US Elections

There’s a fascinating article in the Jan/Feb edition of Washington Monthly that looks at the process by which school text books are approved in Texas.  Along with this NPR piece on the influence of the bail bondsman lobby, it’s an excellent reminder of what many consider the overstretch of democracy. The consequences of the Texas School Board election will be felt nation-wide.  These fifteen individuals elected by Texas will effectively set the standard for most school text books, nationwide, for the next decade.

In Texas, as in many US states, a board of education is directly elected.  This board has direct control over educational practises at a state level (some decisions, of course, remain at the school board level).  One of the decisions the Texas board gets to make, once every ten years, is to set standards to which textbook manufacturers must adhere in order to be used in the state.

This year, though, Texas' new standards are having nation-wide effects. The new Texan standards are likely to shape books sold across the country for at least the next four years.

A strange combination of factors has lead to the situation which has given this board so much power.  First of all, California went broke.  Suddenly, the nation's largest text book purchaser- and a liberal one at that- would not be able to buy books until at least 2014. So suddenly the second-largest market had more power than ever- without its liberal counterpart as a mediating force. 

A conservative block were elected, and now hold the balance of power, in the Texas school board.  They have overseen the process by which the standards are set. 

Hide

Now, five years later, attention has turned to the case. This is, in part because of the attention of the media, but also largely because Perry is running for re-election in 2010, and facing off in a tough battle with now-senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson. The case has garnered attention already during the campaign, with Perry's actions drawing criticism from his opponent.

Across the blogosphere, people are watching. This could be the first time, since the death penalty was re-introduced in the United States, that a state has admitted error in executing one of its citizens. Writers are divided over Willingham's guilt, over the quality of his trial, and over Gov. Perry's actions in the case.

Gov. Perry's decisions regarding Willingham could prove harmful to his reelection chances. Just 48 hours before the Texas Forensic Science Board was due to review the Willingham case in October this year, the Governor removed three members of the board and replaced them with hard line conservatives. The Willingham hearings were immediately postponed and may now not take place until 2011, long after Perry's reelection battle is over. 

One of the really interesting elements of this case is the way Hutchinson has framed her response. In accusing Perry of a cover-up, Hutchinson took the opportunity to attack him from the right. She has claimed that Perry's actions were irresponsible and could provide fodder for the anti-death penalty activists. The statement her office released stated:

"The only thing Rick Perry's actions have accomplished is giving liberals an argument to discredit the death penalty. Kay Bailey Hutchison is a steadfast supporter of the death penalty, voted to reinstate it when she served in the Texas House and believes we should never do anything to create a cloud of controversy over it with actions that look like a cover-up." (Source: Wonkette)

Hutchinson used the case to display her own pro-death-penalty bona fides. Texas conservatives are apparently so strongly in favour of the death penalty that a case of possible innocence is presented by Hutchinson not as a tragic miscarriage of justice, but a potential attack on the death penalty. It's a remarkably example of the fierce belief many hold in the necessity of the death penalty

Many questions remain regarding the Willingham case: Does the US Justice system work when the accused has arguably inadequate representation? Did Perry abuse his power? If Willingham was innocent, what would that mean for the death penalty?

The most fundamental question though, and one that deserves to be revisited in an official, rather than journalistic, capacity, is did Cameron Todd Willingham murder his children, or did the state of Texas execute an innocent man?

Hide