Redstate

in an open thread.

But I will say that either a) we support getting rid of the Dept of Ed or b) we have some education policy we support.

After Bush, option a) seems unlikely.

Furthermore, even though it is anti-federalist, having a President/VP talk about education and education reform is good. Even if they don't enact federal policies, it moves the debate and shows people that education is priority (and not just a "throw money at it" type of priority).

The administration has done very little with respect to gun rights, but it's generally strong support of the individual rights view has impacted the debate, the litigation, and to some extent state laws.

As Rs try to win over Hispanics and low-income white and black voters, we have to talk about education. And right now it is the left that is impeding good reforms. It's an area where "compassionate" and "conservatism" aren't in tension for the most part.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

although President Bush surely did make it a lot harder to do. Even though it isn't particularly palatable right now, I think we have to try. As long as it exists, teacher's unions will have excess power and education will keep going the wrong way. I know that isn't news to anyone here, but it is important enough that persistance is needed, even at an unlikely task.

Whats the strategy to get there. I believe that we should strip it gently a couple peices at a time. Get vouchers going, allow home schoolers a tax credit (read that middle class) but still require the standardized tests, and let the people make their choice. Johnny Cash has a great song called one peice at a time. If you haven't heard is check it out, I think it explains pretty good the strategy I am talking about.

"Land of the Free and Home of da Whopper" Peter Griffin...Family Guy

conform and celebrate diversity....or else!!!

An Introduction to ME!!

Teachers unions are most powerful at the local level: school boards, mayors, and state governments. They don't have as much sway on Presidential and Congressional elections because the feds don't do a lot w/r/t education.

If we accept a DoE as given, then using the DoE to weaken teachers unions grasp on monopoly schools would be decent function. For example, the feds started the DC voucher system since DC is under their purview. The feds don't do a lot for charters. But they could condition funding on some form of school choice (i.e. charter schools, vouchers).

But the idea that the DoE is where Teachers Unions get their power is a bit off base in my view.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

It is entirely possible to A) support getting rid of the DoEd as a long term goal, but recognize this is not possible in the current political environment, so B) we need to have an education policy we support.

It's also possible to think we do need a DoEd, but that it should play a constrained role by supporting school districts with research, technology, and support, while not exerting policy control.

My view is very simple: BECAUSE education is so important, it must continue to be controlled and funded at the local level, where accountability is highest. If you want the President to talk about education, that should be the message. I think the American people are smart enough to grasp the truth of this, if we are consistent in our articulation of it.

What we should not do is tacitly concede to the liberal viewpoint that school problems require national solutions, and then start debating which national solutions we support.

"If all men were just, there would be no need of valor."
- Agesilaus

"If all men were just, there would be no need of valor."
- Agesilaus

We must seize the education issue. Public schools are an embarrassment. I am getting familiar with public schools for the first time in my life and I'm simply floored at what I am seeing. Floored. Vouchers is a tremendous option and must be pursued, even if it means forming and funding a national charter system. It's overused but children are truly the future. And these children will be paying your social security out of their paychecks, so it's out of your self-interest to maximize their earning potential.

Also, poorly educated voters elect awful political leaders and support ignorant policies. See: Obama and most of the Democratic Party platform.

My kids started school 2 years ago and I was prepared for the worst. But our school is great and my kids are thriving. My son in the 1st grade reads at about a 5th grade level.

If your schools suck, then vote out your local school board next November. That's the great thing about local government: it's the only level of government that can be held accountable. The more important the issue, the lower the level of government it should be controlled at. Control follows funding. That's why we fund our schools, police, and fire departments at the county level and we don't have a US Department of Police or a National School System.

Education may be a national issue, but there should not be a national solution. A national charter system is an abysmal idea. Don't rip a page from the liberal playbook and start thinking that every problem must be addressed at the federal level. This is important enough to let the states and local government fix it.

"If all men were just, there would be no need of valor."
- Agesilaus

but she was a pretty controversial CEO, so that might exclude her.

As for Mark Sanford, McCain is apparently angry @ him for his non-endorsement in SC, so there's no way that Sanford is going to be on the ticket.

Local and state governments are far more agile and free to innovate than the federal government. Each locality tries something slightly different, and if it works then the others adopt it. That is much more likely to produce real progress than enacting "good ideas" at the national level.

Don't fall into the liberal trap of thinking national solutions are inherently better. That is wrong. The only time a national solution is better than a local solution is when pooling of resources provides a capability that cannot possibly be achieved at a lower level, such as with national security.

"If all men were just, there would be no need of valor."
- Agesilaus

However education reform is being held hostage and I think the best alternative to the current system would be to give individuals the resources to make educational decisions themselves. Vouchers and school choice is the ideal. I am of the same thought process that dramatic change for the most part is unachievable with any single government initiative. However I do believe there are some incremental ideas such as those I outline that can put us on the road to where we want to go in terms of school choice. Of course, school choice is one of the many reforms (for example is the bachelor's degree this century's high school diploma?)that need to be made so that this century can live up to being America's finest rather than the Asian Century so many are resign to allow.