Over the years, reporters learn that there are a relative handful of the public officials with whom we deal who can be counted on to expand our understanding of events. These are the men and women who have probed deeply into the forces shaping the country -- or their part of it -- and often anticipate the challenges still to come.
So begins a piece by a person rarely quoted favorably on this site, the "Dean" of "the Village" David Broder. He is writing about someone who has recently, with justification, taken some fire on this site, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack. As a result of the incident with Shirley Sherrod, some here wanted Vilsack to resign or be fired, and many have no idea of the good he has been doing. There is a lot, as you will see in Tom Vilsack in context which I think you might want to read.
But I want to do more than suggest you read Broder. I want to talk about one of the finest men in public life I have met.
Let me back up a bit for those who do not know my history with Tom Vilsack. In the fall of 2005 I received an email from Kevin Thurman, I think then still officially at Blue State digital, who was trying to set up a conference call with education bloggers and the then Governor of Iowa Tom Vilsack. I like many politically aware people knew that Vilsack had been on John Kerry's short list for Veep. I was also aware that while he stayed officially neutral in the 2004 Iowa primary, his wife Christie had made a very public endorsement of Kerry in Des Moines, something that as a Dean supporter had irritated me. So while I was intrigued that a man of some significance might want to hear my ideas on education, I was not necessarily inclined to be friendly. Moreover, the conference call was set for 11:30 on a school day.
I sent back a strongly worded (perhaps obscenity laced might be more accurate) email pointing out that many of us who were in the classroom were teachers. In my case I would be in class overlapping with part of the time, and could not use a school phone for a political conversation regardless of the time. Rather than blowing me off Kevin set up a separate time for myself and Joe Thomas of Arizona, who had raised similar concerns.
We had a conversation that lasted for something over half an hour. Unlike a lot of public figures - and unlike the recent experience of two different groups of teachers in conference calls with the current Secretary of Education Arne Duncan - Vilsack listened to what we had to say, and asked cogent questions, including ending the conversation with another question. Joe and I talked for another 40 minutes and I followed up with an email to Kevin.
When Vilsack posted about the conversation at the website of his Heartland PAC (no relation to the right-wing Heartland Foundation), I posted a response there, and about our conversation at Daily Kos. We began to exchange emails. A few days later Tom posted his first diary at Daily Kos, A Response to TeacherKen and Dailykos Community, which had a long stay on the Rec list and drew a then massive 357 comments.
Tom and I began regularly exchanging emails, perhaps once or twice a week. I mentioned in one if he were ever going to be in DC I'd love to meet him for a drink, a meal, or a cup of coffee. As it turned out he was coming into Arlington for a fundraiser for a friend, and it was at a hotel about a mile from my house. We arranged to meet at a Starbucks on a day in October, he arrived with Kevin and what I presume was an Iowa state trooper. We sat and talked, almost exclusively about education, for around 90 minutes. I asked up front if he were going to run for president, and he told me he had not yet made up his mind, he was considering it.
I pointed him at ideas about education about which he had no knowledge, for example, for early childhood education what is done at Reggio Emilio in Italy. I asked him how he evaluated employees in his governor's office. He proudly told me how they sat down with the employee taking the lead in drafting the goals for the next year. I asked what happened if the goals were not reached, and he said the first thing was to examine the reason why, not merely to consider the employee as deficient. And then asked why a similar approach could not be taken with teachers and he seemed interested. I even suggested that with high school students that could also be part of how we evaluated them, not merely by test scores and he responded that Iowa did not have high school graduation tests and as long as he was governor, they would not. In this I was hearing the influence of his wife Christie, who had taught English and journalism at the high school level for 18 years, with an additional chunk of time as a college teacher.
One other part of that conversation was my noting that the governors had recently had a meeting on education, to which each had brought a business leader. Tom acknowledged that. I asked why each had not brought a teacher, or a principal, or even a student. He looked stunned for a moment, and then said he hadn't thought about it, and doubted any other governor had, but that was a good idea.
After that meeting Tom and I regularly exchanged emails, in part, as he told me in one of the first, because when he recounted our conversation to his wife, Christie told him to listen to me.
I will not recapitulate our entire relationship. When he was the speaker at the National Press Club, he invited me as a guest. When at the end I went up to shake his hand, for a moment he did not recognize me - I look very different with and without a beard, and as I recall he had first seen me with and now I was without. When I spoke his face lit up and he turned to Christie to introduce me with great enthusiasm.
Tom was on my panel on education at the first Yearly Kos in Las Vegas in 2006 (which led to some interesting press coverage, including a long piece by Jeff Zeleny, then working for a Chicago newspaper and a very misguided piece by Ryan Lizza in the New Republic). During 2006 Tom concentrated on helping elect Democrats to state positions, including people like Jennifer Brunner as Secretary of State in Ohio. On his way out the door after two terms as governor, he elected Democrat Chet Culver as his successor, and for the first time in ages saw the Iowa legislature turned to Democratic control, both chambers.
Shortly after the election he became the first Democrat to announce for President - never having run for federal office, he had no campaign account with federal funds, and he needed to be raising money immediately. I originally planned to stay neutral - I knew this community would turn to me for fair evaluation of the many candidates on education. Then came the February 2007 winter meeting of the DNC. Tracy Russo got me accredited as a blogger, but I could not skip school for the Friday portion. Tom was listed as the last of the speakers among the potential candidates, unfortunately after Gravel, who droned on for so long that almost no one was left when Tom finally got on.
Which meant that there was no press coverage of something significant in his remarks. When I saw Tom early that morning as he arrived, he told me that he had decided to come out against reauthorization of No Child Left Behind, which was making him the first candidate to do so. Unbeknownst to Tom I had decided that whoever was first to take that position, I would seriously consider endorsing.
Those there might remember the positive impression Tom made. His campaign was giving out free bags of Iowa popcorn - I remember Jonathan Singer almost not being able to talk, because he was on his third bag. Jeffrey Feldman was sitting next to me in bloggers' row after the event when Tom came through. I called Tom over and introduced him, and he actually talked with and listened to Jeffrey, which Jeffrey noted in his posting about the event.
I went to Tom's breakout session that morning. I met people like Ray Mabus, former governor of Mississippi (and current Secretary of the Navy), who told me in no uncertain terms that Tom was the kind of Democrat whom he could sell in his state. I found out from people that among Tom's supporters in NH was Gary Hirshberg, the founder of Stonyfield Farms Yogurt. I learned that both the governor and a key figure in the legislature were quite favorable to Tom, with the Gary helping raise money and introduce Tom to key business people. I saw Christie again, this time getting a chance to actually have a conversation. I was as impressed as I had been the first time I talked with Tom on the phone.
There was one concern coming out of that breakout. When I raised the question of the amount of money I thought would be necessary, I was told by a key Iowa figure that they thought they could raise a different kind of campaign. I was informed that they would have more commitment cards for the caucuses than anyone had ever seen (they did).
A few weeks later I decided to endorse Tom. I had been invited (comped) to a high value fundraiser at a DC law firm, to which I could not attend as I was sweaty from soccer practice. As I drove home as that event was going on I decided to endorse Tom. I knew he was a longshot - Obama's entry into the race had drawn some important Iowa support. I informed Tom and posted a diary about my support. As I learned from others in the campaign, Tom was excited about my support - not that I think my endorsement means all that much.
Unfortunately the money became a key issue, and Tom decided he had to pull out. I got a direct call before his press conference started, about the time the story was starting to hit the news media, because he felt he owed me that.
We have stayed in close contact ever since, primarily via email, by the occasional snail mail such as a Christmas card. Tom once joked with me that he and I had both married above ourselves, although he never met my wife until we had dinner after he had been Secretary of Agriculture for the better part of a year. We disagreed on some things - he was, after all, a strong supporter of Hillary Clinton for some very valid reasons: Christie's late brother had shared a cubicle with her at the House Judiciary Committee during the impeachment proceedings against Nixon (a big although rarely mentioned reason that some House Republicans wanted to impeach her husband) and when he was way behind in his first race for Governor and considered by most a sure loser she as First Lady came out and campaigned for him.
I am not going to publicly share those disagreements, or any of our discussions. They were discussions between two friends. Except that I said before the election in 2008 that I thought he might well wind up as a cabinet secretary. I think in some ways he might have preferred Education - that is my judgment - and had he gone there I would if he had asked me to join him left my role as a teacher to help in any way I could, that is how highly I respect him. I thought he was a logical choice for Agriculture, although he doubted he would be seriously considered.
We continue our email exchanges, as friends. There is nothing that has occurred, even in the Sherrod incident, to change my high opinion of him.
Let me - finally, you might say - return to the Broder piece.
Broder's second paragraph is key:
During the eight years he was governor of Iowa, Tom Vilsack came onto my radar as one of those rare individuals -- a man who planted useful thoughts every time I interviewed him. So I was surprised when Vilsack was cast as the fall guy in the ugly incident last month involving the forced resignation of an African American government employee who was accused by a blogger of reverse discrimination against a white farmer.
Yes, David (whom I know slightly and whom a few years ago was kind enough to come and talk with my students) manages to get in his dig against the blogoepshere. But note the key part of that paragraph <bold>a man who planted useful thoughts every time I interviewed him.</bold>
Broder talks about the efforts Tom has made to overcome the history of racism and racial discrimination in his department, including a financial settlement that awaits approval in the Congress. That to me is illustrative of what Tom really thinks.
What is also important is the initiatives Tom has taken for rural America.
His chief concern, as it was as governor, is the condition of rural America, which is facing challenges not so much because of the Great Recession but as a result of long-term trends. Ninety percent of the counties faced with persistent poverty are in rural America, Vilsack says.
As the former governor of a state with 99 counties, the vast majority of which are rural, Tom Vilsack has first-hand experience with this issue.
But there is suffering in rural America and it is not farmers, whose income is up 9%; rather it is the non-farm population of rural America, who have an income $11,000/year less than their urban neighbors. Remember that most Americans in rural areas are NOT farmers. I have seen, and written about, some of the issues of such people, which I have encountered when I have volunteered at health and dental fairs/clinics in Southwest Virginia, in Roanoke, Grundy, and most of all in Wise. Tom has been thinking creatively of how to help such people:
exploiting their energy resources, creating local food markets for local products, expanding broadband and promoting outdoor recreation
and
his plan to set aside a small portion of the economic development funds to be channeled into eight or 10 counties that have done their own bottom-up planning and to come up with a blueprint embracing all elements of the community. "We did it in Iowa," Vilsack says, "so I know it works."
Tom has also done serious work on the school lunch program, which falls in Agriculture, to improve the the nutritional value of food served in schools and to limit the availability of junk food vending machines. He has used his purview over rural matters to address some educational issues as well.
We are too quick to condemn those on our side when they make mistakes or what we consider misjudgments. That's on us. What we should respect is when someone steps up and admits s/he was wrong and takes responsibility. In the Shirley Sherrod case Tom Vilsack did that. It is not that he is falling on his sword - were that the case he would have resigned. Rather he acknowledged that the actions of his department were wrong, for which he took full responsibility, blaming neither subordinates nor attempting to shift blame upward to the White House. That is, simply put, the kind of man Tom Vilsack is.
I have often joked that were someone I knew in politics or government to ask me to work for them, I would ask first if they had read everything I had read and were they sure they wanted to inherit my big mouth. I would then ask what they thought they could gain by having me as an employee rather than as a friend who because he was not on their payroll would always tell them honestly what he thought.
Despite that, there are some in government to whom I would say if they still asked, I would defer to their judgment, even if it meant I might lose the public voice I have developed over the past half decade and more. Among those to whom I would so defer are two House members, neither of whom would ever ask me, and not because they don't respect me. Those are Brad Miller of NC and my closest friend in the House, Carolyn McCarthy. It would include former VA Lt. Gov. and now Ambassador to Switzerland and Lichtenstein Don Beyer. It definitely includes my senior U. S. Senator Jim Webb. With each of these there are things about which I disagree, but I so respect them that I would defer to their judgment.
At the top of that list is Tom Vilsack. Simply put, I rank at the top of the list of any public servants or politicians I have known.
Which is why I used the occasion of the piece by David Broder to offer this diary.
Peace.