Let 'em Holler - A Political Biography of J. Bracken Lee

Education II

11 Education II Even though he had made himself peculiarly vulnerable to jour­nalistic criticism for his treatment of education, Lee was never­theless easily angered by it. He was especially incensed by a 1954 Time magazine article, "The Governor and the Schools," taking him to task because his "passion for economy" had inflicted "definite signs of malnutrition" on Utah's schools. Time traced the history of the special session, concluding that "one thing was certain: J. Bracken Lee's political troubles are not yet through."1 Furious, Lee wrote a lengthy letter, only part of which appeared in the magazine in edited form. He accused the editors of inaccuracy and lack of objectivity. He correctly noted that he was charged with slashing a social security program that did not exist; he berated Time for referring to the number of teachers graduating from the state's "teachers colleges" when none existed; he objected to the assertion that the merit system and uniform textbooks were his outlandish proposals, instead of survey com­mission recommendations; he objected to Time's omission of the fact that he had helped establish Carbon College and that the junior colleges formerly belonged to the Mormon church; finally, he thought Time's estimate of 400 teachers quitting their jobs in disgust was exaggerated and erroneous.2 Utah educators also wrote letters to the editor lauding the effectiveness and accuracy of the article. Two months later Lee was still smarting, declaring it "incred­ible" that Time had not recanted the story and accusing the editors of trying to discredit him.3 Although he was right about the inaccuracies, none of them changed the substance of the article. The editors had correctly pictured the most important facets of his serious battle with education, with Lee coming out 135 J . BRACKEN LEE on the short end. He had lost an important battle with the legislature and the schools, and it had far-reaching effects on his governorship. Lee had made one glaring mistake: he claimed in his letter to Time that Utah paid its teachers a higher salary than the average of the surrounding states and higher than the national average. This was not true and was a direct contradiction of the findings of the survey commission. He said he based his claim on findings published in a state Department of Public Instruction pamphlet.4 Actually, the table prepared by the department suggested the opposite: all of the surrounding states except two, Idaho and Wyoming, paid teachers more than Utah. The average of the states was $3,633, while Utah's figure was recorded at $3,500. New Mexico's was $4,150, Arizona paid as much as $3,950, while Idaho was as low as $3,382.5 Allan M. West immediately refuted Lee's claims, saying that the most recent NEA figures indicated that the average Utah teacher's pay was below the national average, below the average of the eleven western states, and below the average of the Intermountain states.0 Lee's carping at schoolteachers was continuous. In a letter to a constituent he discussed his belief that many other public employees received salaries much lower than those of teachers. Government, he said, should not '"increase those already at the top of the ladder" but "bring salaries of others up to a somewhat comparable level."7 Such a statement reflected Lee's conviction that teachers were not in fact professionals but, rather, hired help. He had little respect for the teacher as a necessary, con­tributing member of society. This feeling was evident in his desire to remove the teacher's right to serve in the legislature. As early as 1950 Lee had quoted the state constitution as prohibiting a person from being a legislator if he held "an office of public profit or trust." When he asked the attorney general for an opinion, Clinton Vernon ruled that the prohibition was circumvented by another constitutional provision stating that the "legislature shall be the judge of its own members." Lee sug­gested that an alien could even be elected and serve unless the legislature itself refused to seat him. He saw this as unfair and 136 EDUCATION II recommended a constitutional amendment to correct the inequal­ity. The constitutional bar was sound, Lee said, because it "prevents me or any other state official, if his organization was strong enough, from packing the legislature with its own paid employees."8 Lee's interpretation of the constitution was questionable. He was attempting to restructure the system to facilitate the accep­tance of his own program. Just as President Franklin Roosevelt had tried to pack the U.S. Supreme Court to facilitate his New Deal legislation, Lee was trying to unpack the legislature by removing teachers so that they could not oppose him on legisla­tion vital to them. He wanted to eliminate the interest group that opposed him the most. His argument was specious, for one could argue similarly about any number of interest groups. Lee fell victim to the accoutrements and temptations of power, hardly admirable in a democratic society. Fortunately, the attempt failed. Another piece of evidence revealing the low esteem Lee held for teachers showed up in the solutions he proposed for the teacher shortage and for salaries. He maintained that adminis­trators were perpetuating the teacher shortage as a lever for higher salaries. He proposed a five-point plan to solve the short­age: (1) Revise the requirements for teacher certification, per­mitting any person with two years' college education or its equivalent to take a comprehensive intelligence and aptitude test, the successful completion of which would entitle him to teach in the elementary grades and in exceptional cases, the secondary grades. Lee quoted a Tribune editorial that asked, Do we employ instructors for their ability to teach and inspire young people to learn, or on the basis of the letters after their names and their membership in high-sounding profes­sional organizations?9 Believing it was the latter, Lee challenged the college degree as the "only measuring device of a person's intelligence or ability to teach." Benjamin Franklin did not have a college degree, but he was one of our greatest scientists. Despite all his knowledge, his 137 J . BRACKEN LEE inventive genius and his keen intellect, however, he could not be certified to teach in our schools if he were alive today.10 It cannot be assumed that colonial society was superior to our own. Franklin lived in an underdeveloped, experimental society that emphasized learning by doing as opposed to formal educa­tion. He achieved in spite of severe handicaps in methods of learning and limited access to scholarly materials. Nor does it follow that Franklin, no matter what his accomplishments in sci­ence and politics, should be expected to be a successful teacher. But Lee thought anyone with minimal intelligence should be able to teach. He suggested these additional points: (2) Establish a salary schedule based on ability, education or degrees, dependency, and tenure. (3) Abolish the regulations in certain districts prohibit­ing the employment of new teachers over the age of forty. (4) Shift kindergarten to the summer months when the services of regularly employed teachers, who otherwise would be on vaca­tion, could be utilized without shortening other classes. (5) Insti­tute a teacher recruitment program to sell teaching as a career instead of emphasizing its negative aspects.11 Lee's five-point program gave ample proof of his disdain for the teaching profession. Implicit in it lay his conviction that teachers were overpaid, that their abilities were inferior, that hiring standards were too high for the truly talented person to be accepted, that teachers did not work hard enough to deserve a summer vacation, and that any negative reputation of the profes­sion must be blamed on teachers themselves. It came as no surprise that this philosophy generated increased bitterness on the part of educators.12 FEDERAL AID Lee's opposition to federal aid to education became wholly clear in the beginning of his governorship. He called it morally dishonest for educators to accept federal funds for the building of new schools and predicted that spending money to nationalize schools would actually cause them to deteriorate.13 He clashed 138 EDUCATION II with Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Oveta Culp Hobby, even though Mrs. Hobby claimed that she did not favor nationalization of schools.14 Soon afterward, he became embroiled in a controversy with William Carr, executive secretary of NEA. Carr tried to con­vince him that it was possible to have federal aid to schools with­out federal control. The NEA, he insisted, was seeking to pre­serve and strengthen local and state control. He pointed out that Ohio Sen. Robert A. Taft had once entertained similar views to Lee's on federal aid but had later become convinced of its value and even sponsored legislation for it in the Senate.15 Lee coun­tered by pointing out the fallacy of asking for federal aid when the federal government was in debt and unable to balance its budget. Since the states were in better financial condition than the federal government, he said, they should handle their own problems. He feared that a "callous disregard" for the national debt, high taxes, and inflation would cause the "ruination" of the country.10 Later, when Utah was invited to send a representative to Washington for hearings on federal aid in public school construc­tion, Lee refused to send one. He noted that the school survey commission had opposed such aid. He declared that Utah was building its own schools and suggested that other states "be made to do the same."17 Lee was a true advocate of local control, for he did not believe that the state was responsible for local building either. This resulted in another feud with E. Allen Bateman, the ideal­istic and aggressive state school superintendent, over local con­struction financing. Lee wanted to end the program of state aid to local districts, whereas Bateman wanted to make it permanent. In a nineteen-page report, Bateman declared, "Utah cannot afford to refuse general federal aid for school buildings and at the same time fail to continue its responsibility for emergency school building aid." He said that the state was charged by the constitution with the responsibility of providing a uniform system of education. He recalled that a number of districts qualified for help under the 1951 and 1953 laws, which provided $4,157,000 139 J . BRACKEN LEE for emergency school construction. Some districts received help, while others did not. To discontinue the law, in Bateman's opin­ion, would be unfair to districts that had qualified for state aid but had not yet received funds. He urged that the section of the law permitting districts to levy a 10 or 12 mill tax for school building purposes be made permanent.18 Just such a bill was introduced in the legislature the follow­ing year, heavily supported by educators. To meet the needs of an increasing school population, the Salt Lake City Board of Education planned a five-year building program, including mod­ernization of thirty-four schools and the addition of four elemen­tary schools and one new high school on the old state prison site. Educators believed that such a building program needed at least a five-year extension of the 12 mill levy. Therefore, LeGrand Backman and M. Lynn Bennion strongly urged Lee to sign House Bill 154, which provided an extension of the levy for eight years.19 Of course, Lee vetoed it. Besides the fact that it contradicted his philosophy, he believed it duplicated a portion of House Bill 54, which extended emergency school building acts for another two years.20 However, the legislature overrode the veto, the Senate 23-0 and the House by 51-4.21 The legislature also tried to enact legislation permitting Utah to qualify for federal aid for school construction and maintenance, but Lee vetoed that meas­ure. 22 Lee's position remained unchanged. In his last year in office he cited a move by Congress to spend federal money for local schools as an illustration of the attempts of government to "enslave the^ people." He concluded, "Behind all this is the idea of an all-powerful central government by people who think we ought to have two classes-the rulers and the peons."23 CONCLUSIONS Traditionally, three departments of state government have accounted for the greatest expenditures-highways, public wel­fare, and education. For instance, in 1957 education accounted for 38.1 percent of state expenditures, highways 24.1 percent, 140 EDUCATION II and welfare. 13.5 percent.24 In spite of that, Lee's administration witnessed a genuine decline in school expenditures. In 1948 the average national expenditure per child was $179.43, while Utah's was $179.40 and therefore competitive. But in 1957, at the end of Lee's two terms, the national average had increased to $300 while Utah's lagged far behind at $258. Utah ranked thirtieth among the states in 1948 but had dropped to thirty-third by 1957. The regional figures demonstrated an even wider gap: the mountain states average increased from $202.02 in 1948 to $336.75 in 1957 and the western states from $208.10 to $338.42. School building projects suffered significantly due to Lee's reduc­tion of the school equalization mill levy which was used for building purposes.25 This is a view well supported by influential contemporaries who viewed the retarded building program as the most detri­mental factor of Lee's governorship. M. Lynn Bennion said that Lee "did effectively block the financing of needed school build­ings which had to be erected years later at higher costs."20 Richard Bateman, son of E. Allen Bateman, affirmed that Lee, in his father's opinion, was harmful to education in two ways: 1) His policies of economy set the state's school building program back by many years at a time when it was already in trouble because of the war years' moratorium on building. By the time Lee was out of office and accelerated building was resumed, we were desperately trying to catch up during a building boom time and inflated prices which cost the tax­payers in Utah almost double what a well-planned, on-going building program would have entailed. 2) Lee's economy measures forced Utah school districts to cut back or eliminate many of the cultural and associated programs such as music, art, foreign languages, etc. In Dad's opinion, this was destructive to the educational well being of Utah school children.27 Lee's political contemporaries were divided over the issue. Democrat Wayne L. Black, son of Lee's old enemy Parnell Black, thought that Lee carried on a "terrific vendetta" against education with "his penny-wise-pound-foolish attitude." Lee refused "violently to support building programs that educators 141 J . BRACKEN LEE thought necessary at both the elementary and high school level, and in the meantime the cost of lumber, and brick and mortar had gone up and up and up," Black asserted. At the end of Lee's tenure "it fell the lot of George Dewey Clyde to commence the building-estimated at two or three times" what it would have been earlier. Since Black's overall view of Lee's governorship was complimentary, even in economics, his criticism seems valid. Black ranked Lee as one of Utah's great governors.28 A later governor, Democrat Calvin L. Rampton, was popular with educators and perhaps the most popular governor Utah has ever had. He believed that education was harmed under Lee because it was "underfunded." Lee's continual battles with edu­cators had an "adverse effect on the morale of education," mean­ing in Rampton's opinion that Lee did a "disservice." Since Utah fell behind in educational building during both Lee's and Clyde's administrations, Rampton floated a $65,000,000 bond issue to erect university buildings. Utah had not had a bonded indebted­ness for several years, and he was severely criticized for it. Fortu­nately for the state, however, the bond was taken out "just before interest rates started escalating"; and while the buildings were being planned Rampton reinvested the money at a higher rate of interest than the state was paying for it. The interest of 1.4 per­cent represented a great saving to the state and was certainly preferable to building over a period of years.29 Rampton's sug­gestion that there is wisdom in spending money to save money is germane. It was no wiser for Lee to procrastinate on state building projects than for a prospective home buyer to wait until the prices go down. On the other hand, former Republican Congressman William A. Dawson supported Lee's stand. Educators, he said, were a powerful lobby and there were many of them in the legislature. Opposing them was "like opposing motherhood or the PTA." Dawson admired Lee because he was one of the few politicians who had "the guts" to oppose educators.30 Salt Lake City's journalists were divided over the severity of the problem. The Tribune's astute former political editor, O. N. Malmquist, admitted that educational expenditures would have 142 EDUCATION II been higher if someone else had been governor, but he contended that any damage Lee did to education by his economy measures has been exaggerated. He argued that it was difficult to obtain materials and labor because they were siphoned off by the Korean War. "It was good policy not to spend money because you couldn't spend it effectively at that time." He admitted that some construction could have been done more cheaply had it been done in Lee's time, yet, "I doubt that we would have been better off had we spent up to our full income." Without hesitation, Malmquist regarded Lee as "a good governor."31 Conversely, the Deseret News's incisive former political edi­tor, DeMar Teuscher, believed that penny-pinching in education unquestionably cost the state more later, creating a serious flaw in Lee's contribution.32 William B. Smart, editor of the Deseret News, declared that Lee caused the state to accumulate "mon­strous building needs that had to be met later through the bond program at much higher construction costs." Smart blamed Lee for creating a damaging divisiveness in education and contended that his educational record was one of the most important reasons that the Deseret News opposed him for reelection in 1956.33 Even in later years J. Bracken Lee thought "school teachers were too greedy," but his feelings mellowed slightly: "I think that I was rather harsh with the school system-more than I should have been." Yet, he considered it politically impossible to retain the support of educators. For instance, Lee considered Herbert B. Maw to be "a school man and elected by them," yet educators supported Lee after Maw's second term: They turned against me the second term. But what did they do to poor Clyde? They hated his guts! He was more unpopu­lar than / was for a period. I said Rampton [would] be unpopular the second term too, but he [wasn't]. Rampton's a smart politician.34 Lee insisted that he harbored no bitterness toward educators, citing as an example his high respect for the University of Utah's president, A. Ray Olpin, even though they had many disagree­ments. Arguing that a person harms only himself if he retains 143 J. BRACKEN LEE animosity, Lee said he "wouldn't waste five minutes" on such things. In an introspective mood, Lee concluded, "I'm inclined to get irritated and say things I wish I hadn't said-that's one of my weaknesses."35 Lee's record in education is mixed. Some have argued that it was his strongest asset, while others have regarded it as clear evidence that he was not fit to be governor. Based on all avail­able evidence, one must conclude that Lee's unfortunate treat­ment of education and educators was his most serious flaw both as a public servant and as a politician. He made unnecessary enemies who haunted him throughout the remainder of his career, contributing to several subsequent election defeats. Even given his rigid economics, he could have prevented such an alba­tross through the employment of finesse. Since he freely courted the Mormon church as an interest group when he was not a member, he surely could have established a respectable relation­ship with educators. Perhaps the fact that many church leaders shared his educational biases partially explains his failure to do so. His constant battling reduced the quality of education in Utah and did irreparable harm to teacher morale. Yet, it also demon­strated unequivocally Lee's candor, his straightforward approach, his determination to plod ahead with his principles no matter what the political consequences-what most of his admirers proudly called "the courage of his convictions." Such varying reactions to Lee reinforce his image as not only the controversial politician but the charismatic one as well. 144 EDUCATION II l l'The Governor and the Schools." 2Lee to Time. 3Lee to Alexander. 4Six Democratic legislators challenged his claim in a telegram to Time. 5Utah State Department of Public Instruction, Status of Teacher Personnel in Utah, 1954-55 (Salt Lake City, 1954), p. 156. See table listing salaries paid teachers, principals, and supervisors in the various states. Average teacher salary in Nevada was $3,836; Wyoming, $3,400; Colorado, $3,600; New Mex­ico, $4,150. cLogan Herald-Journal and Ogden Standard-Examiner, January 18, 1954. West claimed Lee was using figures more than a year old and inaccurate at that. 7Lee to Mrs. Madeleine Dale, Salt Lake City, December 17, 1953, Lee Gubernatorial Papers. tSalt Lake Tribune, March 7, 1950. 9Lee to Merrill K. Davis, chairman, Utah Legislative Council, May 13, 1954, Lee Gubernatorial Papers. (See also Lee's address to the Salt Lake Adver­tising Club, April 7, 1954, MS, ibid.) Lee explained that the Tribune editorial was inspired by the story of a man without academic degrees who was brilliant enough to teach nuclear physics at the university: "He was released from his teaching position, not because he lacked ability, but because he was using another's name. The University characterizes him as a 'genius' as did other institutions at which he taught. And he was teaching a most difficult subject, nuclear physics, not beginning Arithmetic or the ABC's. This man had no col­lege degree, but he was gifted in other ways. Said the Tribune, and I quote: 'His real crime was that though he was denied a college education, he had the drive to learn on his own and compulsion to teach. With some voids he achieved unusual mastery of a most difficult subject matter. We have only one question: Was he a good teacher? We do not go all the way with the "cult of the Ph.D." in believing professional qualifications can be fully measured by academic degrees. Teaching takes an extra something that cannot be obtained in books or laboratories.' " 10Ibid. "Ibid. 12Lee received national reactions, many emotionally charged, such as the school superintendent from Georgia who said, "I have heard a lot of dumb governors and a lot of dumb speeches from dumb governors, but you take the cake." (R. E. Hood, Brunswick, Ga., to Lee, March 15, 1954, Lee Guberna­torial Papers.) The letter reinforced Lee's prejudices against educators. He accused Hood of being educated without being intelligent and suggested that he collect a little, "since it should be helpful to you in your work." (Lee to Hood, March 23, 1954, ibid). Lee complained to Gov. Herman Talmadge of Georgia who, though, a Democrat, shared Lee's biases toward educators. Talmadge apologized profusely for "such a disrespectful letter to one of the finest Gover­nors of our Sovereign States." He claimed that Georgia teachers had received a 125 percent increase in salaries during his administration and were still unsatis­fied. (Talmadge to Lee, April 1, 1954, ibid.) 13Salt Lake Telegram, March 4, 1950. 14Deseret News, April 28, 1954. "William G. Carr, executive secretary, NEA, Washington, D.C., to Lee, May 24, 1954, Lee Gubernatorial Papers. l cLee to Carr, June 9, 1954, ibid. "Deseret News, September 20, 1954. 18Deseret News, November 20, 1954. 145 J. BRACKEN LEE 19LeGrand P. Backman, president, Salt Lake City Board of Education, and M. Lynn Bennion, superintendent of schools, to Lee, March 11, 1955, Lee Gubernatorial Papers. 20Lee to Backman and Bennion, March 17, 1955, ibid. 21Deseret News, March 4, 1955. 22House Journal, 31st Legislature, as quoted by Wilcox, "The Major Finan­cial Policies," p. 59. 23Salt Lake Tribune, January 20, 1956. 24Utah Foundation, Condition of Utah State Finances-1957, Research Report no. 146 (Salt Lake City, 1957), p. 89, as quoted by Wilcox, 'The Major Financial Policies," p. 76. 2r,Ibid. During a thirteen-year period the school equalization mill levy rose and fell as follows: 1948, 8.9 mills; 1949, 8.28 mills; 1950, 8.05 mills; 1951, 6.3 mills; 1952, 0.0 mills; 1953, 3.6 mills; 1954, 0.0 mills; 1955, 4.6 mills; 1956, 2.1 mills; 1957, 1.0 mills; 1958, 1.0 mills; 1959, 6.10 mills; 1960, 5.90 mills. 26Bennion to author. 27Bateman to author. 28Black interview. Calvin Rawlings added that a "penurious attitude doesn't make a good governor." Rawlings interview. 29Rampton interview. In Lee's opinion, Rampton's $65 million bond was a mistake and definitely not necessary. Lee interview. 30Dawson interview. 31Malmquist interview. 32Teuscher interview. 33Interview with William B. Smart, executive editor, Deseret News, July 3, 1972, Salt Lake City. 34Lee interview. 35Ibid. 146