Impact of No Child Left Behind

Have there been huge changes seen in overall education since the passing of the No Child Left Behind Act? No not really. In the post Many Children Have Been Left Behind my colleague David discusses the problems of the act and also proposes possible solutions. Like many states, Texas is facing underfunding for the standardized TAKS test, of which teachers have to year after year create lesson plans preparing students for the test. These state-issued tests are often not a very good gauge of comprehensive high school knowledge, but passing is a requirement for graduation in Texas. The majority of teachers see the test, and preparing for it as a joke, therefore students can't be expected to take the test very seriously.

Like David proposed, instead of pouring the money into state wide tests I think that the money would be much better put into SAT or college prep programs. The benefits of programs like this would be seen very soon, because for a lot of kids when they take the SAT they have no idea what they are in for. As it is, not a lot of kids can pay for the prep classes because they usually cost several hundred dollars which isn't exactly pocket change. It's a lot better to get the students prepared for college; because on one hand the SAT is a major admission factor while on the other colleges usually don't care about performance on a much easier state administered test.

To me another crucial piece that has been left out of education reform such as NCLB is the issue of financial aid. This part of our education system gets me unbelievably frustrated and there simply have been no answers. Nobody should have to be discouraged from applying to their dream school just because they're unable to pay the 50k a year astronomical tuition at many out of state universities. Partly I blame the schools with the huge endowments that aren't willing to budge much unless family an income of less than 30k. I also blame the government who can give massive bailouts to struggling corporations, but can't help out the kids who are the backbone of our future economy.

With a country so advanced, America should not have to settle for second rate education policies and as David proposes, maybe we should look to other countries to better structure our system. Loopholes including a state’s ability to make up for bad results by setting low standards or making the tests unusually easy just defeats the whole purpose. The act itself has really done very little in solving the core issues of our education system, and something that initially sounded promising, has since turned into a dud.

Unemployment Woes Continue

With our economy still struggling to get out of the pits, unemployment rates keep going further and further up and it's not looking like they're going to go down any time soon. According to the Bureau of Labor statistics as of July the unemployment rate is sitting at 9.5 percent, which is the highest in our recent downturn. Right now with the midterm elections just more than two months away, the Obama administration needs to make job creation the first priority or else not only the country will suffer, but also the Democratic party.

Our economy has been in a lull for too long now, and getting up time after time to see the morning paper saying nothing has changed is starting to get a little on my nerves. Chances are that the numbers aren't going to be going in the good direction any time soon, but as Paul Krugman comments in Defining Prosperity Down we have something far worse to deal with: the governing elite. The elite of our society are starting to think of the economic distress more and more like its just the norm because they aren't being affected by it. The people in power are failing to take responsibility seeing the problems as simply a transition stage, and if they aren't willing to make a change than our chances aren't looking that great.

Is the government doing anything? No. Republicans and Democrats alike are continuing to reject putting the money into job creation, but are willingly turning their backs on the struggling jobless. Instead what is happening is what has always happened, Congress is caring only about fighting deficits and continuing to give the most attention to the taxes of richest 1% of our nation. That's justifiable though right, because after all they are the people that need it most. Turning to the Federal Reserve to step in might seem like an option, but they too have showed they won't take the aggressive stance and make a move, so I don't know who else there is to turn to.

Something has to change, and soon, or else the problems regarding unemployment rates and our economy will get out of control. We're in no situation for a new stimulus, given the lack of reason to make large scale infusions of cash into the economy. Instead, I think Congress should look at extending both unemployment benefits and much needed aid to state governments who are suffering with the continual deficits. It's obvious that the American public is fed up and tired of waiting for the economy to pick back up, but it's up to them to put the real pressure on government officials in order to see any change.

Can't We All Just Get Along

Like always Republicans and Democrats just can't seem to get along, but as discussed by my colleague Jade Williams in her post 9/11 Victims Denied, the wrong people are having to pay the price. The proposed bill Williams states would provide health benefits to 9/11 heroes and keep "NY residents sick from the disgusting fumes and debris." I couldn't agree more, and feel that it wouldn't be right to turn our backs on the people that were willing to risk their lives in a national emergency. With regards to citizens who have to take in the "disgusting fumes," in a CNN report New York fire fighter Kenny Specht comments, "You really can't put a price on your health," and although 10,000 claims have been settled there's still thousands left.

This is a matter that should have partisan interests left behind, and we as a nation should really be angered at this lack of agreement. Like Williams discussed the Democratic "game plan" of the 2/3 majority was only to protect against Republicans from going against another proposed matter regarding benefits to illegal immigrants. The two parties really just need to set their differences apart for once and realize what the people of New York have gone through over the years when they next have the chance to vote.

In her post Williams exploits the matter, concerning Republicans "fear" that the bill was "secure and provided protection against fraud." What's the point then? Because fraud occurs everywhere, and of all places the Republicans are scared of the people who have suffered and need it most, rather than the rich who they continually give tax cuts to year after year. Yeah like Williams said, it is sad that the two parties can't work together, but what's even sadder is that it's taken this long to propose this bill and the two probably won't see eye to eye for a while. A total disgrace to the victims, not passing this bill just shows our ability to completely disregard the American people that need help the most.

Legalizing Pot, Really?

With the vote on Proposition 19 in California getting closer and closer, voter support is scarily continuing to getting higher and higher. The proposition, if passed, will legalize various marijuana-related activities, allow local governments to regulate these activities, permit local governments to impose and collect marijuana-related fees and taxes, and authorize various criminal and civil penalties. The effect will not only have a huge impact on the state of California, but more importantly the nation as a whole. To think that after all the crackdowns we've had, and now we're moving to making marijuana a "recreational" drug, doesn't make any sense at all.

You don't have to go far in California to find proponents of this measure, who point to the massive state budget deficit California is facing, saying that passing the proposition will bring in "billions of dollars" in new state tax revenue. Despite the idea that legalizing pot will be the solution to all problems, in a report by the State Board of Equalization it was determined that revenue generated would be roughly $1.4 billion annually, which is far less than what people are expecting. To go along with this report, President Obama has stated “I don't think that is a good strategy to grow our economy," encouraging looking elsewhere for economic stability. If we legalize marijuana then we are not only going against our president, but also putting a blind bet that pot will become a saving grace in our economy.

Many proponents also cite that legalization would bring down law enforcement expenses, in other words also save the big bucks. One thing that these proponents fail to take into account though, is how they will enforce situations at schools, public use, smoking while minors are present or providing it to people under 21, which is what the measure calls for. Given all these factors, it seems to me like law enforcement is going to have a pretty tough time regulating something like marijuana on such a large scale.

Those in California need to realize that the whole country will be affected by this, not only them, and if passed would put a huge burden on government regulation. The uprising created would be huge, and spring massive controversy over whether the federal government should step in or not. In a recent Fox News report, retired English teacher Shirley Williams comments, "I think it would be chaos if it was legalized," a fear which much of the country might soon see.

How We Look at College

Last Thursday in the National Review's Phi Beta Cons blog, George Leef commented on the way we look at universities and how they look at us. Leef's post, Striving for Socioeconomic Diversity, offers two main points, one of which I agree with and one which I have a big problem with. He presents a very good point saying there's no reason to see it as a "reward to go to an elite college or university," with many teenagers today mystified by the likes of Harvard, Yale, and some of the other college elites. Along with this, Leef finds it hard to justify the characterization by colleges of a poor individual who succeeds, as a "striver" or someone who has "overcome obstacles."

Is going to an ivy league university really going to make a difference in the long run? If anything it might increase possible salaries and connections, but as Leef speculates, you probably won’t have a "brighter, more lucrative career" at a school like Duke than a smaller school such as ECU. To get everything out of these top schools you have to be at the top of a "more intellectually competitive,” which sure does require a lot of drive and eagerness to succeed. To assume "schools with higher U.S. News rankings are “better” schools," and that these schools are your ticket to success is totally wrong. Ultimately it's not the degree from Harvard that's going to matter, but what you're going to do with it in the real world that will determine your success.

Believing that "being relatively poor in the U.S. does not entail deprivation of anything essential," is like saying being rich doesn’t have any benefits. If you don't consider a strong education essential, then I don't know what you do. In many cases poor Americans are strongly deprived of the same standards of education of even the middle-class, with their schools usually struggling to even keep their education system afloat. To go along with this they lack many of the resources and opportunities available to many others which is arguably just as important as the education itself. Leef states that "there are non-poor students who have managed to deal with difficulties," which is true, but the two difficulties are usually on two very different levels and are hard to compare.

In an ideal world to many, such as Leef, colleges in acceptance would look at nothing but academic interest and aptitude, but that's just not the world we live in. There's much more to a person than just academic success, and to look at a person as a whole makes a whole lot more sense than just test results. Just because someone got a great score on the SAT doesn't indicate at all that they will do great in the real world. Interestingly enough it’s those people with the interesting stories and that come from a poor family that are more prepared to face all the difficulties that life has to offer.

What Really Matters?

This past Sunday in The Pundit Delusion, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman speculated on the true reason the approval ratings have dropped so low for the Obama administration. The "Obama Paradox," as described by Krugman, has resulted not because he is "too liberal" or "too Mr. Spock," but because he just simply hasn't overcome the big economic problems. I fully agree with this because the general public isn't really going to appreciate the big victories for congress and the president like health and financial reform. Instead we care more about what the President is doing for us, specifically how our jobs and businesses are doing. Krugman presents a very valid point saying that part of the problem is giving too much attention to the pundits in the decision making.

During the peak of our economic crisis instead of pursuing a larger stimulus package and his policies’ actual impact on the economy, Obama went with looking good in the headlines. The economic downfall has pretty much been the story of the Obama presidency thus far, and given that's the one thing people pay attention to there's no question to why he's in trouble. If there is still a question as to what Americans care about, Krugman backs that claim up by citing a Presidential election report by Larry Bartels, finding that economic conditions are the single most important thing influencing a president's chances in re-election. Yes, not television ads, not debates, not t.v news but the state of our economy. In other words if the economy is doing good right before an election, the president has a good shot, but if it’s falling then he’s toast. Families today don't have the time to pay attention and dissect specific policies or legislature passed, but care most about getting the bills paid. To make matters worse there are the widespread increases in unemployment rates that are just adding to the frustration.

With the midterm elections coming up, it's looking like the GOP is poised to get some big victories in November. Whether or not the primary reason for the problems are indeed the "pundit delusions,” there's not much time left to turn things around, and voter's ignorance to policy successes aren't going to change anytime soon. Seeing their jobs in danger, and having to severely limit spending, the American people are looking to punish those in office and aren't going to be very patient in doing so. Krugman sums it up perfectly saying that with midterms turning out sour, the usual suspects will come up such as … 'he was just too liberal,' or 'where'd the passion go?,' but instead the true reason was that Obama simply wasn't doing enough to create jobs.

Immigration law to face further US legal action

A recent Washington Post Article discusses the Obama Administration's legal efforts to stop Arizona's controversial immigration law. The government states that the law is unconstitutional because the power to set immigration policy lies in the hands of the federal government, and not the state. Citing potential "detention and harassment," no argument is made specifically against racial profiling in the lawsuit. There are so many activists groups outraged with this law that it seems like it doesn't have a chance of making it through. If the fed's initial attempt to bump the law fails, the Justice Department will likely make another one looking at racial profiling. Sure the law does say that no racial profiling will occur, but incidents about stopping someone just because they look Hispanic probably will happen. And then how far will it go? Constitutional rights will be questioned, the outrage will gain momentum and the problems will just keep getting bigger and bigger. John McCain and other proponents knows that everybody is all for keeping illegal immigrants out of the country, but should leave the policy making decisions to the federal government.