Senate Republicans say that the education reform package introduced this week will give parents more power over their children’s education but teachers say it’s actually a union-busting move that will destroy a public education system weakened by recent funding cuts.

The seven bill package would remove limits on the number of charter and cyber schools, allow parents and teachers to force schools to convert into charters, and let districts hire teachers through private companies.

It also imposes new requirements on schools, specifying that students be allowed to simultaneously enroll in high school and college courses beginning in the 9th grade, that schools accept students from out of district, and that services be provided for homeschoolers and private school students.

“This is just a continuation of the Republican attack on public education and the middle class,” said Doug Pratt, spokesman for the Michigan Education Association.

Michigan tried charter schools and school choice back in the 90‘s, he said, and it hasn’t improved education.

“You cant do this stuff without adequate resources,” he said. “They just got done slashing a billion dollars from public education.”

Removing the limit on the number of charter schools without creating a new mechanism for accountability in those schools is irresponsible, Pratt said.

Sen. Education Committee chair Phil Pavlov (R-St. Clair) sponsored the bill to allow privatization of teaching.

Pavlov did not respond to a request for an interview but he told the Michigan Association of Secondary Principals that he sees the measure as “offering options.”

“If there is something out there that can offer school officials the same options at a lower cost, schools need to take a look at that,” he said. “It needs to part of the conversation on reform.”

Pratt called Pavlov’s proposal “selling off our education system to the lowest bidder” and predicted that the plan will become politically unpopular when schools lay off all their teachers.

Many schools have already privatized busing, food service, custodial and other services and some have found that the change has resulted in higher turnover and less accountability.

The Waverly school system near Lansing outsourced its child care program this year, but when school started this week there was no day care available because the company — Rainbow Child Care Center — was unable to get licensed by the state.

Patty Seidl, Lansing Schools Education Association President, said that the privatization of substitute teachers has resulted in less qualified subs in the schools.

“We used to have building subs — three people who reported every day. They knew the system and the curriculum. They would be there for emergencies and the kids knew them,” she said. “Now you take whomever the company sends.”

Seidl said that privatizing teaching will lower teacher pay and drive more people out of the profession.

“No one is going to want to go through the system and get a five year education to make $20,000-$25,000,” she said. “You can’t live on this.”

Under the current system most teachers live in and are engaged with the communities where they teach, she said, and people outside the schools will also be harmed if teachers’ jobs are degraded.

“I think the whole idea of education and students has been totally lost in all of the reforms,” she said. “It is really painful to watch all of this happen. These legislators are attacking us and it us unfortunate what is going to happen to our kids as a result of this.”

In an interview with Mother Jones magazine last week education history and former Bush administration Education Dept. official Diane Ravitch said that the Senate education package in Michigan is the first time she’s heard lawmakers anywhere propose privatizing teaching.

Leaders in the GOP dominated legislature say they are not surprised that the Michigan Education Association is backing a series of recalls targeting lawmakers.

The Grand Rapids reports on how a spokesperson for Speaker Jase Bolger characterized the announcement:

“The MEA has been running a clandestine war since the beginning of the year,” said Ari Adler, press secretary for House Speaker Jase Bolger, R-Marshall. “It’s not a surprise.”

And Adler was not the only high-ranking Republican spokesperson sounding off on the issue. Snyder Director of Communications Geralyn Lasher also weighed in.

“The same old, same old isn’t working for children in our classrooms when we have only 17 percent of students graduating high school college ready,” she said. “That’s unacceptable. We’ve been working to empower local schools and teachers. The MEA has an agenda, and not all of its membership agrees with it on some of these issues.”

Doug Pratt, director of public affairs for MEA, told the Press the union is targeting “out of touch” lawmakers to “hold them accountable.” He declined to say which recalls the organization would back — there are at least 16 recall petitions that have been approved across the state, as well as a recall petition targeting Gov. Rick Snyder.

As the debate over deep cuts to the state’s per pupil allowance in education funding continues, Greenhills School in Ann Arbor has released a fundraising video in which school officials say the $20,000 per year tuition per student is not enough to keep the school running.

The video features students and faculty from the school, where Gov. Rick Snyder sends his daughter, reading from a script and saying that money raised from an annual auction was necessary to keep the school going. One student, who is not identified, says, “Tuition alone does not cover the costs of a Greenhills education.”

The video asks viewers to consider a donation of “$10,000, $500 or $50″ to help the school defray the school’s operational costs.

At the same time that the school to which Snyder sends his own child can’t make ends meet with funding of $20,000 per pupil, the governor recently pushed through and signed legislation that cuts per pupil public school funding by $370 per student, bringing state funding to $6,846 per student. Some schools could qualify for an additional $100 per student if they adopt what Snyder and GOP lawmakers call “best practices.” Those practices include reducing employee costs by forcing an increase in insurance cost sharing and privatizing or consolidating some services.

The state funding is not the only source of public school funds, of course. In the 2009-2010 school year, districts saw total per pupil funding anywhere between $11,439 at the high end and $8,080 on the low end of funding, a spreadsheet from the Michigan Education Association shows. The numbers were pulled from state of Michigan documents, said Don Noble, appropriations lobbyist for the MEA.

Messenger asked MEA’s Doug Pratt, the group’s communications director, what funding per pupil at $20,000 would mean for education in Michigan.

“That level of funding would allow for small class sizes, advanced and well-rounded course offerings, sufficient textbooks/supplies/technology, top-notch teacher training, student support services and more -– all things that are essential to providing a world class education. $20,000 per student is a lot closer to what we should be spending on public education than where we are today,” Pratt said in email.

When asked how public schools can be expected to operate on the per pupil allocations approved by the legislature, when the school Gov. Rick Snyder sends his daughter to can’t make it on $20,000 per pupil, Snyder Communications Director Geralyn Lasher responded:

“The Snyders have nothing to do with the organization of this fund drive and are not involved in the planning or delivery of the campaign. Any questions about the school or their efforts should be directed to Greenhills.

As for per-pupil funding, the Governor has stated time and again that cuts to education were very difficult to make and he was pleased to reduce the cut to K-12 to effectively less than $100 per pupil. As he has discussed the need to put the fiscal situation in order in the state and experience growth and increased revenues, there will be time in the future to look to education and see what types of increases in funding can be made. Focusing on the growth of students during the year is also crucial to seeing improvements in student performance. When only 16% of high school students who graduate are “college-ready” as a state we have to look at the entire education system and not just funding in order to change that figure to 100% of high school graduates who are college-ready and career-ready.”

So how bad are the cuts going to be? The Bay City Times reports that nine area schools superintendents have sent an open letter to Gov. Rick Snyder criticizing the cuts.

Many of the schools have forecast a reduction in funding over $1 million, while the Bay City Schools are bracing for a loss of $10 million under the newly minted education funding, the Times reports.

Echoing a letter from the Ithaca Schools chief Nathan Bootz in which, tongue firmly placed in cheek, he asked the governor to make his school system a prison; the area schools point out the costs of prisoners vs. education funding for kids:

“The State of Michigan spends over four times the cost of one student’s education to incarcerate one single person is prison,” reads the memo from the nine school leaders. “As Superintendents we believe in a safe community, but we also support a strong education system that meets the needs of your children.”

Ari Adler, spokesperson for House Speaker Jase Bolger (R-Marshall), sent out a scathing statement Tuesday slamming the Michigan Education Association and teachers for allegedly being unwilling to negotiate over best practices.

Adler said in the statement that the top lobbyist for the Michigan Association of School Boards, Don Wotruba, told the subscription only capitol news outlet MIRS that “one third of the schools may not be able to attain the best financial practices laid out in the Fiscal Year 2012 education budget because the chances are “slim and none” that teachers will want to reopen existing agreements.”

Adler continued:

I find that very interesting. Basically, Mr. Wotruba is suggesting that teachers, or more likely their unions, will stand in the way of additional funding for students. That might be an interesting question to pose to your union contacts to determine its validity.

If it’s true, we have compelling evidence that teachers’ unions like the Michigan Education Association are quite willing to put children at risk in an attempt to maintain their stranglehold on taxpayers.

MEA spokesperson Doug Pratt responded to Adler’s statement in an e-mail to Michigan Messenger:

“The House Republicans voted to cut more than $1 billion dollars from public education, despite the fact that there was a SURPLUS in the School Aid Fund that would have required no cuts whatsoever. But they wanted to provide a no-strings-attached $1.8 billion tax break for corporate CEOs, so they decided to balance the budget on the backs of students and school employees.

“Now, the House Republicans want to ride in to the rescue by dangling $100 per student in front of school districts that adopt so-called “best practices” that take away local control over decision making?

Makes perfect sense that they want to scapegoat unions, since every recent poll shows HUGE opposition to school budget cuts. Voters aren’t going to buy it. They’re going to remember Republicans’ hypocritical assaults on local control and public school funding, right up to November 2012.”

Pratt is referring to a budget deal, announced by GOP leadership and Gov. Rick Snyder last week, that directs funds to schools that implement a progress report-style dashboard program, consolidate school services, bid out contracts on non-instructional positions and duties and increase school employee health premiums.

The House has scheduled a tentative special session on Friday to allow the GOP dominated legislature to pass the budgets before the May 31 deadline. That deadline was pushed by Snyder and is artificial to a point. The budget must be approved no later than Sept. 30, as the fiscal year begins Oct. 1 each year.

LANSING — Republican Gov. Rick Snyder delivered his first State of the State address to Michigan lawmakers and the public Wednesday night. Standing before a joint session of the Michigan legislature, Snyder clarified a vision for Michigan, but provided very little in terms of details on how the state would bridge its estimated $1.8 billion budget deficit.

Progressive organizations and Democrats, who are in the minority in both chambers of the legislature, said they were cautiously optimistic about the direction Snyder said he was taking the state.

“With the exception of his announcement regarding the Detroit River International Crossing, Governor Snyder’s speech was closer to stump speech happy talk than a State of the State address,” said David Holtz, executive director of Progress Michigan. “Those who criticized Governor Granholm’s State of the State addresses for puffery can now look back on her as a policy wonk by comparison to Snyder’s first address tonight. How’s the $1.8 billion budget deficit going to be solved? We will have to continue to wait. “

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Gretchen Whitmer of East Lansing said after the speech she had not expected specifics in Wednesday’s speech. Details, she said, will come “on Feb. 17” when Snyder is expected to send his budgets to the legislature.

Snyder reiterated his support for the elimination of the Michigan Business Tax and the attendant surcharge, which raise nearly $1.5 billion in state revenue every year. Snyder has touted a plan to replace those disliked taxes with a flat six percent tax, but that would only bring in about $500 million.

Snyder told the legislature that the elimination of the “job killing MBT” would be contained in the budgets he will introduce to the legislature in mid-February. That budget will actually be a two year budget, with the first budget representing the mandated state budget for the 2011-2012 budget, and the second one proposed for 2012-2013.

“It’s hard to say what it will look like, we don’t have enough detail yet,” Whitmer said of the budget deficit and potential cuts of the MBT and surcharge. “I am optimistic we will get that level of detail on Feb. 17.”

“The first is the legally required one, the second is for planning,” Snyder said. “We can no longer afford to play kick the can down the road.”

While the speech was missing specifics on how Snyder and his team will balance the state budget, he did make two announcements that were a surprise.

First, Snyder says he will support the Detroit River International Crossing, a controversial plan to build a new, publicly-funded bridge between Detroit and Ontario, Canada. A proposal to pass the plan failed in the legislature twice this last year, and both times because of Republican opposition to the plan.

“I ask you to forget everything you heard in last year’s debate,” Snyder said of DRIC battles in 2010. “Private sector investment will be used.”

To sweeten the deal, Snyder says he has agreed to accept a loan offer from Canada to go towards the DRIC. In addition, Snyder said he was able to secure a “unique” deal with Washington wherein the Ontario money could be counted as money the state is putting forward as matching funds for federal road funds.

Without that match the state stood to lose millions in federal dollars for road projects because of the budget shortfall.

Detroit Democratic lawmaker Rashida Tlaib praised Snyder for endorsing the DRIC. She told MLive.com after the speech:

“I’m extremely happy he decided to make this a priority,” she said. “Happy he made it part of his State of the State address.”

House Minority Leader Richard Hammel (D-Mount Morris) said that announcement was the biggest surprise for him during the evening.

“The new bridge to Canada is critical for creation of new jobs and the principled point that public infrastructure should not be about enriching one person but needs to serve all the people,” said Tova Perlmutter, of Sugar Law Center National Lawyer’s Guild in Detroit.

Also somewhat shocking as a call from Snyder was a call for a focus on health care.

Snyder said the state needed to focus on better access and quality while lowering costs. He said this could be done by people focusing on getting and staying healthy, reducing obesity rates and kicking smoking habits. Ironically, that statement came only hours after the U.S. House voted to repeal last year’s health care reform bill that increases access to insurance for all Americans.

“Health care for all — one of the comments he made — is very important to us,” said Hammel.

One other proposal from Snyder drew praise as well.

The Michigan Education Association’s Doug Pratt was pleased with Snyder’s call to move from a traditional focus on K-12 education, to pre-school to college, or as he said, “P to 20.”

“Gov. Snyder spoke a lot about measurement and results this evening. That’s nothing new for public schools. But we also know that more tests and measurements alone won’t address the serious issues facing public education,” said Pratt, MEA’s communications director. “We need a properly aligned curriculum, greater accountability, financial stability, parental involvement and world-class educators serving our students — all of which we call for in MEA’s A+ Agenda.”

“He understands about the investment in early childhood education,” said Gilda Jacobs, president and CEO of The Michigan League for Human Services. Jacobs just started in the role after being term limited out of the Michigan Senate.

The legislature Snyder addressed is a completely different animal than the one Gov. Jennifer Granholm presented her final State of the State speech to. The Republican party swept state elections, taking control of the Michigan House and increasing the majority in the Senate to a super majority. The red tide also swept the statewide offices including Secretary of State, Attorney General and two seats on the Michigan Supreme Court.

Michigan Messenger reporter Eartha Jane Meltzer contributed to this report.

Republican Attorney General Bill Schuette is asking the new Republican majority of the Michigan Supreme Court to reconsider several last minute rulings made at the end of the court’s 2010 session before conservatives took over the court.

Schuette says in a press release he is targeting four “decisions handed down by an eleventh-hour lame-duck Court.”

The top case Schuette wants over turned is MEA v. Secretary of State. In that case, the majority ruled that it was not improper for schools districts to deduct payments to the Michigan Education Association Political Action Committee, so long as the MEA refunded the costs the districts incurred in processing the deductions. According to Schuette’s release:

“If the Attorney General’s request for a rehearing is granted, his office will argue that the involvement of the State in the collection of funds for a political action committee is not a proper use of taxpayer resources under the Michigan Campaign Finance Act.”

“The AG is clearly wasting the taxpayers time and money trying to do repeal something that has already been decided,” says Doug Pratt, spokesman for the Michigan Education Association. “That’s the way it has been done for decades… It’s a shame the AG is wasting taxpayer money this way.”

Meanwhile, Schuette is also eying King v. State of Michigan, which ruled that the state could not withdraw an insurance license mistakenly approved by the Office of Financial and Insurance Regulations. The AG says he will argue that a license mistakenly issued to an ineligible felon can be revoked.

In Anglers of the AuSable v. Department of Environmental Quality, the court ruled that citizens could sue the state to challenge permits issued by the state’s environmental agencies. Schuette will argue that the case is moot and the ruling will cost the state too much money.

Michigan Messenger reported on this ruling shortly after it was delivered. In that report, Messenger quoted an attorney representing citizens in the case:

“This sends a signal that our lakes, streams, and the Great Lakes will not be plundered by relaxed legal principles that condone harmful diversions and exploitation,“ said Jim Olson, who represented the Anglers before the Court. ”It fully restores the rights of citizens to sue the state for permitting projects that are likely to degrade the environment and our states’ waters.”

And finally in Duncan v. Governor of Michigan, the Court ruled that a lower court could proceed in reviewing how funding for indigent defense is operated. Schuette says the he will argue the courts are not the place for that argument, rather the legislative branch is.

Photo courtesy of Flickr - Breakfast for Dinner

But how accurate were the calls and the information they presented? The Michigan Messenger checks the facts.

Anti-Bernero ad #1: No Friend of Labor

In this message, the caller tells the voter that Bernero is no friend of labor and it claims that he had an unfair labor complaint filed against the city. That claim is true.

The Teamsters Local 580 filed a complaint with the state’s Department of Labor and Economic Growth Labor Relations Division on Sept. 11, 2007. That complaint alleged the city was not providing the union with information about seasonal and temporary employees who were filling union covered posts at the city. On Sept. 23, 2008, the state ruled against the city.

In the ruling, Administrative Law Judge Julia Stern found the city violated the Public Employee Rights Act (PERA) “by failing to provide the Charging Party (Teamsters) with relevant information in a timely fashion.”

The entire ruling and complaint can be seen here.

Bernero is also currently being sued in state court by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers over a 527 group that he controls for fraud and unjust enrichment. You can view the complaint in that case here.

The call also claims that Bernero “tried to ax city union jobs.” This claim is true, but hardly the whole story. With steep cuts in state revenue sharing and decreasing revenue at all levels of government, jobs have had to be cut across the board and some of those cuts are inevitably going to be union jobs.

The difference with union jobs is that cuts have to be negotiated. In December, for example, Bernero and the police and firefighters unions negotiated a package of job cuts and concessions to help the city balance its budget in the wake of steep cuts in state revenue sharing.

It should perhaps be noted here that the IBEW has condemned these robocalls and says are not involved in their production in any way.

Conclusion: Mostly true, but contains a measure of spin and distortion.

Anti-Bernero ad #2: Urgent Message

Several claims are made in this call as well, all about Bernero’s relationship with labor.

The first is that “labor supported his opponents in his state senate and mayoral campaigns.” This is partly true and partly false.

During last year’s mayoral campaign Bernero grabbed up several local union endorsements, including the local UAW and firefighters. Opponent Carol Wood snagged groups like the local I.B.E.W., Teamsters Local 580 and the Bricklayers. In other words, labor support in the mayoral contest was split.

The call goes on to quote local labor leaders as calling Bernero a “bully” and saying he was “no friend of organized labor.” Michigan Messenger left several messages for Mike Parker of the local Teamsters, who is cited as the source for the bully comment, but Parker did not return calls.

On the other hand, Ray Michaels from the I.B.E.W. told the Michigan Messenger that Bernero was “no friend of organized labor” back in June 2009. Michaels and other unions boycotted a rally Bernero hosted with Rev. Jesse Jackson. Here’s what Michaels told Messenger:

“We did opt not to participate in it. We support the message. Our issue is with the messenger, with Virg Bernero,” said Ray Michaels of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. “He is no friend of organized labor as far as my union is concerned.”

But of course, he only speaks for his union, while other unions endorsed Bernero.

Conclusion: Overstated, at the very least. Labor unions have been divided on Bernero, some endorsing him and some opposing him. That will undoubtedly be the case again in the race for governor.

Pro-Dillon robocall: Dillon as a “strong advocate” for education

The call is correct in asserting that Dillon supported bills that would “lower class sizes and and make sure our schools are fixed,” and “supported putting limits on charter schools.” Dillon voted for such legislation throughout his years in the state House.

However the call’s claim that Dillon “supported funding for the Michigan Promise Scholarship,” is a bit more muddled, perhaps reminiscent of John Kerry’s famous “I was for it before I was against it” position.

Dillon voted for the original legislation to create the Michigan Promise Scholarship. However, the scholarship was eliminated last October when the state legislature passed a cuts-only budget. That budget had been approved as part of a deal Dillon struck with Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop. The problem? The move to fund the scholarship — and restore cuts to education — failed.

Ultimately the blame on this has to go to the Senate Republicans, who refused to pass any bill that raised revenue in order to maintain a balanced budget without eliminating the Promise Scholarship. But Dillon does bear some measure of that blame for the deal he struck with Bishop, for which he took a great deal of criticism among his fellow Democrats.

State Rep. Alma Wheeler Smith, who is also running for the Democratic nomination, bluntly called that strategy a failure in an recent interview with Michigan Messenger. And she was hardly alone. Many members of the House Democratic Caucus were angry at Dillon for going along with a cuts-only budget last year that resulted in such steep cuts to education.

Conclusion: Mostly accurate, though the last claim is much more complicated than the call made it sound.

Under current law, robocalls do not have to be reported in campaign finance reports nor do those who run them have to file statements with the Secretary of State showing how much was spent on the calls, and who financed them.

“Voters have a right to know who is paying for those ads and who is behind them,” Pratt told Messenger in a phone interview.

Pratt also said his group would explore whether or not it can file a complaint with the FCC over the calls. As Michigan Messenger reported Wednesday, the three robocalls that hit voters homes over the weekend may have been illegal under federal law.

Federal law requires all telephone calls using pre-recorded messages to identify who is initiating the calls and include a telephone number or address whereby the initiator can be reached. None of the three calls identified who was initiating the call or a way to contact that initiator.

Pratt said he would discuss the issue with MEA legal staff, in the meantime, he said state officials should be taking interest.

“Both the attorney general and the secretary of state should be taking interest in what could illegal election year activity,” Pratt said. He also noted that such anonymous robocalls “just add to the cynicism of voters.”

Labor endorsements are seen as a key money maker for Democrats — so much so that former Genesee County Treasurer Dan Kildee dropped out of the race for governor last week, worrying that he would split the labor pool. That announcement came as rumors swirled that the UAW was poised to endorse Bernero.

Photo courtesy of Flickr - Breakfast for Dinner

Michigan Messenger was able to get numbers for two of the calls. One number, (202) 534-3126, according to a records search, was owned by a group called Info Voter in Washington D.C. The only group we could find by the name Info Voter is actually located in Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania. Ken Smuckler, president of that company, told Michigan Messenger in a phone interview that his business is not making the calls.

“That’s not us, and if it is, I’d like to know because I would like the money,” he said, joking.

He said it’s easy to input any number into a caller I.D. program to show an erroneous source for a call.

Todd Cook, a Democratic Political consultant with Mainstreet Partners, says there is nothing illegal about the calls in the state of Michigan. “They are not regulated under Michigan Campaign Finance Laws. In some states groups have to report them, but not here,” he said. He noted it is unlikely it will ever be known who paid for the calls.

But Wikipedia reports that under federal law “all calls, irrespective of whether they are political in nature, must do two things to be considered legal. The federal law requires all telephone calls using pre-recorded messages to identify who is initiating the calls and include a telephone number or address whereby the initiator can be reached.” Factcheck.org confirms that fact.

None of the calls included any identification of who had paid for the calls, nor did they include a phone number or address where that person or organization could be reached.

There are several possibilities as to who might be funding the calls. The most obvious suspect is Andy Dillon, since one of the calls praises his record and the other two attack his primary opponent, Virg Bernero. The second is that Republicans might be funding the calls — but that raises a question of why would they praise Dillon, a Democrat they may well face in the general election?

A third possibility is that some actor not directly related to either the Bernero or the Dillon campaign is involved; in fact, it’s likely that if either the Dillon campaign or a Republican campaign is involved, they would have tried to hide their connections to the group that actually paid for the ads as much as possible.

It’s also possible that there is no connection between the ads at all and that one group is initiating the anti-Bernero calls while another group is initiating the pro-Dillon calls. Until we can identify who is making the calls and who paid for them, there is really no way of knowing which of these possibilities is true.

Calls to Dillon spokesman Ken Coleman seeking comment were not immediately returned.

Doug Pratt, spokesman for the Michigan Education Association, says his group has received calls asking if the union was behind the calls. “It most definitely is not (the MEA),” he tells Michigan Messenger.

Two anonymous calls attacked Bernero on his history with organized labor.

The first robocall, which came from (202) 534-3126, says the mayor is trying to “steal” union leaders support for his run for governor, and that he is “bad for labor’:

Here is the transcript of that call:

“Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero is parading around with union leaders trying to steal their endorsement for his run for governor. Lansing union leaders — the ones who know Bernero best — know he’s no friend of labor. Bernero tried to ax city union jobs and had an unfair labor complaint filed against Lansing by the Teamsters. He even said he had concerns about the city’s prevailing wage ordinance. Call UAW president Ron Gettelfinger at (313) 926-5000 and tell him not to fall for Bernero’s stunt. Bernero is bad for labor.”

In the second call, for which the originating phone number could not be identified, has a similar message:

“This is an urgent message. Democratic bosses are trying to force union leaders to endorse Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero for governor. And Bernero is deceiving them into thinking he supports us. But truth is labor supported his opponents in his state senate and mayoral campaigns. The local Teamsters called him a “bully” and the IBEW said he is no friend of organized labor. We need a leader who supports our union brothers and sisters. Call UAW president Ron Gettelfinger at (313) 926-5000 and tell him we’re counting on him to protect Michigan workers and not sell out to Bernero.”

In a statement on the calls, Bernero campaign spokesman Jamaine Dickens said, “Virg is being attacked because he is clearly the most able voice for Michigan’s struggling working families. Our campaign is gaining support and momentum. No one would be playing these petty political games and trying to confuse the facts, if he weren’t an effective a leader for the average working family against the greed of the rich and well connected.”

While voters were getting an earful about Bernero and labor, they were also hearing the notes of sweet praise for Dillon on education:

“Hi! This is a special message for Michigan families. Our teachers need a strong advocate for education. Speaker Andy Dillon fits that bill. He has a strong record of supporting our teachers and our children. In the House he supported legislation that would lower class sizes and and make sure our schools are fixed. He also supported putting limits on charter schools and supported funding for the Michigan Promise Scholarship. Education is a priority for Andy Dillon. That’s why Andy Dillon is a leader Michigan needs.”

This is not the first time robocalls have been an issue this primary season. Michigan Messenger reported on robocalls made by Republican consultant and operative Joe Munem attacking GOP gubernatorial candidate Rick Snyder earlier this year.

“It’s time to make education a national mission,” Duncan said. “We have to impact what’s going on in the classroom.”

Duncan said states are at “a nexus of crisis and opportunity,” which should be harnessed to create change in the way education is delivered.

The Race to the Top funding initiative, Duncan said, is designed to reward those states and districts which have been consistently innovating in education with high performance markers from students who are prepared for college or employment following graduation.

Among the pillars of the initiative are four areas for innovation. Those areas are tying teacher performance ratings to student outcomes, expansion of high quality, high performance charter schools, turning around failing schools and alternative teacher certification.

“Our goal is to fundamentally challenge the status quo,” Duncan said. “This is absolutely a competition. There will be winners and there will be losers.”

And Michigan could likely be a loser when it comes to competing for this federal cash. Michigan Board of Education Superintendent Mike Flanagan, told The Associated Press on Thursday that Michigan would have to change laws in order to even have a chance to qualify for the federal money.

Among those laws? One which prevents schools from tying teacher performance reviews with student performance, and another which prevents districts from allowing uncertified teachers from entering the classroom to teach. Certification through a university and the state licensing board is mandated.

And while the Michigan Education Association is “fundamentally” opposed to linking teacher performance to student performance, Doug Pratt, direct of communication for the state’s largest teachers union said they are participating in the conversations with lawmakers in Lansing to make sure Duncan’s statement that teacher performance and student performance was but one criteria in evaluating the full performance of a student is carried out in Michigan.

“There are so many other things that go into student success,” Pratt said. “The problem is that while the Secretary says that, it’s not always the way it’s interpreted.”

Pratt rattled of a series of influences he says are involved in student performance including poverty, family involvement, class size and per pupil funding from the state.

“How that student performed one day on one test is not a sole indicator of student success,” Pratt said.

Another fundamental obstacle Michigan will have to overcome if it can successfully compete for the federal cash will be addressing the recent K-12 educational foundation allowance grants. Duncan made it clear in talking with reporters Thursday that states are all facing difficult budget issues, the question — and the evaluation — will come down to how state’s prioritize funding in tight budget times.

“Did those cuts help students in the classroom, or did they benefit adults?” Duncan said would be a major evaluation tool in this process.

Many would argue that Michigan’s K-12 foundation allowance grant cuts were done for political expediency, not to help students in the classroom. The question then becomes, if the Democratic lead House passed legislation which restores $184 million in funding to the K-12 budget is approved by the GOP-dominated Senate and signed into law, will that be enough to alleviate concerns from the feds about how Michigan funds its schools. The answer is unclear.