I agree many democrats supported it in the first place. In matter of fact it has been on the table for more than a decade before it got heard and one of the primary, orginal sponors was Ted Kennedy.
What has happened is that Bush got the ball moving and got the idea out of committee during his honeymoon. It was signed into law in the Rose garden with the sponsors attending.
So what happened?
As to your other links - I have read those reports before. I could post various links that oppose some of that and others that make a mission to mars easy! They do not alter one single fact, they provide the spin the political parties (Dems and Reps) use to beat each other over the heads with.
As for the education dollars that is at the Dept of Education web site. Someone else posted a link to it all or the list at any rate, it is on the boards here.
Well more deletes [img]smile.gif[/img] I had about 5 paragraphs written and realized I was repeating myself from earlier posts.
The money is not the problem as I see it. The problem is most people have no idea what NCLB is all about (You are an exception), so they listen to the pundits from both sides that havent a clue either but want to score points with the voters that equally are clueless. Gee doesnt this sound like the typical government program?
You dont need NCLB money to accomplish the goals of the program. It can be accomlished in the day to day classroom.
Not sure about your state Dave and I would love to see the financial report showing the return of the unused money or any data to back that up. You mention that it is partisan and yet, many Democrats supported NCLB in congress.
I also have spent the last two years studying NCLB and the many facets of it. www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/index.html
It's quite lengthy but very enlightening once you sit through it.
This link examines the budget and shows the shortfalls- www.nea.org/esea/leftbehind.html
It is important to note that much of the research done at the above website was conducted bipartisan. There are also links to each individual state and their budgets. Estimates were derived by Fiscal Planning Services, Inc. (FPSi) from U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services budget data. You can call it rhetoric but the information is there and it isn't coming fromt the PTA.
I am many things but misinformed is not one of them.
This sort of rhetoric is exactly what I am taling about. As an example in my state we have returned 6 million dollars unused and uspent to the fed for education. It is not that NCLB is under funded it is the states are not spending the money as well as the funding levels are exactly where the legislation provided for them to be at this point! You provide noise from the PTA attacking in a very partisan manner and I might add a very misinformative manner something that has wide spread support and what it is designed to do is lost in the nonsense. Exactly what part of NCLB has not been funded when states are returning the money usused? Let me see here you in your home budget for food. You put away 500 this month and have said next month you will put up 600. Yet you only spend 400 a month. Does it make sense to keep uping the amount you put into this? If the facts would match the rhetoric I could agree but since it doesnt, and I have to assume the people who create the rhetoric know it doesnt, then I have to conclude that the noise is being made for a reason other then the welfare of our children. And allow me to then ask where exaclty has the national PTA been for the past 50 years as our schools have fallen apart, the education of our children has taken second seat to nonsense ideas like fell good math and the variety of other complaints that the local PTAs have been voicing for years?
As for NCLB - I find it ineresting that now, an eleciton year the complaint has shifted from its requirements for schools to improve to it is not fully funded.
Dave it isn't that the complaints (at least from a PTA standpoint) have shifted this year during the election year. There has been much discussion in the PTA community since NCLB's inception regarding the lack of funds. Yes, the increases have been consistent with the original proposal but the original proposal lacked the necessary funding and we have been consistently asking for more money to fund it.
PTA has not been quiet in the fact that we want more funding for public education. It is seriously underfunded as we push to recieve .05 of every tax dollar rather than the .02 we currently get for education. www.pta.org/ptawashington/5cent.asp
It is the issue, not the candidate.
I am quite certain that if President Bush had presented in his state of the union address that federal funding would be increased to meet the requirements, that the article would have been more favorable. If you read the entire article, you will see that we are not critical of President Bush but rather concerned with NCLB and with good reason. If you have any doubts, contact a school district employee and ask if they are meeting the requirements financially.
You can read entire article at www.pta.org/aboutpta/pressroom/pr040121.asp
To test the faitrness of any lobbying group one must first determine if they endorse or support canidates from the various political parties )mostly defined as Dem or Rep) or do they endorse only one party regardless of any facts about those canidates. So please tell me the last time the PTA endorsed and helped any Republican running for the Senate or the Presidentcy! Hint try looking to the 50s!
When a group that proports to represent the will of a group of people that is obviously as diverse as the PTA is in its political spectrum only endorses people from one political party it has lost its ability to be a vehicle for change but insteads becomes a vehicle for maintaining the status quo.
As for NCLB - I find it ineresting that now, an eleciton year the complaint has shifted from its requirements for schools to improve to it is not fully funded. Lost in this is the fact that when passed it was planned to be phased in over the course of 6 years with more aspects of it being funded year by year and as far as I can tell not one cent promised for each increase has missed a beat!
I have been involved in this discussion on many politcal levels for many years now. I have watched as many have tried to use NCLB as a political trashing tool for far too long, to return us to the days of no accountability nor responsibility. I have watched as NCLB has been misrepresented and distorted to a point that it has become a holy grail, either to get rid of or defend at all costs, to far too many.
Isnt it interesting that something designed to let parents know HOW their school is doing so THEY can make informed decissions on a number of levels is so politisized! Do you continute to elect the same school board members that fail to provide adequate rescourses to your school which those parent report cards can help you determine or do you blame the concept of the report card and keep them in office?
I prefered the alternate name for NCLB - Parent Empowerment - but I guess that gets lost in all the shuffle as the politicans make hay over it.
The PTA's political stance, lobbying efforts and presumption on national level to represent its membership is why I will NEVER give a dime to PTA. Thank God for the PTO.
