We were having dinner with a friend this week when the 2010 governor’s race came up. Our friend seemed to be leaning towards Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann because he was concerned about Neil Abercrombie’s relative lack of executive experience, echoing a key bit of Hannemmann campaign rhetoric.
It got me thinking about the issue of experience. After all, Neil has well over 30 years of political experience at the county, state, and federal levels. It’s true that, unlike Hannemann, he hasn’t served as mayor. But he’s been a successful legislator and congressman, and that’s not a bad thing.
In the U.S. House of Representatives with its 435 members, Neil has successfully gotten things done by finding ways to work with others. Or, perhaps, to get others to work with him. His philosophy has always been to understand where the other person is coming from and then provide them with their own reasons to cooperate towards a common goal.
As mayor, Hannemann has pretty much ditched the “cooperating with others” approach and relied instead on bullying his own agenda forward. Dropping Mufi into the governor’s seat would mean more of the same political bullying but this time on steroids, given Hawaii’s centralized system which concentrates power in the governor’s hands. I don’t think it’s a pretty picture.
So I do think the question of executive and legislative experience is relevant. I just don’t think it necessarily works in favor of Mayor Hannemann.
Speaking of experience, I have to confess being extremely uneasy with the idea of promoting a non-educator to the post of Superintendent of Education. That seems a very bad idea, whatever Kathy Matayoshi’s skills as an administrator. Educational issues, along with educational values and professional perspectives, are vital and should drive the educational system. When the buck stops, it needs to stop with someone whose professional background, training, and experience has been in education. A Superintendent of Education can hire administrators to handle the purely technical decisions, but education needs to be at the top of the bureaucratic pyramid.
Or so it seems to me.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I go back and forth on my opinion on whether an educator should be the head of the Dept of Ed. As a scientist, I value a person with scientific training educating my children in science and math much, much more than someone with a degree in Education. So I have to wonder if maybe it is better to have an administrator in the top administration, rather than an educator. That said, I also value experience in the local environment (here the schools) and it makes me nervous to have an administrator with very, very little experience working in the education environment being the Superintendant.
Kinda surprised that you did not comment on the circumstances leading up to Ms. Matayoshi’s appointment as acting superintendent. She just joined the DOE in July, has held several high level politically appointed positions and is from a prominent politically connected family. A seasoned political analyst such as you are knows that the circumstances suggest that it ensuring that Kathryn got the Superintendent’s job was planned long ago. But to what end, Ian? Please speculate as to the powers that are behind the move and what is their ultimate purpose?
You really see Neil as a hand holding “hey let’s all get along” and love love love kinda leader?? Really?? Actually Ian, most people I know see him as a screamer and the bully you continually maintain that Mufi is. He is one of many in the U.S. House, so it may be a stretch to personally credit Neil for any particular accomplishments.
Nonsense! I’ve visited Washington on numerous occasions over the past 20 years and Neil is liked and respected by colleagues of both parties.
For most of Congressman Abercrombie’s career in the House, he was in the minority party. To get things accomplished, he HAD to learn to work with the other side of the aisle. And he did so successfully. Remember, nothing, nothing Senator Inouye passes on the Senate side becomes law without someone getting it passed on the House side. That’s been Congressman Abercrombie task for 20 years, and he’s done it quietly.
I gotta say Ian the “political bully” aspect is a quality that, previous to the Lingle administration, I’d never really considered except as a personality trait. But considering, as you say, the incredible almost unique power vested in the governor in Hawai`i that she has abused the thought of Mufi at Washington Place is truly terrifying.
On DOE, I don’t know Kathy Matayoshi at all. Perhaps she would be a good Supt. Most likely, the rest of the DOE doesn’t know her either, she has hardly been there. It seems to me that one aspect of Pat Hamamoto’s success has been that she came from the system and knows it and the others who are in it. And they know and respected her. That’s important in a dysfunctional system where the superintendent’s orders can be short-circuited at any level on the way down if someone doesn’t want to play along.
On Mufi, aside from bullying, I question his skill as a mayor. The rail project is based on the described bullying, frequent complaints that the people are not involved or disregarded show that it hasn’t been advanced through skillful leadership. Paying big bucks for propaganda ads is also not leadership.
And you have highlighted problems with the garbage contract. If the contractor decides to walk away from the garbage, Mufi will have, well, something on his face. Are the rail contracts he is rushing so furiously forward with better conceived than this one? If the approvals don’t come in, well we owe these contractors something, or will they sue? Again, a bully perhaps, but not necessarily a leader.
Sorry, I don’t like either choice. To me, the 1986 campaign is like yesterday. YUK!!
Mufi, Abercrombie, Matayoshi, Spellingbi. Doesn’t make the slightest bit of difference. Given the divisiveness and distrustfulness of the Hawaiian electorate at present, I doubt that even the elite executive firm Yahweh, Yeshua and Buddha could get anything done – or get it done without so many compromises and encumbrances that it ceased to be worth doing.
Im surprised, Ian, that you would dismiss Kathy so easily. Some of the prior Supers were barely in the classroom before they moved into admin, and they certainly did not come into the job having already been a successful director of a major state department. They certainly werent lawyers, which isnt the end all, but it dont hurt either. Kathy took an important but archaic department and modernized and significantly improved it, practically made it self sufficient. Isnt that what we want for DOE?
So, just for kicks, lets see what you think if we substitute the word “Educational” for “Public Safety”, what do we get? Do you similarly think that only a person who knows public safety issues, along with public safety values and professional perspectives, are vital and should drive our public safety system? When the buck stops there, does it need to similarly stop with someone whose professional background, training, and experience has been only in public safety, the MQs you are requiring of Kathy? So, therefore, can I conclude that you also believe that only a corrections employee who saw the inside of a prison could possibly be a viable candidate for that department too?
Just curious.
Actually, in terms of corrections, what our state puts in a Dept. of Public Safety, my answer would be a strong “Yes”. But a corrections professional doesn’t mean someone who has worked as an adult correctional officer. I mean someone who has professional training in the field of corrections, and understands the range of best practices that have been developed.
A major reason that our whole prison system has had so many problems over the years, from the youth correctional facility and detention home to Halawa, is that the state has not sought out professionals capable of reforming our institutions.
So, yes, public safety is an example, as is recreation (the city has been routinely ignoring the charter provision requiring the parks and rec director to have professional training and experience), etc.
This is the other side of another issue, the poor job we do in ongoing training and development of agency staff.
Ian, don’t leave the last point. Until we do a better job of training mid-level civil servants and create better transition programs for incoming department heads and deputies, we will not return to the day when civil service was a sought after and highly regarded career. We experimented with HIMAG for a while and although it stumbled at first, it was a good idea with a good future. Too bad we ended the idea prematurely. Other states, e.g. Massachusetts, require much more pre-education before advancement, and we should as well. Highly trained, and equally important, highly regarded civil servants are an absolute necessity.
I don’t know if it’s an absolute requirement that someone needs a background in education to run a school system. After all, there are many terrible school districts in the U.S. run by people with education backgrounds.
For sure, it’s the traditional pathway but if you look at other departments, it’s not necessary to be an M.D. to run the health department, have an engineering background to run the transportation department, have a degree in labor and industrial relations to run the labor department, etc.
Kathy Matayoshi is no political hack. As Director of DCCA she brought efficiency and accountability to a struggling agency. As I understand, by the last two years of her term, DCCA did not take any general fund money; not a penny. She ran it like a business, and successfully. And although we in the business community were paying higher fees, we appreciated the timeliness and accuracy that her administration brought to this important agency. I expect she will bring the same to the DOE.
Thanks, Charles and Haehae. Sorry, Ian, I think you’re wrong on this one. In reverse, Kathy can surround herself with education professionals, since that’s your primary concern. Give Kathy a chance, Ian. I think she’ll impress you in no time.
Hipoli, you’re welcome. 🙂
Actually, I’m not pushing for Matayoshi simply because I don’t know her and to make her the permanent supe without going through a thorough search does a disservice to us all.
My only point is that not being an educator should not be the reason to eliminate a candidate for the position.
Ian has never been a fan of Hannemann. But he neevr really nails it down except for ‘I don’t like his style.’ he has certianly gotten more substantial things done in 6 years then Harris did in 10.
And I’ve dealt the past decade with the rest of the Congressioanl delegation and their staff. They can’t stand Neil! His yelling tirades are stuff of legend in DC. Inouyes been salivating at the idea of replacing him with Hanabusa for years now. Did Neil get more done then Mazie in the same time period? Yup. But since Mazies done nothing that wasn’t that hard…
Sorry Ian, but when people casually drop the “bully” label on Hannemann it seems like a cheap shot. While his political enemies have been pushing this tag for years, it seems to have very little basis in fact. The idea that it “fits” a person of Samoan heritage and seems to work speaks to the latent racist tendencies of both the perpetrators and the gullible among the community in general.