Cutting and Running on Education Again

[tpsbmam]

Today Rep. John Kline (R-MN), chairman of the House Education and Workforce Committee, introduced the State and Local Funding Flexibility Act, a bill that would provide states and school districts greater flexibility to spend federal money. Some autonomy and flexibility can improve the way schools are run, as work by the Center for American Progress has pointed out. But the House proposal pushes flexibility too far and would undermine the primary federal commitment to education: providing extra assistance for educationally disadvantaged students.

The Flexibility Act would allow districts to cut or eliminate funding for low-income students, English language learners, and afterschool programs by moving money out of those programs into others such as programs for rural students or early intervention services for struggling students. The result is that groups of children may have to compete against each other for funding. If passed, this bill would dismantle decades of reliable federal investment in the education of disadvantaged children.

In the end, this bill is poor policy because it continues House Republicans’ cut-and-run approach to education. In February the House passed a budget bill that would have cut education funding by $5 billion. In May the House Education and Workforce Committee passed a bill that eliminated 42 education programs. The bill was sponsored by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA). Now with this new bill, Republicans are marching ahead by retreating on the federal role in education to ensure states and districts prioritize disadvantaged students.

Ayers (author) believes this bill would harm education 5 ways:

1. Leaving some children behind. Districts could pull money out of Title 1 programs for disadvantaged and at-risk kids.
   
2. Reducing the responsibility to improve struggling schools, which includes possibly transferring money away from schools with largely low-income students.
   
3. Funding programs that don't bloody work -- schools much continue to fund these.
   
4. Doesn't address any of the REAL existing problems.
   
5. Adds more administrative burdens. Good 'ole ReTHUGS are adding more paperwork & burdening the system more, not less.
   
   Lots more to read at the Center for American Progress.
   
   A number of states come to mind that would seize the opportunity to fund low-income schools less and pour more money into charter schools, etc.
   
   I'd be interested to hear educators' response to this one.
   
   
   
   
   

[LiberalAndProud]

1. I am not an educator.

But I do know that the Rs will frame the legislation as "Returning education to local control," and that is some very appetizing framing. We all know that the Fed tests are undermining the education process, and anything to get Fed hands off of our local education choices will be tempting to voters.

The analysis at the link notwithstanding, this will be attractive to voters.