Amendment X
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.
Read the following articles about No Child Left Behind. Consider the main arguments of both authors and answer the following question: Does NCLB and federal education policies support or violate the 10th Amendment?
No Child Left Behind Act: An intrusion on state's rights? By Robert S. Sargent, Jr.web posted March 7, 2005
On January 29 of this year, the Executive Committee of theNational Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) unanimouslyapproved the Final Report of the Task Force on No Child LeftBehind (The Report). According to their website (www.ncsl.org,where you can download the whole report) the "NCSL is abipartisan organization that…provides research, technicalassistance and opportunities for policymakers to exchange ideason the most pressing state issues." The Report is divided into sixchapters that analyze in detail the problems state legislators havewith mainly two questions: "What do we need to do to make thelaw work and how can we effect improvements to it throughadditional congressional or administrative actions?" According to The Report, the goal of the No Child Left BehindAct that President Bush modeled after his program in Texas is"…to close or dramatically narrow the differences inachievement among American students that cross lines of skincolor, ethnicity, immigrant status and wealth." In this column I willsummarize the problems given in The Report, and then showhow a state is currently dealing with these problems. Starting with Chapter 2 (I will come back to Chapter 1) the firstproblem is how to deal with the Act's standardized testing and"...holding schools accountable for their progress." It seems thatthere is "…an unnecessary level of rigidity and questionablemethodology." For example, "NCLB mandates that schools beevaluated by comparing successive groups of students against astatic, arbitrary standard, not by tracking the progress ofstudents over time." And, "The law improperly identifies schoolsas ‘in need of improvement' by creating too many ways to ‘fail.'"Finally, "The law allows students to transfer from schools foundto be in need of improvement before the school has anopportunity to address specific individual deficiencies." Chapter 3 deals with the fact that certain aspects of NCLB arein conflict with the Disabilities Education Act. Chapter 4addresses the fact that the NCLB "…imposes a uniform set ofrequirements that all schools must meet," while not recognizingthat "Many urban and rural schools face unique challenges ineducating students." Chapter 5 deals with the "highly qualifiedteacher clause" that "…is particularly problematic for hard-to-staff schools." And Chapter 6 deals with the costs of complyingwith the Act. "In the best case scenario, federal fundingmarginally covers the costs of complying with the administrativeprocesses of the law." Now Chapter 1: Is the Act itself constitutional? Past SupremeCourt decisions have held that it is constitutional if Congressblackmails the states by withholding money if states don't complywith a mandate. For example, if North Carolina doesn't pass astate law that meets Federal requirements for legal alcohol levelwhen driving, they will lose federal highway money. However,the federal government cannot coerce a state into complying witha mandate. We will see that last year when Utah asked thequestion, what if we just opt out of the Act? "…the U.S.Department of Education responded that not only would Utahlose its Title I funds, it would forfeit nearly twice that much inother formula and categorical funds…" That's coercion! (A billopting out of the Act was introduced last year by Rep. MargaretDayton. According to Rep. Dayton, the feds contribution toUtah of $105 million is "…about 5 percent of our state budget,but NCLB directs 100 percent of our state education. I didn'tfeel like it was worth that 5 percent." The Utah Senate didn'tagree.) The Report also addresses the other constitutional issue:the 10th Amendment. The Act "…pits the 10th Amendment,which reserves the powers to the states, against the spendingclause of Article I." For us Constitutional Conservatives, this isnonsense. The 10th Amendment couldn't be plainer: Education isnot an area that's delegated to the United States, therefore it isan area reserved to the states. Period. Unlike idealists like me, Isuppose that the NCSL must deal with reality. There actually is aDepartment of Education. Oh, well. Utah (the state that gave Bush his largest margin of victory) injust the last couple of weeks, is again challenging the Act.According to the Salt Lake Tribune, on February 18, "Membersof the Senate Education Committee unanimously passed twoUtah House measures meant to keep the federal No Child LeftBehind Act at bay. One was a resolution…to recognize Utah'sefforts to measure student competency and sustain qualityschools. The other was… (an) effort to mediate the powerstruggle between state priorities and President Bush's federalmandate to reform public schools with imposed standardizedtests." In other words, "state priorities trump NCLB – even if itmeans breaking the federal law." So how has Washington reacted? Tim Bridgewater, Gov. JonHuntsman Jr.'s education deputy said the bill "has been helpful inopening some dialogue with the Department of Education." Soon February 24, the Tribune wrote, "Federal education officialssay Utah's 8,500 veteran elementary school teachers are highlyqualified after all." On other issues? Bridgewater said, "We hit abit of an impasse…" Last week, Utah's unanimously passed billcompletely opting out of the Act now had the votes in theSenate, but the Bush administration put pressure on GovernorHuntsman, and the governor convinced the legislature to take nomore action until April 20 so that they would have more time tonegotiate with the feds. What does all this mean? When a state like Utah with legislatorslike Dayton, stands up to the federal government, it can getresults. It can also empower other states to action. Kim Cobb inthe Houston Chronicle wrote: "Fifteen states have introducedlegislation in the first two months of this year challenging the lawat a variety of levels…(and) many state leaders are taking theircue…from Dayton." For us Republicans who say we admire a Joe Liebermanbecause he has principles that he won't compromise, even to hisparty, we have to admire Ms. Dayton for her efforts to defendher state even against her president. And for us constitutionalists,we have to love a legislator who places her state's priorities overthe federal government. High five to the 10th Amendment! (WillUtah opt out in April? Stay tuned.)! Robert S. Sargent, Jr. is a senior writer for Enter Stage Rightand can be reached at rssjr@citcom.net. Enter Stage Right -- http://www.enterstageright.com
Does Federal Spending Meet "The Tenth Amendment Challenge?" By Steve Lilienthal October 12, 2005
Congressmen. Too few Congressmen take it upon themselves to appear before the debt clock that flashes the size of our mounting debts. The appropriation for the CDGB program is over $4 billion for FY 2005.The National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign. Most mature Americans do not promote use of illegal, addictive drugs, particularly by younger Americans. The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) advertising and PR campaign urges Americans to talk to their children. It's a useful recommendation.The question needs to be asked: Given the current situation, there is one more reason for parents to talk to their children - to tell them about the bill we are passing on to them - the interest on the national debt -- thanks to our failure to curtail unconstitutional spending on programs like that of the ONDCP. The National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign received appropriations of $119,040,000 in FY 2005. Kids may be doing drugs but does ONDCP's media campaign have its own addiction problem?The Legal Services Corporation (LSC). The Constitution assures the accused in a criminal case a right to counsel. Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, and Counsel to the Legal Services Corporation in the George Herbert Walker Bush Administration, points out, "There is no constitutional right to file a lawsuit at government expense."The attorneys funded by this quasi-government agency have the discretion to pick their cases and often they are tilting against businesses, farmers and landlords. A House Budget Committee report from the 1990s emphasized, "A phase-out of federal funding for LSC will not eliminate free legal aid for the poor. State and local governments, bar associations, and other organizations already provide substantial legal aid to the poor." Appropriations in FY 2005: $330,803,705 (after two rescissions).The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). Americans spend over $25.5 billion on the arts. Other than very limited projects in consonance with portraying our national history, there is no reason for the hundred million or so spent by NEA. It's great work if you can get an NEA grant but providing a subsidy for the arts is simply not a function of the federal government assigned by our Constitution. Artists will not starve without the NEA; they just will have to compete harder for all the other money out there. NEA appropriations for FY 2005, including two modest recissions made by Congress, was $121,263,000.Two ideas that can be of use in attempting to rein in Big Government have been advanced by Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) and Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS).Shadegg is sponsor of The Enumerated Powers Act (H.R. 2458), that would require each bill introduced in Congress to include a statement citing constitutional authority. Shadegg has introduced this bill in several Congresses. He argued in 2001 that the Enumerated Powers Act was needed because:"Our Founding Fathers believed the grant of specific rather than legislative powers to the national government would be one of the central mechanisms for protecting our freedoms while allowing us to achieve the objectives best accomplished through a national government. One of the most important things Congress can do is to honor and abide by the principles embodied in the Constitution -- no more, no less. Respecting the Tenth Amendment is the first way to ensure that the genius of the Constitution and its division of power between the national government,the States, and the people continues to guide our nation."If enacted, Shadeg's Enumerated Powers Act would become the constitutionalist version of Consumer Reports.After extensive research by the Free Congress Foundation, Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Representative Todd Tiahrt (R-KA) have introduced the Commission on the Accountability and Review of Federal Agencies Act (S.1155 and H.R. ), more frequently referred to as "CARFA." Many conservatives, upon hearing the title of Brownback's bill, will instantly say, "The last thing we need is another commission examining the problem. We know what's wrong; what we need is action!" Brownback's bill, if enacted into law, would provide just that.CARFA members would be appointed by the President and the Congressional Leadership. They would undertake an extensive study of federal agencies and programs, specifically looking for those that are wasteful, duplicative or simply obsolescent.The bill does not specifically mandate a Tenth Amendment test. Pressure would need to be exerted on those who appoint, particularly those representing the more conservative party, to place commissioners who respect the purpose of the Tenth Amendment and want to see it reflected in Federal Government expenditures. The Commission would issue its recommendations in a report to Congress which then would vote up or down on the whole package.The Executive Branch and Congress have each proven themselves to be careless in recent decades when it comes to exercising appropriate caution in spending taxpayer money. Worse, they have ignored the Constitution and its limits on federal power.The result is mounting deficits, leading to large interest payments on the national debt. That is not the legacy we want to leave to posterity.It's time to start pruning the federal government. (Reforming "third rail" entitlement programs, such as Medicaid and Social Security, is vital but something which Congress and the Executive Branch habitually defer.)The Constitution is clear about what the responsibilities of the federal government are and Members of Congress have taken an oath to uphold the course charted by our Founding Fathers. It's time Congress started to apply "The Tenth Amendment Challenge" to domestic spending.
http://www.aim.org/guest_column/A4091_0_6_0_C/\
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0305/0305nclb.htm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Samantha Goon
Block A
November 7, 2007
After reading the articles "No Child Left Behind Act: An intrusion on state's rights?" by Robert S. Sargent and "Does Federal Spending Meet 'The Tenth Amendment Challenge?'" By Steve Lilienthal, I've realized that the NCLB and federal education policies are violating the 10th Amdenment. President Bush and the feds are violating the 10th Amendment by forcing a new Act upon the states. Even though the national government is suppose to have it's laws, and the states can set the specific rules, President Bush wants all of the states to have the national government laws and the same specific rules. It's unfair. The way that President Bush forces this Act upon the states is by not giving the states government money to provide their state with. "Is the Act itself constitutional? Past Supreme Court decisions have held that it is constitutional if Congress blackmails the states by with holding money if states don't comply with a mandate." It is not fair for the states to have this force upon them. Utah is the first state to stand up against the feds. Then a couple of months later, other states decided to follow. The NCLB article stated that the Senate tried to stop this Act, but the President forcefully told the legislature to cease their actions. This is really not fair. As Shaun Quinto said that checks and balances are being inust. The executive branch is taking control and somebody needs to stop them immediately or the government will become corrupt. The reason for checks and balances are to keep each branch under control with the same fairness.
Janell McBean
A-Block
From reading both articles, "No Child Left Behind Act: An intrusion on state's rights?" by Robert S. Sargent and "Does Federal Spending Meet 'The Tenth Amendment Challenge?'" By Steve Lilienthal, I also agree with Samantha with Amendent 10 being violated. The United States of America always seems to have to sides of bein fair and being unfair. It is understandable for the President to want to be able to do what he wants but there is a fine line between doing what may seem wrong because you feel like it and doing what may seem wrong for the better. "Pressure would need to be exerted on those who appoint, particularly those representing the more conservative party, to place commissioners who respect the purpose of the Tenth Amendment and want to see it reflected in Federal Government expenditures. The Commission would issue its recommendations in a report to Congress which then would vote up or down on the whole package.The Executive Branch and Congress have each proven themselves to be careless in recent decades when it comes to exercising appropriate caution in spending taxpayer money. Worse, they have ignored the Constitution and its limits on federal power." That whole entire paragraph really struck me since it is true how nowadays things are not truthfully being looked over upon carefully. Politics have their own devilish sides at times and it really is not a secret anymore. They put it out there in the open for everyone to see. For can different opinions on their laws from state laws just because the government seems like the stronger power. These government opinions can destroy laws that states want to proceed with but again, since the government seems like tha stronger power this happens. It is not fair but it is politics and what ever may seem right to one can also seem wrong to another. Nothing is fair.
Ama Kwakye
A Block
November 10,2007
Robert S. Sargent’s No Child Left Behind Act An intrusion on State's Rights talks about propaganda even though he doesn’t verbally say it. Do you see how this act started in one state and is now all over. The No Child Left behind Act should be limited to certain consenting states, not the executive branch of government because then they’ll take charge and change things up side down. . Sargent states in his article that the act is not supported by the Constitution or the Tenth Amendment. The Act shows the rising rate of failure and drop outs. America talks about how it wants everyone to succeed but what is going on?! THIS LAW MUST BE CHANGED SO THAT MORE PEOPLE CAN SUCCEED. More and more kids are failing and dropping. Some people already hate school so why don’t the higher people try to make is easier and fun. Laws like these helps our society corrupt and not succeeed. Bye till next time
Ama !
I agree with JAneellee.. JAnelle Said " It is understandable for the President to want to be able to do what he wants but there is a fine line between doing what may seem wrong because you feel like it and doing what may seem wrong for the better". And this goes back to our uit in Ms. KAplas class from lasty year when people tend to get power they always abuse it to the limit , but we cant blame anybody blame the people who voted . IM not saying this only about our President but mostly for people with power.
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. This amendment is stating that the states can make their own laws. The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) approved the report No Child Left Behind. According to The No Child Left Behind( The Report) , the goal of the No Child Left Behind Act that President Bush modeled after his program in Texas is"…to close or dramatically narrow the differences in achievement among American students that cross lines of skin color, ethnicity, immigrant status and wealth." This education policy is a federal issue because it’s attracting all states. The NCLB and federal education policy supports the 10th Amendment because the federal government checks on how the kids are doing in school, which shows that they care.
Karmila Saulong
Block A
In the articles No Child Left Behind Act: An intrusion on state's rights? By Robert S. Sargent, and Does Federal Spending Meet "The Tenth Amendment Challenge?" By Steve Lilienthal. The No Child Left Behind Act is an issue that violates the 10th amendment. The NCLB not only violates the amendment but may cause serious financial problems for the state. Also, children in schools that don’t reach the required passing test will have a hard time The No Child Left Behind Act is suppose to help out the students but if they evaluate schools unfairly and claim that a school isn’t fit, many students will not benefit from an education. The article states that, "NCLB mandates that schools be evaluated by comparing successive groups of students against astatic, arbitrary standard, not by tracking the progress of students over time." Who gave the federal government and its authorities the power of education policies? It is the state’s issue because every state has a different method in changing education problem. Education is taken care of by the state and its people not the federal government. The state should have a choice whether or not to pass the act in their state like the issue of abortion. Every state has a different way of accepting abortion laws, education laws should be treated the same way. Not only does the NCLB act violate the 10th amendment it also violates the 14th amendment. Children who do poorly in school do have help but schools are trying to push away the very low performing children. The NCLB can have some pros but the cons seem to over rule the fact that the act violates our constitutional rights.
Larry Williams
Block A
Nov,11 07
Based on the no child left behind act I've felt that the NCLB has violated the 10th amdenment because the no child left behind grant should be limited within different states because this is america and to do otherwise would be violated the amendments. Trying to get other countries under the same thing whether it's the no child left behind grant or anything else is wrong. The different states have different representives for a reason and that is to make sure the different states have the right laws for there specific country. Even though it shows that the government cares for america it still violates the freedom in which we as americans are supposed to recieve.
Mariel Elia
Nov.2007
Robert S. Sargent’s No Child Left Behind Act is a outrage because so many kids today are ruining their lives left and right. I think they should do so much more for these children because there are so many smart kids that just need a little guidance. Instead of acting like they know everything the government should try to make things work with the kids. I think this decision of law should be helped out by the kids.
In my opinion I belive that the NCLB and the federal eduation policies violate the 10th amendment. The 10th amendment states that " The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constituion, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. So if the states do not agree with a law that is being passed, why are they being forced? It seems to me that President Bush is trying to model the US after texas. What he fails to understand is, what works in one area may not work in another.By threatining to take away Title I funds from states that refuse to pass the act is unfair not only to the states, but most importantly the students. I agree with Samantha when she stated "The reason for checks and balances are to keep each branch under control with the same fairness." chances are both the legislative and judiciary branch dont agree with this law, so why is it still being passed. Seems to me that Bush has found another way to screw our country over.
Qadeem G,A Block
The article "No Child Left Behind Act:An intrusion on state's rights?" is controversal.The article explains how the President wants to pass a federal law that would mandate the use of a new structure within the public schools.Some states oppose of the law because it contradicts some of the tools they use to determine what the needs are of the students.This issue defies the tenth amendment which states that
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.Therefore making this move illegal.The NCLB,I believe contradicts itself in which it's purpose is to create a more rich public school but instead it rears more toward no solution,a cycle of the poor quality.What we need are schools that teach and closely supports children."NCLB mandates that schools be evaluated by comparing successive groups of students against a static,arbitrary standard,not by tracking the progress of students over time.""The law improperly identifies schools as 'in need of improvement' by creating too many ways to 'fail,According to Robert S. Sargent, Jr..The fact the states recieve school funding from the government puts the states in a much tighter position becuase they are at the mercy of the government,however,that won't bring the states to their knees.
Refering to what Larry said,the president wasn't trying to enforce the NCLB law on other countries and If I'm wrong then exuse me.I understand what your saying and I couldn't agree with you more that the reason for state representator is to represent their state.However,when that way isn't working then a new plan should be imposed instead of depending on a plan that hasn't worked for oh' so many years.The plan that the president is pitching doesn't seem logical though but I do believe that in some cases measures have to be taken in order to enhance societies quality but it depends on how you go about it and the way the president is going about it is absurd.
what i think is that the funding should not be a fed. court because of the way you want your education you should pay for it. for example i know many people who say that the city schools suck. but if you pay for your school then you should be happy about what you are paying for. like the saying goes you get what you pay for.
matthew Bowlin
In the articles No Child Left Behind Act: An intrusion on state's rights? By Robert S. Sargent, and Does Federal Spending Meet "The Tenth Amendment Challenge?" By: Steve Lilienthal. The No Child Left behind Act is an issue that violates the 10th amendment. The NCLB not only violates the amendment but may cause serious set backs in state funding. Also, children in schools that don’t reach the required passing test will have a terrible time trying to catch up, The No Child Left Behind Act is suppose to help out the students, but when they evaluate schools unfairly and state that a school isn’t on top form, many students will not succeed in this type of educational environment. The article states that, "NCLB mandates that schools be evaluated by comparing successive groups of students against astatic, arbitrary standard, not by tracking the progress of students over time." It is the state’s issue, in that every state has different standard as well as different strategies for changing education problems. Education is taken care of by the state, and its people the federal government should have nothing to do with the standards of states.
Emily - G-: solid work -remember to respond to another post.
Sam - G+ : well supported and analytical!
Janelle - S: remember to back up generalizations (ie. "nothing is fair") and to respond to at least one other post.
Ama - G: interesting work! Be sure to proofread before posting.
Mac- S-: you make insightful arguments but keep neglecting to respond to other posts!
Kamilla - S+ : this is an excellent summary of the issues, but you neglected to respond to another post.
Larry - N+: you fell a little short of the minimum word count and neglected to respond to another post.
Mariel - N: your post is too short; what happened to that insightful blogger who posted first a few weeks in a row?
Vinny - G: thoughtful and well supported work!
Quadeem - G+: Insightful, analytical and well supported. These keep getting better!
Post a Comment