: I hope they're useful and not just an
overwhelming nuisance. I think the piece still needs lots of
work -- not because of the writing, but because it reads too much
like a speech, and lacks the sharper focus that op-ed pieces
need.
I'll begin with a few general comments, then move to
specific recommendations, including a suggested outline.
I) General Comments:
A) The missing lede: Readers have to read halfway through
the piece before finally discovering what news editors call the
lede (and spell incorrectly for reasons known only to the gods of
the newsroom). This piece argues 1) That we want to do for
elementary and secondary schools what the GI bill did for
colleges and universities: Give everyone choice; give every
student a chance to attend the best school; 2) that our proposal
will help public and private schools and that much of the money
likely will go to public schools, since the vast majority of
children attend such schools; 3) the Educrats, and especially
teacher union presidents, make wild and inaccurate claims against
us; and 4) the times demand these reforms, and the American
people will get them, with or without our help.
I'd suggest making the points in roughly that order, so the
argument flows more logically.
B) The missing explanation: We don't fully explain what the
GI bill does and is and how people might gain access to its
wonders. The second paragraph seems jargony. Those who don't
stop reading right there will scratch their heads and hope for
enlightenment in paragraphs to come.
Remember that op-ed readers aren't captives: They will jump
away from a piece that does not seize their imaginations. You
REC'D TOO LATE TO FILE-
FILED BY BUSH LIBRARY STAFF
2
must keep the piece moving with clear and compelling examples,
and with language that leaves a reader thinking: Tell me more.
c) The Family Feud Effect: Our insistence on giving
prominence to Shanker and Geiger turns a broad explanation piece
into a rather narrow airing of grievances against two old foes.
I think we should mention them and take on their arguments -- but
they should not appear until the second or third page: They do
not deserve the spotlight. If we make them prominent, we limit
our audience to our supporters and theirs -- people who already
have made up their minds -- and we sweep past the undecided or
confused Americans whom we hope to persuade.
D) What's in it for me?: When we boast about spending
levels, we talk to bureaucrats. We should personalize the
benefits of this program, as we tried in the Maria-David/Jose
piece. This bill makes it possible for a few students to shop
for the best schools. It also will help illustrate the real
benefits of school competition. It's the greatest thing since
McGuffey's reader -- and it will mean that parents tired of
having to send kids to mediocre schools will have the choice of
sending them elsewhere. It also means that mediocre schools will
feel compelled to improve right away. This bill declares an end
to the status quo and helps ring in an era of innovation and
excitement in education -- something we've dared dream before,
but never thought would come to pass.
II) Specific stuff:
A) The Ann Richards lede: Cute, but too cute. If we wish to
mention Democrats, we also must challenge them to make good on
their rhetoric -- and challenge them by name. Otherwise, it
looks as if we're trying to co-opt a Democratic quote.
B) I'm not sure public school support represents a
"gargantuan point,' as we allege in the second graph. We have no
idea where the money will go, and therefore should not make firm
predictions. We can note that most kids attend public schools -
- and many would try simply to switch to better public schools.
We also should note, as I mentioned above, the fact that
competition will force bad schools to improve.
c) On page two, we mention 37 states with choice legislation
and 12 with choice initiatives or proposals under consideration.
Do any of these overlap. If not, why not say that 49 of the 50
states is considering choice, and that our proposal merely
enables people to explore this exciting option? When you note
that 49 states have or soon will hop on the bandwagon, you can
ask the obvious question: If 49 states feel this way, isn't the
educational bureaucracy out of touch?
REC'D TOO LATE TO FILE-
FILED BY BUSH LIBRARY STAFF
3
D) This sentence worries me: "It is the Republican
conservative President who is pushing the revolution and fighting
to spend the money.' I would suggest ending the sentence with
"revolution." The goal is not to spend money. We want a
revolution -- by whatever means available.
Similarly, the reminiscence on page 3 -- the one about
securing merit pay in exchange for tax hikes -- might not send
the right message. We should find better ways of explaining
union resistance to reform.
E) Conclusion: I'd look for a snappier, more visionary
conclusion. This piece at times reads too defensively; it is as
if we're saying: "Don't believe all the nasty things they say
about us. Please?!!" We offer kids a chance to get the best,
and for American education to achieve its historic dream of good
educations for all, so that all might enjoy a fair opportunity to
explore their personal genius and build a better future.
I know my style tends toward confrontation, but I'd suggest
something more direct, like: "George Bush has proposed the most
sweeping revolution in education this century. His education
strategy doesn't just threaten the status quo -- it replaces one-
size-fits-all, take-it-or-leave-it education with a system that
gives parents the power to demand and create better schools --
and build a better future for our entire nation.
"It doesn't much matter what the education establishment
thinks. The American people want these reforms. The only
question is whether the educational establishment will join the
revolution -- or be overtaken by it."
I'm not happy with that rendering, but you get the idea
III) Outline
I) Change/Choice
A) American education's problems -- everyone knows
B) What works: choice/GI bills
II) GI Bill
A) Explain
B) Pilot program -- 500,000 students nationwide
i)
eligibility
ii) duration of pilot
iii) expected results
iv) the importance of opportunity
C) Power to the people: How this program lets parents play a
more direct role in building better schools
D) This program should enable Americans to explore the
possibilities of choice -- something increasing numbers of
Americans want to do -- and could inspire other innovations in
education.
REC'D TOO LATE TO FILE-
FILED BY BUSH LIBRARY STAFF
4
III) The Educational establishment
A) Opposes the GI Bill because it threatens to change a
system that makes life cozy for teachers -- and the future bleak
for too many students
B) How Shanker and Geiger distort the program
C) The reforms aren't intended to weaken any schools;
they're intended to improve all of them
D) Gives power to parents -- not to school authorities.
IV) An Educational system for the 21st Century
A) Many people give lipservice to change: This program will
provide the only kind of change that's worthwhile, change for the
better. (You might have someone dig up a nice quote on this)
B) Reviving public interest and participation in education -
- the great American ideal
c) George Bush's revolution -- the revolution Americans
want, need and deserve.
REC'D TOO LATE TO FILE-
FILED BY BUSH LIBRARY STAFF