On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 7:09 PM, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > > *Republicans’ primary choice: The Constitution or the money > **GOP risks its small-government ID by backing federal funds for schools > *By David Davenport > The Washington Times > 6:53 p.m., Monday, May 16, 2011 > > Perhaps no issue better reveals one of the growing divisions in the Republican > Party <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/republican-party/> than > education policy. It wasn’t that long ago - 1996, in fact - that the party > platform called for the elimination of the U.S. Department of > Education<http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/us-department-of-education/>in > favor of a smaller federal government and greater power for states. But > in the past decade, beginning with President George W. > Bush<http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/george-w-bush/>’s > No Child Left Behind Act in 2001, Republicans have seemed to be > challenging Democrats <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/democrats/>to > see who can win the misguided race to federalize education. > > How did Republicans come to this place? In part, Republicans fell victim to > the age-old notion that in a crisis, the federal government must come to the > rescue. With America’s test scores lagging behind in international > comparisons, U.S. policymakers increasingly saw > kindergarten-through-12th-grade education in crisis. As governor of Texas, Mr. > Bush <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/george-w-bush/> had some > success with regimens of testing and accountability, so he brought his team > and ideas with him to Washington. The argument was that we could identify > failing schools through national testing and thereby address the problem. > Like poverty, drugs, illiteracy and other crises that led to federal > initiatives, our underperforming schools moved Washington onto a war > footing. > > President Obama <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/barack-obama/> has > continued to expand federal control of education. Secretary of Education > Arne Duncan thinks testing can identify not only failing schools, but also > failing teachers, and his “value added” approach seeks to tie test scores to > the performance of individual teachers and, ultimately, to their salaries > and job security. Because the federal government still has no constitutional > authority to intervene directly in local schools, instead the feds bribe - > sorry, incentivize - cash-strapped states and school districts to adopt > their tests and reforms through their Race to the Top grant programs. Only > Texas has declined to participate on the ground of state and local control. > > As if this weren’t enough, it was announced recently that concrete steps > are under way in Washington to develop a new national curriculum. The > Department > of > Education<http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/us-department-of-education/>is > funding the development of national guidelines, teaching materials, tests > and curricula, which have received some early expressions of support from > people on both sides of the political aisle. Others, including this author, > have signed a counterstatement pointing out that a one-size federal > curriculum hardly fits our nation’s diverse educational needs or our system > of federalism. > > Republican reformers believe in their federalized approach because it > enables them to make education more businesslike. By setting clear standards > and testing all students, they are turning education away from process and > toward outcomes. In addition, they are shifting the debate away from the > argument for more money, which has been the constant refrain of teachers > unions, to one about effectiveness. Still, this debate and the resulting > testing and accountability regimes could and should be carried out at the > state level, not in Washington. > > At the deepest level, federalizing education suggests that many Republicans > have given up on smaller government and state control in favor of using > government to produce their own desired outcomes - an oxymoronic > big-government conservatism. We can only hope that in the 2012 primaries, > Republicans will rediscover the constitutional view that education, which is > not a power delegated to the federal government, is best handled at the > state and local levels. > > *David Davenport is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a > former president of Pepperdine University. > > http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/16/republicans-primary-choice-the-constitution-or-the/ > * > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
<<attachment: DemocraticMoonbats.jpg>>
