I enjoyed Lori Sturdevant's symposium salute to Rudy Perpich (Sept. 18) on the 10th anniversary of the former governor's death, and was particularly pleased by the group's recognition of his leadership on school choice.

In fact, I have full reason to believe that if he had lived, the DFLer from Hibbing would have become an even more avid champion of educational freedom. By "educational freedom," I'm referring to the kind that truly allows parents to pick the best school for their children, be the institution public or private, religious or not.

One of the points driven home by Perpich's efforts is that the greater the quotient of parental choice in any proposed reform, the wilder the opposing rhetoric likely will be about how the sky above Minnesota will fall seconds after it's adopted. Of a piece is not just how bloated, but how silly, objections to school choice sound once the programs become law and are profitably and responsibly used by families.

Come with me to yesteryear -- even though by-rote opposition in these matters remains with us still.

In the late 1970s and early '80s, the Minnesota Business Partnership made its largest contribution by focusing on education. The then-chairman of its Educational Quality Task Force, 3M CEO Lew Lehr, was not optimistic about educational quality in the state. This led to a Partnership study in late 1984 that recommended, among other things, "restructuring grades 7-12 to provide both greater focus and student choice."

It was exactly at this time that Perpich was on the lookout for new ideas in education for the coming legislative session but was disappointed by the thin fare he was getting from his Education Department. This led to a meeting involving senior administration officials outside of the education bureaucracy and, not incidentally, several people active in the Partnership as well as the Citizens League.

One of the ideas proposed by the nonadministration guests would allow students to cross school district lines -- long the Berlin Walls of public education -- to attend the public school of their choice. A couple of days later, Perpich agreed to run with the initiative, and just days after that, he announced his intentions at a quickly arranged speech hosted by the Citizens League.

As one might expect, reaction in the education community was not uniformly warm. The first story in the Minneapolis Star and Tribune opened with this synopsis: "Some school officials were puzzled by Gov. Rudy Perpich's education proposal Friday while teachers' union officials vowed to oppose it and key legislators greeted it cautiously."

The incoming Republican chairwoman of the House Finance Committee said she spent two hours "grilling" administration officials on the plan and came away convinced that it was unworkable. "I see this as the state being in the position of encouraging elitism," she said.

Whipping out his biggest oratorical gun, the executive secretary of the Minnesota Federation of Teachers shot off that "a voucher system would be the end of public education." Public schools, he said, "would simply become caretaking facilities for those who can't afford anything better."

Perpich, please recall, had not proposed vouchers at all, merely the opening of enrollment among public schools.

The governor was terrific in pursuing four major reforms over the next few years:

• Postsecondary Enrollment Options in 1985;
• the High School Graduation Incentive Program in 1987;
• a voluntary cross-district, open-enrollment bill, again in 1987;
• and a more rigorous, state-mandated open-enrollment bill into law in 1988 -- the first of its kind in the nation.

Suffice to say a critical number of people, both in and out of government, played major roles in these victories. For example, the postsecondary options program, which gives high school juniors and seniors a chance to take college courses, would not have passed in 1985, if anytime, without the enthusiasm and skill of Republican Rep. Connie Levi.

But the point deserves emphasis: Far more than any other state players, governors have the standing and clout to dominate the dance of policymaking in education.

As demonstrated again a decade later by Arne Carlson with his passionate advocacy of educational tax credits for low-income families, Rudy Perpich understood how much progress governors can make in expanding freedom and learning -- not just for "elites," as the skeptical legislator worried two decades ago, but especially for less-advantaged children who deserve bigger and better opportunities most of all.

Mitchell B. Pearlstein is chairman of the St. Paul-based Partnership for Choice in Education.

This commentary was originally published in the Star Tribune on September 30, 2005.