Tuesday, November 10, 2020



Expect More Federal Interference on Education from Joe Biden

For parents of school-aged children, protecting their future through access to quality education is as equally important as Medicare and Social Security to our senior citizens.

No matter if the U.S. is experiencing a robust economy or a recession, parents deserve to know how the candidates will protect their children’s future by ensuring that they understand the critical value of enabling states, local communities and families to create strong educational systems tailored to fit their child’s learning needs.

The federal government is not the answer when it comes to education. The feds and the next president need to keep their hands off of state and local decision making on education in order to turn this sinking ship around. Since the federal takeover of public school systems under President Jimmy Carter’s administration, school districts have been kneecapped and have not been nimble enough to address students’ needs. The grip of labor unions and various federal mandates have dramatically dropped the quality of public education since the 1970s.

Since the creation of the U.S. Department of Education, states and local school districts have been drowning in rules and regulations that are time-consuming, labor-intensive and very costly to the taxpayers. These federal regulations have added endless layers of bureaucracy that ultimately impede on local decision making. Every year, bureaucrats on all levels waste billions of dollars that could be going to students or families but, instead, are used to protect government jobs which are often unionized. Overwhelmingly, this system does not prioritize the actual needs of the students it claims to serve.

Seemingly, every new administration that comes into office thinks it has the answers and solutions to the decline of American education. But additional regulations are simply bandaids that will not heal the serious wounds.

This year, however, voters have a choice. Marking a change from even fellow Republican President George W. Bush’s policies, the Trump administration has, for the most part, approached education with a hands-off approach during the last four years. The Trump administration has allowed states, as much as possible, to run their schools with autonomy from the federal government while breaking down government barriers to educational opportunities outside of public schools. Trump has demonstrated his dedication to students instead of to systems, including giving states more independent decision making without bogging down local school districts with more federal mandates. This hands-off approach from the federal government has allowed states to focus on what is working and what isn’t.

From school districts to the classrooms, all the way down to individual students, the last four years have been a reprieve compared to previously overly-zealous administrations, namely that of President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. Their tenure was marked by taking advantage of the 2009 recession and a $4.35 billion federal education boondoggle. The Obama-Biden administration seized the opportunity to wave a carrot in the faces of states that were suffering from cash flow issues during the Great Recession. Funded as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Obama and his U.S. Education Sec. Arne Duncan only gave stimulus money to states that competed for Race to the Top education grants. The awards for these funds were based upon points for imposing educational policies and states and local school systems tying themselves to more federal mandates. The more buy-in from local school districts, the more points they received. Part of the scoring included states adopting a set of national standards — Common Core — that at the time were still in draft form. It was months before states were able to actually review the new set of educational standards.

The Common Core State Standards. along with all of the excessive student assessments which accompanied them, have been a failed experiment. Fortunately, during the last few years under the Trump administration, states have been able to pause long enough to recognize they must reverse the courses they followed under the Obama-Biden administration.

Parents frustrated by the education their students are getting in public schools, whether in-person or virtual, should not be fooled by Biden. A Biden presidency would reverse the hands-off approach of the Trump administration when it comes to education. Having Biden in the White House would also further the federal strangulation of school choice–to the detriment of students nationwide.

With DeVos out, Biden plans series of reversals on education

President Trump tried to bully schools into opening their buildings, a hard-edge pandemic tactic that succeeded in places and backfired elsewhere. President-elect Joe Biden is hoping to pry them open with money for increased coronavirus expenses and clear guidance on how in-person schooling can resume safely, a shift that signals a new era for education policy in the United States.

Under Trump, the Education Department has been led by Secretary Betsy DeVos, who alienated many by casting public schools as failures and promoting alternatives to them. Through executive action and negotiations with Congress, Biden wants to bolster public schools.

He has promised hundreds of billions of dollars in new education spending, for preschool through college. He has proposed college debt forgiveness. And he wants to overturn a controversial regulation on sexual harassment and assault that universities and others strongly opposed.

He has also promised to appoint an educator as education secretary and likes to tell people that a teacher will join him in the White House. Jill Biden, an English professor at a community college in Northern Virginia, has said she plans to continue teaching as first lady.

“Teaching isn’t just what she does — it’s who she is,” Joe Biden said Saturday in a victory speech after being declared the winner of the presidential race. “For America’s educators, this is a great day: You’re going to have one of your own in the White House.”

With the election results clear, transition teams for every federal agency are beginning the work of assessing the state of each department, cataloguing Biden’s promises, determining what can be done by executive action and what needs congressional action, and setting priorities.

For the Education Department, the transition committee is being led by Linda Darling-Hammond, president of the California State Board of Education, several people said. Darling-Hammond, who was considered for education secretary by President Barack Obama in 2008, is under consideration again, people familiar with the process said. Also under consideration are two teachers-union leaders: Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, and Lily Eskelsen García, former president of the National Education Association.

Biden has said he wants a diverse Cabinet, and many of those being touted or considered are people of color.

Democrats for Education Reform, a centrist group that supports Obama-era accountability measures, is pushing several names and hoping for a secretary who will be open to their views. That will be a challenge, given that Biden aligned himself closely with teachers unions, who oppose much of the group’s agenda. In an email to supporters obtained by Chalkbeat, the group’s president pointed to three big-city school leaders: Sonja Brookins Santelises of Baltimore City Public Schools, Janice K. Jackson of Chicago Public Schools and William Hite of the School District of Philadelphia.

Other names mentioned by people familiar with the process include Tony Thurmond, the California state superintendent of public instruction; Rep. Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.), a former national teacher of the year; Betty A. Rosa, interim commissioner of education in New York state; and Denise Juneau, superintendent of Seattle Public Schools.

Teachers unions, on the rise, poised for gains in a Biden administration

Trump repeatedly proposed deep cuts to education that Congress rejected. Many of Biden’s promises require new spending, and they, too, will face head winds in Congress, particularly if the Senate remains under Republican control.

Biden has promised to triple spending for the $15 billion Title 1 program, which targets high-poverty schools. He has said he would double the number of psychologists, counselors, nurses and social workers in schools. He has promised new money for school infrastructure. And he has said he would dramatically increase federal spending for special education.

He also wants to fund universal prekindergarten for all 3- and 4-year-old children; make community college debt-free; and double Pell grants to help low-income students pay for college.

First up will be coronavirus-related spending, particularly if Congress has not passed a relief package before Inauguration Day. Some emergency funding for schools was approved in the spring, but the Trump administration has been unable to cut a legislative deal for additional money.

Biden has endorsed at least $88 billion to stabilize state education funding and help pay for protective equipment, ventilation systems, reduced class sizes and other expenses associated with operating school during the pandemic.

“Schools — they need a lot of money to open,” Biden said last month at the second presidential debate.

Weingarten, the union president, suggested that a coronavirus relief bill negotiated by Biden could wrap in some of the rest of his agenda, such as support for more school nurses or counselors. “There’s a real opportunity to meet the needs of children,” she said.

Biden also has promised to give schools “clear, consistent, effective national guidelines” for reopening. That process will begin Monday when the Biden transition team announces a committee of scientists and experts that will turn his campaign proposals on the pandemic into an “action blueprint.”

Trump simply demanded that schools reopen, saying it is better for children and for the economy. The pressure campaign succeeded in some places, with schools throughout Texas and Florida ordered to open. In other communities, his demands had the opposite effect, hardening teacher and parent opposition to going back.

Arizona voters approve Prop. 208, education tax on state's highest earners

Arizona voters have approved Proposition 208, a measure that would raise money for educator salaries by taxing the state's highest earners.

The measure, also known as the Invest in Education Act, will raise revenue primarily for educator salaries by adding a 3.5% tax surcharge on taxable income over $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for couples. A small fraction of taxpayers would be affected.

The Associated Press declared the measure a winner shortly after 8 p.m. Thursday.

Proposition 208's leaders said at a news conference Tuesday night they believed the measure would earn voters' approval.

"Voters agree that strong schools mean a strong economy," said Rebecca Gau, executive director of Stand for Children, the organization supporting Proposition 208.

The committee opposing Proposition 208 acknowledged the education tax measure’s victory in a statement Friday. Jaime Molera, the committee’s chairman and a former state schools superintendent, called the win a “setback” but struck a hopeful note in the statement.

“It’s back to work to continue to seek ways to support Arizona’s education system across the continuum in a way that strengthens our economy,” he wrote.

The “No on 208” campaign was backed by the Arizona Chamber of Commerce & Industry. Gov. Doug Ducey and Arizona Treasurer Kimberly Yee were among the state politicians who opposed Prop. 208.

State Schools Superintendent Kathy Hoffman voiced her support.

Proposition 208 led in preelection polls, garnering support, particularly among Democrats, despite the fierce campaign being waged against the measure.

The measure was born out of the #RedForEd movement in 2018, when educators protesting low salaries and classroom funding repeatedly cut since the Great Recession pledged to "Remember in November."

After the vote, Joe Thomas, president of the Arizona Education Association, took a shot at the state's governor and lawmakers.

"Voters will have sealed the deal on something that no legislator has had the courage to do, no governor has had the courage to do," he said.

Where would Invest in Ed funding go?

Educators probably will need to wait awhile to see a difference in their paychecks. David Lujan, one of the authors of the measure, said the money likely would start to flow to salaries in the spring of 2022.

The Joint Legislative Budget Committee, a third-party state entity that analyzes the financial impact of ballot propositions, estimates that Proposition 208 would raise $827 million for education, about $100 million less than Invest in Ed's initial estimate.

The measure would send money to the following areas:

50% of the money would go to hiring and raising the salaries of teachers and other certified employees, such as counselors and nurses.

25% would go to hiring and increasing the salaries of student support staff, including classroom aides and bus drivers.

12% would go to career and technical education programs.

10% would go to programs dedicated to retaining and mentoring teachers.

3% would go to scholarships for the Arizona Teachers Academy, which waives college tuition for teachers-in-training who commit to work in Arizona schools after graduation.

***********************************

My other blogs: Main ones below

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://awesternheart.blogspot.com.au/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

*******************************

No comments: