Matt Webster has plenty of ideas about public education. Regrettably, for him, few voters are going to actually hear about them.
A father and chief technological officer for Denver-based Inventive Technology Inc., Webster designs e-learning systems and argues that dramatic changes are needed for Denver schools to stay competitive.
“Competition doesn’t come down to playing in a sporting event against other kids,” he explains. “It’s about global competition.”
To facilitate change, he’s decided to run for the District 3 school board seat representing central Denver.
And while no one is questioning his commitment to the race, Webster hadn’t exactly anticipated the cutthroat and high- stakes world of school-board politics.
“I guess in retrospect, it is more important than I thought to raise money,” admits Webster. “I thought I could run this on the grassroots level.”
Webster has raised about $500, all of it from his most devoted supporter – Matt Webster. The leader in this race, Jeannie Kaplan, has reportedly raised about $38,000.
Now, I’m not one who is instantly outraged at the mere mention of money in politics. The words “special interests” aren’t any scarier to me than the words “grass roots” or “teachers unions.”
But when Denver school board candidate Brad Buchanan pulls in almost $70,000 and begins running television commercials, you really have to ask: “This is a school board race, right?”
Jill Conrad, who is opposing Buchanan, has reportedly raised a little over $44,000. A chunk of Conrad’s money comes from the teachers union, which, no doubt, would like to see its will implemented without any interference.
Is this the smartest way for those purportedly interested in serving public education to spend money? As Webster points out, $70,000 could buy a whole lot of computers for students in Denver.
And what does all this money tell us about a candidate, anyway? I won’t try to detail the positions of each one here, since all the top contenders seem dreadfully similar. Apparently they all care about children and/or kids.
So does Webster. He just hasn’t perfected the art of hitting up friends for a couple of thousand bucks a pop. Instead, he casts himself as the first school board candidate of the Digital Age. Webster, according to his biography, is the youngest person ever to receive a Ph.D. in politics/international relations from Princeton and is a successful businessman.
Webster specifically points to technology (his own, coincidentally) that can utilize antiquated computers and network them so anyone in a school can use the same programs.
“Anyone can sit down at any device. That allows spontaneous creativity and learning. A teacher can pull up and say, ‘This is how a rocket works.”‘
Some of the parents in District 3 tell me that strides have already been made in providing technology for students. So, who knows, maybe Webster’s ideas are nothing new at all.
What parents should ask themselves is whether real-life experience and fresh ideas are more valuable to the school board than another cherry-picked educrat complaining about lack of funding.
Does that mean parents should assume that a candidate who is outstanding at raising money is bad for education? No. In fact, it’s reasonable to suppose that a candidate proficient at the art of fundraising takes the job more seriously.
Either way, an escalation in fundraising among low-level candidates is inevitable. And before you know it, some group with “fair” or “progressive” in its name will propose severe limits on contributions in local races. This would also be a mistake.
I’m fairly certain that voters look beyond commercials, yard signs and big money already. But then again, maybe I’m just not cynical enough.
(For more information on the positions of the candidates running for the school board, go to: http://board.dpsk12.org/election_05.shtml)
David Harsanyi’s column runs Monday and Thursday. He can be reached at 303-820-1255 or dharsanyi@denverpost.com.
