The last big push to transform federal higher education policy came in 2006, under President George W.  Bush’s Education Secretary Margaret Spellings.

Not surprisingly, she has a few thoughts about the current president’s new plans, which she shares with Inside Higher Ed writer Michael Stratford.

Q. What’s your reaction to the higher education plan President Obama unveiled last month?

A. It’s encouraging that he’s weighed in on the issue. His leadership matters. He has a big microphone. It’s the right issue at the right time, and I commend him for engaging on it. Having said that, some of the proposals are unworkable and ill-conceived in the short run. We need to start with a rich and credible data system before we leap into some sort of artificial ranking system that, frankly, would have all kinds of unintended consequences. It’s a little bit of a bridge too far, particularly when the data is so lacking at the moment.

Q. One of those data-related obstacles, arguably, is the lack of a federal “unit record” database. Do you support one?

A. I do indeed. What we have now is sort of these cul-de-sac systems with states doing their own thing. That’s better than nothing. But particularly in a commodity, if you will, that is so interstate, we should do better than that given our very robust investments in higher education at the federal level. So, yes, I think we need a federal unit record system and called for it many years ago.

…Q. Do you think Obama’s proposals, many of which echo the reforms you pushed during your tenure as education secretary, are being met with a different reaction than yours were? A. I do. First of all, that was six years ago, and it was almost heretical for things that were in the Spellings Commission to be said in public. In the last six years, there’s been a lot of activity, external to the government, that has softened the ground and made this more socially acceptable to speak about: the foundation world (Gates, Lumina, and others who have invested heavily in it), the business community, the civil rights community, states, governors, and higher ed.May I also say that the academy is more likely to give a Democrat president, who was an academic, more leeway than a Republican, by any measure?