“This president receives the lion’s share of funding from organized labor, and the teachers’ unions represent a massive source of funding for the Democratic Party,” Romney said. “The challenge with that is when it comes to actual reform to make schools better for our kids, they talk a good game, but they don’t do it.”

He continued, “If I’m president of the United States, instead of just giving lip service to improving our schools, I will actually put the kids first and the union behind in giving our kids better teachers, better options and better choices for a better future.”

The message is consistent for the Romney campaign, which regularly heaps criticism on the Democratic president’s policies but offers only a vague road map for what Romney would do.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Wednesday that Romney’s shift to education was welcome after a long campaign season in which he said the GOP rarely mentioned the issue.

“Education never came up in the Republican primary in any of the debates, or if it did, it came up almost never,” Carney said.

Carney said Obama’s education initiatives have received broad bipartisan support and that the president “looks forward to defending that record.”

Romney’s shift carries some risk. His regular criticism of labor unions, in particular, threatens to alienate voters in Rust Belt states like Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania, where a close election may be decided.

Before the speech, Romney announced Tuesday a team of education policy advisers that includes former Education Secretary Rod Paige and other officials from President George W. Bush’s administration. Paige is among several prominent opponents of teachers’ unions on the panel. As education secretary in 2004, he labeled the National Education Association a “terrorist organization.”

Romney’s positions on education have evolved over time. He once supported abolishing the Education Department but reversed that position as a presidential candidate in 2007. At the time, he said he came to see the value of the federal government in “holding down the interests of the teachers’ unions” and putting kids and parents first.

Romney also changed his position on the Bush-era education overhaul known as “No Child Left Behind.” He said he supported the law as a candidate in 2007, but he has since generally come out against the policy many conservatives see as an expansion of the federal government.

Romney continues to support the federal accountability standards in the law, however. He also has said the student testing, charter-school incentives and teacher evaluation standards in Obama’s “Race to the Top” competition “make sense,” although the federal government should have less control over education. The campaign in recent days has emphasized his support for charter schools while governor of Massachusetts, a theme likely to play out in Wednesday’s address.

The speech represents Romney’s first public event in four days. Working to close Obama’s cash advantage, he’s coming off a three-day fundraising swing in the New York area that his chief finance aide said had netted $15 million. A single finance event in Manhattan on Tuesday evening generated $5 million.

Still, the campaign is eager to drive a positive message for voters now tuning in to the contest.

The education speech follows a relatively quiet phase for Romney, who has been focused on fundraising but usually delivers one major address a week. Most of his recent speeches, however, have been about the economic themes that so far have defined his campaign.

The election, Romney aides say, will be a referendum on Obama’s economic leadership far more than a question of Romney’s business career, regardless of how much Democrats highlight that issue.

So far, Romney aides have let Democrats — led by President Barack Obama — do most of the talking.

Obama sharply attacked Romney’s background as a venture capitalist on Monday, offering his most expansive comments to date about how Romney’s role as founder of the Boston-based private equity firm doesn’t necessarily translate to the White House.

“If your main argument for how to grow the economy is ‘I knew how to make a lot of money for investors,’ then you’re missing what this job is about,” Obama said during a news conference at an international summit in Chicago. “It doesn’t mean you weren’t good at private equity, but that’s not what my job is as president. My job is to take into account everybody, not just some. My job is to make sure that the country is growing not just now, but 10 years from now and 20 years from now.”

He added: “This is not a distraction. This is what this campaign is going to be about — is what is a strategy for us to move this country forward in a way where everybody can succeed?”

Romney did not respond personally to the broadside. Instead, his campaign issued a written statement as he courted donors on Wall Street in the midst of a three-day fundraising tour. In the statement, Romney said Obama was once again attacking the free enterprise system.

“What this election is about is the 23 million Americans who are still struggling to find work and the millions who have lost their homes and have fallen into poverty,” he said. “President Obama refuses to accept moral responsibility for his failed policies. My campaign is offering a positive agenda to help America get back to work.”

The Romney campaign has offered several defenses since Obama’s re-election team launched an all-out assault against Bain: It’s a simple distraction, an affront to free markets, an attempt to divide the nation, a misreading of the firm’s success. The Romney campaign released a Web video last week featuring workers from an Indiana company that benefited from Bain’s involvement.

However, Romney himself has generally avoided the issue as he spends most of his time privately raising money. He ignored Obama’s criticism during a $2,500-a-plate reception at the Waldorf-Astoria hotel.

“I understand the economy because I’ve lived in it,” he said. “And by the way, I’ve been successful, but I’ve also lost. There’s sometimes I failed. I probably learned more from failures than from the successes. But I know how this economy works.”

Romney’s relative silence was made possible, in part, by a gaffe by Newark, N.J., Mayor Cory Booker, an Obama supporter who on Sunday called exchanges by the campaigns over Bain “nauseating” and a distraction from issues that interest voters. He walked back his comments after they dominated the campaign news for a day.

Obama is running television ads across five swing states featuring a former worker who likens the firm Romney founded to a vampire. The president’s re-election campaign has also released Web videos and hosted multiple conference calls with employees from companies that suffered under Bain’s leadership.

Romney senior aide Stuart Stevens described the television ad as “performance art gibberish.”

“Shouting louder and getting more angry is not very persuasive,” Stevens said in response to the line of attack. “The idea that people are walking around with less of a paycheck or higher gas prices because of something Bain Capital did 20 years ago is absurd.”

Romney faced similar criticism from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich during the Republican primary. Gingrich accused Romney of “looting a company” and suggested that he return money earned “from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over his years at Bain.”

The argument helped fuel Gingrich’s surprise victory in South Carolina. Democrats are betting big that it will help Obama win over working-class voters in November, citing polling that suggests Romney would struggle with lower-income voters. But exit polling from the GOP primary shows Romney won such voters about half of the time.

In a rare recent interview on Bain, Romney told a conservative radio host last week that the closure of a Florida factory under Bain’s control was not his problem. “The steel factory closed down two years after I left Bain Capital. I was no longer there. So that’s hardly something which is on my watch,” he said.

The Obama campaign has pointed out, however, that Romney continued to profit from Bain’s investments years after he left.

Romney also opened himself to new criticism by resurrecting a controversy over the number of jobs he created at Bain. In the radio interview, he jabbed the Obama campaign for failing to mention that Bain created “over 100,000 jobs.” He has struggled for months to back up the jobs claim.

Bain offered this statement Monday responding to Democratic criticism: “Despite political attacks that emphasize the few companies that have struggled, the facts are that during Bain Capital’s ownership, revenues grew in 80 percent of the more than 350 companies in which we have invested.”

The former Massachusetts governor co-founded Bain in the early 1980s, but he left in 1999 to run the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics and pursue a political career. He has lived off his investments and retirement package ever since.

His net worth is now as much as $250 million, which would make him among the wealthiest presidents ever elected.

___

AP Deputy Director of Polling Jennifer Agiesta contributed to this report.

The fact that Romney likely cannot win Massachusetts — and probably won’t even try to — illustrates the degree to which his currying favor with conservative Republicans in GOP presidential primaries has alienated the moderate base that launched his political career.

If Romney defeats Obama while losing Massachusetts, he would be the first presidential candidate elected without carrying his home state since before the Civil War. James K. Polk lost Tennessee en route to the White House — 168 years ago.

In 2000, Democrat Al Gore, who had spent years in Washington as a senator and vice president, fell short of winning Tennessee in his losing White House bid. Other notable home-state losers include Democrats Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota in 1968 and Adlai Stevenson of Illinois in 1952 and 1956. Republicans need to go back to 1936 to find a nominee who didn’t carry his home state: Kansas Gov. Alf Landon.

Romney aides argue that it would be a waste of money to run TV ads and compete in a state Obama carried by 25 percentage points in 2008.

Some Massachusetts residents agree, feeling that their former governor used the state as a springboard for his national political ambitions. And some seem to resent him for it.

“He doesn’t know where he lives,” said Mike Egan, a retired independent sitting at a Dunkin’ Donuts in Belmont, near Romney’s home.

While Romney’s permanent address is the home he keeps in this upscale Boston suburb, he spends considerable time, including holidays and vacations, at his homes in California and New Hampshire.

Egan and others say Romney seemed to have his eye on the White House as soon as he arrived at the Massachusetts State House in 2003.

The following year, he made his first trip to Iowa, home of the leadoff presidential caucuses, to speak at the state GOP’s fall banquet some weeks before President George W. Bush’s re-election.

He would visit Iowa three times in 2005 and nine times in 2006. That year, Romney spent 212 days outside of Massachusetts. One trip included a visit to Iraq and Afghanistan to enhance his international credentials, just as his state grappled with a devastating flood.

“By the time he left, it became clear to everybody that he was committed to national politics,” said Massachusetts Republican Sheldon Binder, a retiree who supported Romney, as he sat near Egan.

Republicans had held the governorship for 12 straight years by the time Romney took office in 2003.

Voters were comfortable supporting candidates with right-of-center fiscal profiles. And Romney’s moderate profile, including support of abortion and gay rights, fit in with other Republicans.

But some in Massachusetts were turned off by what they saw as Romney’s effort to project a more conservative profile on hot-button issues, in part to prepare to court socially conservative activists in states such as Iowa that hold early nominating contests in election years.

Romney reversed his position on abortion while in office. And, after advocating full equality for gay and lesbian couples, he publicly condemned the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision in 2003 to allow gay marriage.

“He’s a moderate. He’s not a conservative Republican in the true sense of the word,” said Matt Walsh, a 36-year-old advertiser from Mansfield who sat with his mother at the doughnut shop. “That’s why he played well at first. He won the voters in the middle.”

Romney was elected governor by a slim margin — 50 percent to his Democratic opponent’s 45 percent — and his approval ratings, while never soaring, topped 50 percent in public opinion polls at times during his one term. But by the October before he left office in 2007, Romney’s approval had dipped to 34 percent in a Boston Globe poll.

With Massachusetts apparently out of reach, Romney aides are trying to claim his native Michigan as the campaign’s home turf. But while Obama can bank on winning his home state of Illinois, Michigan is no lock for Romney.

Romney, 65, was born in Detroit and grew up nearby in Bloomfield Hills, but hasn’t lived in Michigan since his teen years. Despite Michigan being viewed as competitive in recent campaigns, no Republican has carried the state since George H. W. Bush in 1988.

What’s more, Obama and other Democrats have criticized Romney for opposing the 2008 federal bailout of Detroit-based automakers Chrysler and General Motors. Romney favored allowing the companies to go through bankruptcy without taxpayer help.

Obama, meanwhile, frequently highlights his decision to extend the companies a lifeline and their return to profitability as one of the successes of his administration.

Still, Michigan is more within Romney’s reach than for any Republican in nearly a quarter century.

His family name, made by his father, George, once a governor and an automotive executive in Michigan, still resonates in the state. Romney also has influential contacts in the state, which he reminded voters about at every stop while campaigning for Michigan’s GOP primary in February, which he won.

Michigan also has trended Republican in recent state elections, including a 2010 GOP sweep of statewide offices. Detroit, the dominant force for Democrats, has seen its population shrink amid the auto industry’s troubles, while its suburbs and western and northern Michigan have kept their GOP complexion.

“The climate is much more ripe for a Republican victory in 2012,” said Jeff Timmer, a former Michigan Republican Party director. “When you add to that he does have home-state roots and an established presence, it adds an element to Michigan that no other candidate has brought to this state in a long time.”

So while Michigan may also be a stretch, it rates higher than Massachusetts on Romney’s priority list, according to former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu.

Of Romney’s chances in Massachusetts, Sununu said: “I wouldn’t rule it out completely — even though it’s No. 50 on the list.”

___

Beaumont reported from Iowa.