What do YOU think a liberal is?

[BuckNaked]

Show me in the Constitution where it says education is strictly a function of local governments and any interference is a violation of "states rights. Take your time.

It doesn't, and I never said it did. But it does say this:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Is the power to control education delegated to the United States by the Constitution? No.

Is the power to control education prohibited to the states by the Constitution? No.

Does that mean that, according to the Tenth Amendment, the power to control education is reserved to the states? Yes.

 

[wvrevy]

Brenda, I gotta admire you for sticking to your principles, even if I do think you're nuts.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. Personally, I think government should be the great equalizer in as many ways as it can without hindering capitalism and individual freedom. It is to our benefit as a society to provide as much opportunity as possible to people in all walks of life, not just those fortunate enough to be born into prosperity.

Education is the silver bullet for virtually every problem this country is or could be facing. Teaching kids how to reason...how to evaluate problems in their context...how to not miss the forest for the trees...those things can lead to a much brighter future for our country, western society, and the world as a whole. Aside from defending this country from invasion, I'm not sure there is a higher purpose the federal government could have than educating it's citizens.

 

[alldiz]

In other words, is it just as someone pointed out earlier - liberals think that the government knows better what's best for people than the people themselves?

No....If the gov't new better....
We wouldn't be so FAR BEHIND....in math and science....
I think the schools need a serious overhaul...

I was very sad when Bill Gates....said....
I want to hire americans in the top computer and
math positions.....THEY ARE FEW AND FAR BETWEEN....

Is this not a problem...
Will you wonder what happened in 30 years when
the good ol USA is a MINORITY...in industries..
Kerri

 

[LuvDuke]

No, my thought is that liberals believe that the gov't is by the people for the people and it's supposed to help those people that voted them into that position.

Well said!

I'm starting to see a pattern developing here. Apparently, many conservatives see their government as some kind of enemy entity imposed on them rather than as an extension of themselves.

We are the government. Government derives it's powers from the people. If conservatives don't like their government, they have only themselves to blame. And maybe that's the point of "government is bad". It allows too many conservatives to pass the buck.

 

[wvrevy]

In other words, is it just as someone pointed out earlier - liberals think that the government knows better what's best for people than the people themselves?

Ah...now we've got something. See...liberals don't claim for a second to know what is best for the individual person. We are much more interested in what is good for society as a whole. Conservatives, on the other hand, couldn't care less about society as a whole. They take a much simpler perspective on situations. As I said...black and white vs. shades of gray.

Not only do liberals think this, btw...the nation is founded on that very principle. Otherwise, we would be a democracy, not the republic that we have always been.

 

[BuckNaked]

I'm starting to see a pattern developing here. Apparently, many conservatives see their government as some kind of enemy entity imposed on them rather than as an extension of themselves.

Rest assured, the current Congress is NOT an extension of me. The enemy? Not quite, but getting there.

 

[LuvDuke]

It doesn't, and I never said it did. But it does say this:



Is the power to control education delegated to the United States by the Constitution? No.

Is the power to control education prohibited to the states by the Constitution? No.

Does that mean that, according to the Tenth Amendment, the power to control education is reserved to the states? Yes.

Interesting legal logic.

Doubly so if it weren't for the fact that the federal government has taken over school districts numerous times and for various reasons.

 

[LuvDuke]

Rest assured, the current Congress is NOT an extension of me. The enemy? Not quite, but getting there.

You can't make this stuff up.

 

[MassJester]

You can't make this stuff up.

And Liberals are called "America hating" -- go figure.

 

[Charade]

Of course it does. By controlling the purse strings, the federal government can absolutely influence curriculum.

If the feds got out of the education funding business, they wouldn't have anything to influence. Let them provide emergency funds for schools hit by disaster. That's their job.

Don't blame me for your feelings of guilt. I was simply asking a question. One which you refused to answer, I notice.

I didn't say I felt guilty about anything. But your attempt to bring forth those feelings is what I'm talking about.

I wouldn't have a major problem with that, so long as the number was high enough. The problem is, a dollar goes a good deal further in rural WV than it does in Los Angeles or New York City. While this type of program would work great in rural areas, you are then going to be completely hosing kids in more expensive districts.

I agree. But, I don't think one school district (with affluent residents) NEEDS a 100 million dollar school when the not-so-affluent school district is using 20 year old school books with a leaking roof. There's PLENTY of money pumped into the education system. It's just that it doesn't get used wisely.


A problem was noted about the state of education needing to be more global. How about getting rid of 250 individual school districts and let the state run everything? Let them set standards for school buildings and curriculum.

 

[BuckNaked]

Interesting legal logic.

You asked the question, sorry you don't like the answer, but it's right there in the Constitution. If you can show me anyplace in the Constitution that either gives power over education to the federal government or prohibits the states from having that power, then I'll agree with you that the states have no rights when it comes to education.

Doubly so if it weren't for the fact that the federal government has taken over school districts numerous times and for various reasons.

Taken over school districts? When?

The federal government has certainly stepped in and used its power to force schools to submit to Supreme Court rulings regarding those districts violations of Constitutional rights, which I support. However when did the federal government ever "take over" a school district for anything other than Constitutional violations?

You can't make this stuff up.

What is there to make up? Do you really believe that the current Congress, controlled by Democrats is an extension of me? That the current Congress represents my beliefs and my best interests? If you believe that, then you haven't been paying attention to what I've said for the last couple of years.

Not only do liberals think this, btw...the nation is founded on that very principle.

The nation was founded on the principle of individual liberty, not on the principles of a socialist society, as so many liberals favor.

 

[BuckNaked]

And Liberals are called "America hating" -- go figure.

I didn't say liberals hate America, and I certainly don't hate America, so what exactly is your point?

 

[Charade]

Show me in the Constitution where it says education is strictly a function of local governments and any interference is a violation of "states rights. Take your time.

The Constitution says what the federal goverment can do and what the states can't do. Whatever is left belongs to the states. There is no provision in the Constitution that gives the federal govt the right to involve themselves in the education system. They just did it.

 

[wvrevy]

I agree. But, I don't think one school district (with affluent residents) NEEDS a 100 million dollar school when the not-so-affluent school district is using 20 year old school books with a leaking roof. There's PLENTY of money pumped into the education system. It's just that it doesn't get used wisely.

So...the affluent school district should have it dictated to them that they should donate that money to another school district? I don't get it...you seem to be arguing both for and against local control.

 

[LuvDuke]

So...the affluent school district should have it dictated to them that they should donate that money to another school district? I don't get it...you seem to be arguing both for and against local control.

I admire the ability to take a principled stand on both sides of an issue.

 

[MassJester]

She is absolutely right, the Federal government has no constitutionally delegated authority over education, and it has almost no authority not given expressly through the Constitution.

The exception is authority that the states' have given to the federal government. This reverse grant happens when the states agree to conditions upon their programs, execution, and laws in return for federal funds.

Hence, the Department of Education.

Federal judges have placed school districts in receivership pursuant to section 1983 litigation (constitutional torts). The school district essentially is run through continuing court injucntion until the tort is corrected or cured.

 

[SwedishMeatball]

http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/index.html

 

[LuvDuke]

If the feds got out of the education funding business, they wouldn't have anything to influence. Let them provide emergency funds for schools hit by disaster. That's their job.




I didn't say I felt guilty about anything. But your attempt to bring forth those feelings is what I'm talking about.





I agree. But, I don't think one school district (with affluent residents) NEEDS a 100 million dollar school when the not-so-affluent school district is using 20 year old school books with a leaking roof. There's PLENTY of money pumped into the education system. It's just that it doesn't get used wisely.


A problem was noted about the state of education needing to be more global. How about getting rid of 250 individual school districts and let the state run everything? Let them set standards for school buildings and curriculum.

I think there ought to be a national curriculum with national standards. The child who goes to school in a rural area is, more than likely, moving out of that area and has to compete globally.

Case in point: How many more times is Kansas going to change their curriculum regarding the teaching of evolution?

In the meantime, the student in Japan is learning higher math and science.

 

[BuckNaked]

Thank you SwedishMeatball, very good link.

 

[BuckNaked]

I think there ought to be a national curriculum with national standards.

And how do you propose to force states to accept that national curriculum?

States that don't want it can turn down the federal funding, but then it is no longer a national curriculum.

The only way I see to accomplish such a goal would be by Constitutional amendment.