No Child Left Behind II
HJR 1 and HB 135, Utah's pushback bills on the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, passed the House unanimously yesterday. Jeniffer Toomer-Cook attributed the following to Patti Harrington (our new and incredible State Superintendent of Public Instruction -- who entered the system as a bus driver), regarding NCLB,
"(The time and money) could be used to improve student achievement in our state," Harrington said. "This is federal intrusion. The state runs public schools. My accountability is to the State Board of Education, the state Legislature and the governor. I shouldn't have the additional piece of the federal government on top of that."
This issue presents a great example of federalism -- the vertical separation of powers between the federal government and the states. The people, through the states, gave the federal government limited powers to deal with specified issues (e.g., national defense and treaties), and the states kept the remainder of government powers to deal with all other issues. On those other issues, to be quite blunt, the federal government was supposed to butt out. Federalism is the most unique aspect of our Constitution and one of the most important -- allowing states to do their own thing on many issues, thereby fostering competition and experimentation that drives innovation and improvement. Federalism is healthy for our country; however, it has been on the decline for many decades. NCLB might change that.
States take nothing more seriously than education. The federal government should never pretend to know a fraction as much about education as the states, and it especially should not pretend to know more about education in any particular state than the state itself does. Though Utah is on the forefront of the pushback effort, other states also are beginning to realize that something significant was taken from them and making movements toward taking it back. This isn't revolution, and it's not even disrespect. It is the Constitution working.
UPDATE: Margaret's bill and my previous entry got a mention in The New York Times. The article supports my federalism-upswing entry above. The article says,
Support from Democrats [for NCLB] has since withered [after passage in 2001], but vigorous challenges have come from Republican state legislators who view the measure as an unwanted mandate from Washington in an area traditionally left to states.
The action last year by the [Utah] House inspired similar actions nationwide. Legislatures in some 30 states considered challenges to the federal law. This year, the legislatures in Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, Vermont and Virginia are considering challenges.
"(The time and money) could be used to improve student achievement in our state," Harrington said. "This is federal intrusion. The state runs public schools. My accountability is to the State Board of Education, the state Legislature and the governor. I shouldn't have the additional piece of the federal government on top of that."
This issue presents a great example of federalism -- the vertical separation of powers between the federal government and the states. The people, through the states, gave the federal government limited powers to deal with specified issues (e.g., national defense and treaties), and the states kept the remainder of government powers to deal with all other issues. On those other issues, to be quite blunt, the federal government was supposed to butt out. Federalism is the most unique aspect of our Constitution and one of the most important -- allowing states to do their own thing on many issues, thereby fostering competition and experimentation that drives innovation and improvement. Federalism is healthy for our country; however, it has been on the decline for many decades. NCLB might change that.
States take nothing more seriously than education. The federal government should never pretend to know a fraction as much about education as the states, and it especially should not pretend to know more about education in any particular state than the state itself does. Though Utah is on the forefront of the pushback effort, other states also are beginning to realize that something significant was taken from them and making movements toward taking it back. This isn't revolution, and it's not even disrespect. It is the Constitution working.
UPDATE: Margaret's bill and my previous entry got a mention in The New York Times. The article supports my federalism-upswing entry above. The article says,
Support from Democrats [for NCLB] has since withered [after passage in 2001], but vigorous challenges have come from Republican state legislators who view the measure as an unwanted mandate from Washington in an area traditionally left to states.
The action last year by the [Utah] House inspired similar actions nationwide. Legislatures in some 30 states considered challenges to the federal law. This year, the legislatures in Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, Vermont and Virginia are considering challenges.
posted by steve u. at 2/16/2005
Subscribe
0 Comments:
<< Home