A sad 'No Child' failure

Last week, a federal judge in Michigan threw out a lawsuit challenging the federal No Child Left Behind Law. The ruling was a blow to Utah, which has been among the most vocal opponents of the law.

The National Education Association, which brought the lawsuit, has said it will appeal. It ought to.

The No Child Left Behind Law presents a bit of a conundrum to people who believe public education should be made more accountable and responsive to the needs of students and parents. It requires states to measure the progress of public schools and to give the parents of kids at failing schools the chance to choose alternatives. Those are good things, and they are especially needed in a state like Utah, where public education has been resistant to real accountability.

But the law also represents an unprecedented move toward centralized, federal control over education, which ought to be an entirely local concern. If Utah's public education system needs improvement, Utahns should be the ones to force that improvement, not the bureaucrats at the Department of Education in Washington.

President Bush, whose many other initiatives, such as Social Security reform, have been attempts to put choices into the hands of the people, has with this law done the exact opposite. Washington is calling the shots, and the law imposes standards over which local school boards, and their constituents, have had no say.

The NEA lawsuit focuses on the costs associated with No Child Left Behind. The argument is that Congress and the president did not provide enough money to cover the law's costs to local governments. It is, in other words, an unfunded mandate. That argument is difficult to prove, considering the costs of devising standards and tests, and tracking yearly progress, are difficult to calculate. In any event, Judge Bernard A. Friedman didn't buy it, ruling "Congress has appropriated significant funding." He also said Washington has the power to make such demands of states in exchange for the money it provides.

Utah, after all, has always had the freedom to reject No Child Left Behind, so long as it was willing to completely forgo federal education funding.

Money always has gone hand-in-hand with control. Whether conservatives or liberals control Washington seems to make little difference. Each wants to exert power and push agendas from the top down.

But whether No Child Left Behind is adequately funded makes little difference. Centralized solutions to local problems don't work. They make local officials resentful and put them in search of ways to circumvent the law. They also make people feel powerless as they realize their local school boards and state legislatures have little control over the issue.

The NEA should appeal. More importantly, people should lobby Congress to repeal the law.

Comments