Skip to main content


Ok, time for a quick post:

The Doug for President Campaign believes in the dissolution of the Federal Department of Education. The Constitution does not give Congress or the President authority or responsibility to educate. That is reserved to be a matter between the States and the People.

What about the money, you ask? Where will our schools get the money they've been getting from the Federal Government?

From their State Government. You see, large percentages of what you pay in Federal taxes are turned back to the states for the states to spend. What you have is a duplication of the most inefficient part of government, bureaucracy, in areas like Education. No one, for example, disputes that the idea behind No Child Left Behind is bad. After all, the idea was that every high school student in America should be able to read, do basic math, and know enough to survive. The problem with the NCLB act is all of the bureaucracy, the testing, the mandates, where local schools have to prove to states that they are doing well enough to keep the Feds happy.

So, duplicated bureaucracy wastes money. And how much sense does it make for you to pay taxes to the IRS for the IRS to give them to the Department of Education, for the DoE to give them to the state, for the state to give to the local school board? Like we use to say at UPS: TOO MANY TOUCHES! You don't want stuff handled more than necessary, because every touch increases the chance for error, theft, and damage, and every touch costs money. So, by eliminating the redundancy, the Federal Tax rates can come down.

Then, state legislatures can determine what is best for their states, and the states bear the cost, and your local legislator bears the accountability. There is much more need for local input, local influence, because it takes a lot fewer angry voters to get the attention of a state legislator than a Congressional Representative. For example, 1 person represents all of south Arkansas in Congress, but 1 person represents Monticello/Drew County in the Arkansas State Legislature. Who do you think cares more about my opinion? Mike Ross, who has to effectively live in D.C., or Alan Maxwell, who lives in Monticello? So, local influence allows for more accountable decision making.

Which is good, because if you know your local schools are running well, funded well, then you can easily tell someone to leave them alone. And if you know they need help, you know where to go. When your state loses jobs because of a lack of skills or poor education, you know who to go after.

What about problems in schools, like Civil Rights violations? The Department of Justice has a civil rights division. Adequately staff the DoJ to handle it. A school professional or school board that denies civil rights is not deserving to have funding cut off or sanctions, they are committing a criminal act. What do you think bears more weight? We'll equally fund our men's and women's athletics, because we might lose some money, or because the Athelitc Director will go to prison? AD's are fundraisers, they can find rich boosters to make up financial sanctions. They don't want to go to jail. Punish crime as crime, not as slaps on the wrist. And again, local accountability should make a huge difference, because people will know they have to answer.

Is it extreme? Yes, but what we're doing, by most objective measures, isn't really working. True, we have some great schools all over the country, but, by and large, Washington making education decisions doesn't work. The schools that are doing well seem to share some basic characteristics: local involvement, local support, parental involvement, teacher appreciation, local involvement. (did I say that twice? hmm...) I've not seen a story of a school that excelled because US DoE bureaucrats were on top of them. You might point to some that have done well with grants, but again, that money was taxed out of the local area anyway, and could have been provided by local controlled taxes.


Popular posts from this blog

Book Review: The Heart Mender by @andyandrews (Andy Andrews)

The Heart Mender: A Story of Second ChancesEver read a book that you just kind of wish is true?  That's my take on The Heart Mender by Andy Andrews.  It's a charming story of love and forgiveness, and it's woven into the historical setting of World War II America.  For the narrative alone, the book is worth the read, but the message it contains is well worth absorbing as well.However, let's drop back a minute.  This book was originally published under the title Island of Saints.  I read Island of Saints and enjoyed it greatly.  Now, Andrews has released it under a new title, with a few minor changes.  All of this is explained in the Author's Note at the beginning, but should be noted for purchaser's sake.  If you read Island of Saints, you're rereading when you read The Heart Mender.  Now, go ahead and reread it.  It will not hurt you one bit.Overall, the story is well-paced.  There are points where I'd like more detail, both in the history and the geog…

Curiosity and the Faithlife Study Bible

Good morning! Today I want to take a look at the NIV Faithlife Study Bible. Rather than spend the whole post on this particular Study Bible, I’m going to hit a couple of highlights and then draw you through a few questions that I think this format helps with.

First, the basics of the NIV Faithlife Study Bible (NIVFSB, please): the translation is the 2011 New International Version from Biblica. I’m not the biggest fan of that translation, but that’s for another day. It is a translation rather than a paraphrase, which is important for studying the Bible. Next, the NIVFSB is printed in color. Why does that matter? This version developed with Logos Bible Software’s technology and much of the “study” matter is transitioning from screen to typeface. The graphics, maps, timelines, and more work best with color. Finally, you’ve got the typical “below-the-line” running notes on the text. Most of these are explanations of context or highlights of parallels, drawing out the facts that we miss by …

Foolishness: 1 Corinthians 1

In Summary: 1 Corinthians opens with the standard greeting of a letter from the Apostle Paul. He tells who he is with (Sosthenes) and who he is writing to. In this case, that is the “church of God that is in Corinth.” He further specifies that this church is made up of those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be saints. 
He then expresses the blessing/greeting of “grace and peace” from God. From there, Paul reflects on his initial involvement with the Corinthian people and the beginning of the church. After that, though, there are problems to deal with and Paul is not hesitant to address them. He begins by addressing the division within the church. Apparently, the church had split into factions, some of which were drawn to various personalities who had led the church in times past. There is no firm evidence, or even a suggestion, that Paul, Cephas, Apollos, or anyone else had asked for a faction in their name. Further, the “I follow Christ” faction may not have been any le…