Our Opinion: Make no mistake about federal involvement

News Tribune editorial

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Why are people in public life so reluctant to admit a mistake?

The question resurfaces with the federal government’s insistence on reauthorizing a sweeping education law that 26 states, so far, have abandoned.

The question also is largely rhetorical. Elected officials fear admitting errors will scuttle re-election. So, instead, they strive to appear perfect, a pretense not consistent with being human.

With regard to the “No Child Left Behind” federal education law — championed by former President George W. Bush — the Obama administration’s reauthoritization effort appears inconsistent.

It is inconsistent with granting waivers to states and with Obama’s across-the-board insistence on blaming Bush.

No Child Left Behind poses two important issues: Is education a federal responsibility and are federal standards the best way to improve academic performance?

The answer to the first question — from a constitutional standpoint — clearly is no. The U.S. Constitution largely is silent on education, in contrast to the Missouri Constitution’s emphasis on providing and funding public education.

As a practical matter, however, Americans have raised concerns about statistics indicating U.S. students are academically inferior to their peers in other countries.

Public concerns attract candidates’ platforms and promises. And — for good or ill — education has been characterized as a national problem in need of federal mandates.

But Obama’s waiver option has been sought by and granted to more than half of the states, with another 10 applications pending.

Now, we get this confusing, convoluted statement from Education Secretary Arne Duncan: “A strong, bipartisan reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act remains the best path forward in education reform, but as 26 states have now demonstrated, our kids can’t wait any longer for Congress to act.”

But our kids haven’t been waiting; the federal law has been in effect for 10 years. And many states want out.

Failure to push for reauthorization, however, might be construed as an admission that the federal government is imperfect.

And we mustn’t have that.

More like this story

Sequoia 11 months, 1 week ago

I don't think you can say that there is "clearly" no federal responsibility when it comes to education. If not for federal invovlement in education, many states might still segregate students by race or refuse to teach basic science. Your statement is stunningly inaccurate on a number of levels. Do you think we should have 50 completely different education systems in each state? How many people read this before it went to print? Didn't anybody stop on that line and think "Wait a minute..."?

Just because the Constitution is silent on something doesn't mean that the federal government has no responsibility. The constitution doesn't mention cars, planes, highways, nuclear weapons, sulfer dioxide, outer space or the quality of foods and drugs, yet most of us agree that the federal government can and should be involved in these things.

JCLifer 11 months, 1 week ago

Whatever happened to STATES' RIGHTS???

If we don't allow state's to choose what they want, then why even have states? Just think-- that would be 50 huge multi-billion dollar buracracies that could be eliminated and we just let the Federal Government do it all.

Does anyone ever read the constitution or understand how and why our country was founded? It must be the poor public education system that has gone downhill since the liberals took over education.

tonto_goldberg 11 months, 1 week ago

In order: 1. The Constitution of 1789. It's not the same as the Articles of Confederation. 2. The collapse of the Nullification Crisis in 1833. 3. The end of the Civil War in 1865.

JCLifer 11 months, 1 week ago

See! I made my point. I am a JCPS graduate.

tonto_goldberg 11 months, 1 week ago

Well, surprise, surprise!

Sequoia 11 months, 1 week ago

Its a basic point that some people seem to misunderstand. The Constitution was not written to free us from King George. It was written to correct the mistakes of the Articles of Confederation.

Sequoia 11 months, 1 week ago

Lifer wondered whether people ever read the constitution or understand how or why our country was founded. That, along with his post about JCPS, seemed to imply that the constitution founded our country, and that he accepted Tonto's correction with good humor and aplomb. Maybe he was inspired by the NT's scolding of those who can't admit error.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting. Maybe I'M the one not reading what was written. If so, I'll admit MY mistake.

Sequoia 11 months, 1 week ago

The Constitution was written to give the federal government more power than it had under the Articles of Confederation. You're not going to argue with that, are you? We had a much weaker central government under the Articles. It just didn't work, and we're not going back. We're a union. We're one people. That's been settled.

Littleinvestor makes a good point: Federal involvement in education is bad, unless it's doing something you need or like. Then it isn't.

I'm certainly not arguing in favor of one-size-fits all education or NCLB (which was not cooked up by people that Grace and Lifer would call "liberals," if you'll recall), even though it is "liberal" in the worst sense of the word. Just more evidence that the conservative "movement" is not actually conservative.

Feds ought to be involved in education to ensure that states don't violate students' constitutional rights, or segregate students by race, and to make sure states have enough money to pay for things like special education. All that is part of freedom, which, Grace,you indicate in almost every post that you don't understand. If companies want to be "free" to hire outside their state boundaries, they need to be certain there is a basic core competency across the country.

Beyond that, I'm actually very committed to the idea of states and even cities as laboratories of democracy. State experimentation with policy is a great way to figure out what works and what doesn't. On a lot of policy issues, I think the federal government ought to just cut state and local governments a check and say, "figure it out."

ANYwho, all I said was that the NT's statement about the lack of any federal responsibility in education, and their breezy statement about how to interpret the constitution's silence on a particular issue, is deeply misleading and actually quite sloppy.

Some of you folks like to argue with what you heard, rather than what I said.

connor 11 months, 1 week ago

The Constitution was written because not all of the states were happy with the articles. In some ways the Constitution strengthened the Federal government but it also limited it as well. There were also a few gaps that needed to be addressed.

Littleinvestor 11 months, 1 week ago

I have to agree with Graceful on this. Education has been going downhill ever since the feds started getting involved in a big way in the 1960s. However, one excellent thing the federal government did was standardize special education because when I was in grade school many of those special children were not in school at all. That has probably gone too far now because there are a few (a small percentage of special needs students) students who are currently in public schools who might be better off in a different setting. Every student should be educated to their best potential but the public school may not be the best place for that in some instances. State officials would be better at determining that than some federal bureaucrat though. Those old Iowa Test of Basic Skills tests are still used in some school districts because they are way better than Missouri's MAP tests at showing teachers what children are failing to learn and giving the faculty a chance to adjust the curriculum. But not all districts want to spend the money on them.

tonto_goldberg 11 months, 1 week ago

One rather large point of clarification: The "No Child Left Behind Act" (NCLB) of 2001 made various changes to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) with the intent of improving services to the academically disadvantaged. They are not the same thing - ESEA is more than and different from NCLB.

JCLifer 11 months, 1 week ago

NCLB is the 2001 version of ESEA. Same thing.

tonto_goldberg 11 months, 1 week ago

The proposed reauthorization of ESEA includes significant chages to NCLB. Basically, NCLB dies and ESEA lives on. If you use Wikipedia, use it for the references and footnotes. It's not a good primary source.

JCLifer 11 months, 1 week ago

NLCB is just a catchy name that the Bush Administration gave to ESEA. This administration will probably call ESEA something like "ObamaEd". It doesn't really matter what it is called- it is all the same thing- just reauthorization of the ESEA.

JCLifer 11 months, 1 week ago

From Wikipedia: NCLB is a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which included Title I, the government's flagship aid program for disadvantaged students.[5] NCLB supports standards-based education reform based on the premise that setting high standards and establishing measurable goals can improve individual outcomes in education. The Act requires states to develop assessments in basic skills. States must give these assessments to all students at select grade levels in order to receive federal school funding. The Act does not assert a national achievement standard; standards are set by each individual state.[6] NCLB expanded the federal role in public education through annual testing, annual academic progress, report cards, teacher qualifications, and funding changes.[5]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_child_left_behind

2warped757 11 months, 1 week ago

As a former teacher, I find the "No Child Left Behind" concept to be totally absurd. Yes, every child has the right to an education and a quality one at that, but if anyone thinks that each child can learn the same information at the same rate or in the same way, I say put them in a classroom and let's see them accomplish that. Between that silliness and those worthless standardized tests that seem to be the Holy Grail of teaching, children today are not learning much of anything. They can't write, can't spell, can't make change, and have grammar skills that are unbelievably bad. I am SO glad to be out of the business of education. Teachers are no longer allowed to teach and the pay was lousy.

JCLifer 11 months, 1 week ago

Pay was lousy? Looks pretty good for a 9-month job to me: tinyurl.com/cvrwyus

kentheco 11 months, 1 week ago

I have to agree with 2warped757. You couldn’t pay me enough to put up with a system that prevents me from defending myself from attack or for putting up with parents that are not involved with their Childs’ education. If a parent doesn't care enough to see that homework is completed or take the time to meet with the teacher during the school year, why do they think they can come running when their child fails and doesn’t advance to the next grade. I also have to wonder how we, as a society, always blame the teachers for educations woes when through our “non-involvement” have allowed the problems to grow to where they are today.

Littleinvestor 11 months, 1 week ago

NCLB was a Bush II proposal, modeled on the Texas plan put into place when he was governor. I don't consider Bush II a liberal but he got liberals like Ted Kennedy to buy into it. Regardless, most educators in Missouri that I have contact with think it had good intent but is a very bad law that pretty much misses the intent.

CentralMissouriAssemlby 11 months, 1 week ago

Article I Section VIII of the US Constitution lists the enumerated powers of the federal government and education is not one of them. There is a misconception in this country regarding the true role of government and our civic duty as people. Please take some time to read our founding fathers documents to get a better understanding. I suggest starting with the Virginia Declaration of Rights which inspired the Declaration of Independence.

spelchek 11 months, 1 week ago

Informative post, thank you.

Clayton 11 months, 1 week ago

Now, we get this confusing, convoluted opinion from the News Trib. Has every federal responsibility been listed in the constitution? The answer to this question clearly is no.

The only valuable idea in this piece is the second issue mentioned: "are federal standards the best way to improve academic performance?" Then the author proceeds to ignore his/her own question. So what's the point of this opinion peace? A. To complain that politicians don't admit mistakes? (really?) B. To all but claim that NCLB was unconstitutional? (seriously?) C. To add a few sparks to the tinderbox and get readers debating tired issues in the comments thread? (bingo)

A more well written piece would push us to think about solving the core issue, rather than arguing about the constitution.

And we mustn't have that.

dokeus6 11 months, 1 week ago

What is the core issue of what is wrong with Education in America in your opinion Clayton? Could it be that the way that television has evolved that the attention span of a child is less than thirty seconds now? Has the way information on the shows that our children watch changed the way the information goes into their minds? No one wants to admit that things change so we are very hesitant to change. Instead of waiting eight to twelve years to be proactive on all of our countries problems, maybe we should examine them earlier. I feel we have become lazy as a country. We see all these issues happening in front of our faces but we go out of our way to avoid dealing with them which in turn causes us more grief in the long run. We have to make hard decisions but we should have input from everyone. We need to speak up and let our voices be heard!

Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting

Or login with:

OpenID

News Tribune