In May 2007, West Virginia First Lady Gayle Manchin visited Shepherdstown. She paid her first-ever visit to Shepherdstown Elementary School, where she read to three first grade classes and toured the school. After reading to the children, Mrs. Manchin spoke with The Observer.

 

Observer: Last week you traveled to Virginia, for the 400th anniversary of the Jamestown settlement. While you were there you met Queen Elizabeth II. Tell us about this.

GM: It was one of those things in life that you think you will never get to do. It was very memorable. We had been sent protocol on how to curtsy and that you have to wait for her to extend her hand. Her husband, the prince, has a great sense of humor. We were at the governor’s mansion and the queen and the prince were meeting us. Governor Kaine explained to them who we were, that we were the governor and first lady of West Virginia, and the prince said: “And you invited them back!?” He has a good dry wit about him. The queen spoke before the senate and house in Virginia. She has a very strong voice. The queen looked very much like she does in the pictures. She dresses beautifully, with a hat for every outfit. I found her to be very gracious.

Observer: Education is obviously important to you. You were a teacher for many years, now you are a member of the West Virginia State Board of Education. Why is it so important to you?

GM: To me, education is the cornerstone of everything—economic development, health care, the root of that is education. It is what gives people choice in life. In our state we have a high percentage of poverty, we have people in very rural isolated areas. And if we are going to break that cycle of poverty it is through education. That way we give them options and choices in life. It is critical we make sure that every child in West Virginia should have the opportunity and advantage of the best education we can offer.

Observer: How are we doing with education?

GM: We are working on it. It is not easy. I think there are a number of factors: the rural landscape of our state is a challenge. In West Virginia we need to think how technology can be an advantage—for example, distance learning and online classes.

Observer: You talk about the poverty in West Virginia, but Jefferson County has the lowest poverty in WV at five percent of the population. The cost of living here is much higher than other parts of the state, yet teachers are paid the same if they work here as they would in other counties. As a result, many of our best teachers leave the county and work in Maryland and Virginia, where the pay is better. Do you think teachers who work in Jefferson County should get paid more?

GM: The problem is this. We can raise the wages here, but Virginia and Maryland can continue to raise theirs. They have the capacity to do this. We can’t compete dollar for dollar. The other problem is that in the counties that border Jefferson County, those teachers will say: “Why should I work in Hardy County if I can work in Jefferson County and make more money?” It is a challenge. You have to look at the teaching environment. If you paid the teacher more money, would you automatically prevent them from wanting to leave? We need to do a teacher’s survey on what is important to them, next to salary—for example, the working environment.

Observer: This is a politically sensitive thing right? Teachers in other parts of the state want to be paid as much as teachers here.

GM: The teacher’s unions don’t want locality pay; they want everything to be equal across the state. Then you get into the issue of what about teachers who have national board certification. Should they be compensated more? I believe people should be rewarded for extra qualifications. Research shows that when teachers are higher qualified in their content area, students do better in their classroom.

Observer: You are on the state board of education; you have a voice in this. What do you think of paying teachers locality pay?

GM: I am undecided on the locality pay. I’m not against it; I’m not for it. It is a challenge that we need to address. I really believe, at the end of the day, it is not just about money. It’s the teaching environment, the relationship with other teachers, the leadership of the school, the flexibility a teacher has, her sense of ownership, her workload.

Observer: What do you think about No Child Left Behind?

GM: What it has forced us to do as a nation is to identify the students who would have previously fallen between the cracks. The good news is that did make us identify these children.

Observer: And the bad news?

GM: It has put so much emphasis on that one test, that one day. That test is now what defines the school and teacher, and we know that is not true. And I think it has brought us less rigor in the classroom. No Child Left Behind sets a minimum-level requirement. We are worried about reaching this minimum level rather than worrying about reaching for a higher level.

Observer: Do you miss teaching?

GM: Yes, I do. My background is middle, secondary and college level, but I guess that at this point in my life, I can make a bigger difference by being a voice in the state rather than being a voice in the classroom. I hope so.

Observer: What do you think about table gaming? It’s interesting that we now rely on gambling to raise money, when in the past it would have been up to government to fund public services like education.

GM: The original gaming bill passed in the previous administration. Gambling is not a good way to pay the bills in your state. However, that bill is passed. I think table-gaming at the four [county] locations is not an unfair thing to do. I think allowing people to vote for it gives people a voice.

Observer: Do you gamble?

GM: I do [she laughs]. It is fun. I think the problem is the little places on the corner. The gray machines. That’s where you hear about people losing all their money. People who go cash their pay checks.

Observer: Are you in favor of table gaming?

GM: I am in favor of people being allowed to vote [on the table-gaming issue].

Observer: Yes, but are YOU in favor of table gaming?

GM: I support it at the four tracks, the resort areas. I support that the money be dedicated to services that we really need in our state.

Observer: What do you like most about being First Lady?

GM: I’m very honored to represent the women of West Virginia; I’m very proud to do that. The thing that surprised me about being First Lady is that as I travel around the state, I realize I do have a voice, and that now I see it as a window of opportunity to talk about the things that are important to me and that are important to the state: about education, about the level playing field for children and families in the state.

Observer: What was the least enjoyable thing?

GM: I guess people criticizing the Governor [laughs]. It is tough when people criticize him.

Observer: It is interesting you said “Governor” not “Joe”, or “my husband.” You see him as a public persona; is that how you shield yourself from the criticism?

GM: I think so. It is not personal. It is the position. You have to understand it is not personal. It is about the position.

Observer: Let me ask you about politics. Do you have political aspirations yourself?

GM: No. I think Joe and I make a very good team. I enjoy being able to focus on what I really love. My husband has to focus on everything. I can pick and choose my issues. I’m very happy with that arrangement.

Observer: Now something might happen, God forbid, to Senator Byrd. And your husband will have to choose someone. Would you ever be interested in that?

GM: We have talked about it. Not me being the choice, but that it might happen. But I can tell you, mentally, Senator Byrd is on top of his game. He will not retire. It is his life. My hope is we don’t have to make the decision. Joe and I consider ourselves a team. If he, as governor, appointed me as senator, that would put me in a different location, and would not enable us to work together. That is more important.

Observer: “That is more important?” That you stay together. That comes first?

GM: Yes, I think so. We are at a very fortunate time in our life; our children have grown up. We certainly enjoy the grandchildren. But we can now make decisions without having to think about school systems, after-school activities. That is a good thing.