Not Washington's business
Published: Wednesday, Dec. 5, 2012, 8:59 p.m.
By briefly quoting one critic of the national Common Core education standards, which are shaping curricula and tests for schoolchildren in Pennsylvania and across the nation, the Trib at least did more in the news story “Educators anxious about switch to Keystone Exams” (Nov. 20 and TribLIVE.com) than hundreds of newspapers that are simply parroting talking points of the shills for education nationalization.
Hoover Institution fellow Bill Evers, formerly an official of the U.S. Department of Education, is exactly right: The federal government's use of money and muscle to pressure states into a unitary Common Core mold violates federal law prohibiting federal dictation of curriculum. It also is the case that the Constitution assigns no power to Washington over education of the young, and therefore, under the 10th Amendment, such power is reserved to the states and the people.
When parents discover that the Common Core has further dumbed down the education of their children and that the federally financed tests are tainted by ideological agendas, where will they be able to go to seek redress of grievances? Good luck on securing a hearing from the national school board in D.C.
The writer is senior fellow for education policy at The Heartland Institute (heartland.org).
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Choosing judges I
- Choosing judges II
- Us & them
- Name game
- Prevailing wage downsides I
- Lies and disrespect I taught …
- Fuel tax increase
- Legacy: All lose
- Zubik is right
- Eagles’ plight
- Promotion questionable