Letters
Please explain your endorsement, school principals
With deep respect and admiration for Jewish day schools, Jewish education and Jewish educators, I found the “united” political endorsement of local area Jewish school principals rather astounding. From what I understand, I am not alone in reacting with such astonishment.
Perhaps, therefore, it would be useful for the school principals to explain more specifically and clearly why they engaged in this unprecedented act. For example:
As the principals must be aware, there is a very capable and committed Orthodox resident of Teaneck, Tamar Warburg, who is running for Assembly in the relevant district and who enjoys substantial support within the Jewish community (including among parents of many students), and yet the principals deliberately chose not to endorse her. It would be helpful for the principals to explain why they have taken the extraordinary measure of endorsing candidates (knowing that such a move can invite government scrutiny) and why specifically they have disregarded an eminently qualified Orthodox candidate and her supporters?
Obviously aware of the federal tax law limitations prohibiting schools from endorsing political candidates, the principals first assert that “we are not speaking for the institutions we serve, but write in our personal capacity.” Indeed, they try to justify their endorsement as needed for educational purposes, stating that they were purportedly “motivated by [their] deep commitment to Jewish education.” They do not explain, however, how their endorsement of local state Assembly candidates relates to their educational responsibilities. Is there a reason why this particular Assembly race, as opposed to the more contentious statewide gubernatorial race, is the only one that requires input (even an endorsement) from Jewish educational leaders?
Perhaps even more concerning is the not so veiled effort to join ranks with those who are trying to defeat Ms. Warburg by questioning through innuendo and the like her fidelity and loyalty to the Jewish community and its interests. Are the principals really saying or implying that Ms. Warburg, an accomplished lawyer who is deeply committed to Modern Orthodoxy and the State of Israel and is the granddaughter of Dr. Norman Lamm, the esteemed long-time president of Yeshiva University, would somehow harm Jewish education? Why have the principals overlooked, ignored and discounted Ms. Warburg’s deep roots in and contributions to the local Jewish community? What is it about the other two candidates (one who is a resident of Hackensack and likely does not and will never send her children to Jewish day schools) that the principals believe is better for Jewish education?
The only explanation for endorsing the other two candidates but not Ms. Warburg that the principals offer in the united endorsement letter is their statement that: “These candidates have earned the endorsement” of local political action organizations “as well as many of our community’s political leaders.” Huh?! What do the personal political preferences of political action groups and unnamed politicians have to do with the principals’ “deep commitment to Jewish education” and to their unprecedented decision to expressly endorse particular candidates?
Again, it should be underscored that these questions are raised respectfully and appreciatively for the important role the principals play in educating our children and serving our community. But the principals and schools need to recognize that there is a substantial portion of the Jewish community (including parents) who are concerned about the wisdom, prudence, fairness and accuracy of the principals’ united political endorsement letter. I hope the principals will make themselves available to answer the above and other similar questions.
Daniel D. Edelman
Teaneck
comments