American Politics

[Mad Monkey]

So, he missed by a decade?

I count century.

Look at this! We don't know counting or history, yet you want to get rid of Education!?

EDIT: In all seriousness, though, I'm almost positive that he was talking about the law that changed the name of the education department to the U.S. Department of Education.

[The Iceman of the North]

I count century.

Being a conservative, I just assume that FLOW is a century behind us to begin with. ;)

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Alguien,

What is more represetative, a government where the representative's have an average of 30,000 people in a district, or a government where the representatives have an average of 689,255 people in their district(a number that will increase after the census is completed)?

[Swordfish]

Why not abolish the state departments of education then? I imagine that would probably be more efficient.

How so?

[Mad Monkey]

Well, if you ignore that these agencies actually do and focus just on the number of them, then eliminating random agencies based on a sweeping and inaccurate proclamation that they just duplicate everything that someone else does makes perfect sense.

[ljkeane]

How so?

I've got no idea how the US education system is structured but I imagine if each state has it's own department of education there are probably numerous roles that are currently duplicated that it would be possible to centralise. If the goal is simply to cut costs that seems logical.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

ljkeane,

Only if you assume what works in International Falls, Minnesota will also work identically in Eagle Pass, Texas, Nome, Alaska, and Key West, Florida.

[TrackerNeil]

Contrary to what the politicians want you to believe, raising taxes is not the same thing as cutting spending, and should not be considered an adequate substitute, even if you are just taxing the evil baby kicking rich people.

Obviously raising taxes is not the same as cutting spending, but they represent the only realistic ways to balance the budget. I'm not sure exactly what point you are trying to make here.

[alguien]

EDIT: In all seriousness, though, I'm almost positive that he was talking about the law that changed the name of the education department to the U.S. Department of Education.

That's probably the case, and I wanted to point out that the organization had existed quite a bit earlier than just the 1970's.

Here's the first link Google turned up, if anyone's interested in its history. Apparently some think its a good idea to get rid of the institution that started the GI bill and passed key law prohibiting discrimination in schools. :dunno:

ETA: here's an interesting link to a trailer for a documentary that depicts the problems the US facing education-wise. Yep, states are doing a GREAT job right now.

[Shryke]

Who else will be trusted to administer Pell Grants, ACG Grants, SMART Grants, Federal Direct loan programs (Stafford and Perkins), and Federal work-study program. I can get behind the idea of cutting out the federal government's direct supervisory role over lower education, but I don't think we can remain competitive with other countries if we prevent lower-income students from affording college by getting rid of the Department that makes that possible for so many people.

Do you guys even know about what these departments actually do? People think that Department of Education is concerned only about elementary - high school. That's just not true, and insisting that all of the federal department's functions are duplicated at the state level is simply incorrect!

Beyond all that, Federal Guidelines for education curriculums/textbooks/etc are good things (and can in many cases, also increase the efficiency of the system as a whole).

I mean, unless you think it's cool the people of Utah get to learn that all your Founding Fathers were devote Mormons and that Creationism is better supported by evidence then Evolution.

[alguien]

Alguien,

What is more represetative, a government where the representative's have an average of 30,000 people in a district, or a government where the representatives have an average of 689,255 people in their district(a number that will increase after the census is completed)?

Scot, do believe creationism should be taught in schools?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Alguien,

Scot, do believe creationism should be taught in schools?

No I don't. I vote against people who want to teach creationism in schools in my area. That said, I don't believe I should tell people up in rural Minnesota what they should and should not teach in their schools.

[alguien]

No I don't. I vote against people who want to teach creationism in schools in my area. That said, I don't believe I should tell people up in rural Minnesota what they should and should not teach in their schools.

And I believe there should be federal checks in place against this sort of idiocy. Nor do I believe that the DoE is so simple-minded that it doesn't take regional differences into account. Or else Alaska wouldn't have its own sports program specifically designed for their people.

However, I also don't believe that the human brain learns differently in the South nor rural Minnesota and that the principles of science and math are the same wherever you teach them.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Alguien,

You miss my point. In order for elminating the State Department's of Education in favor of the Federal Department of education to increase efficieny the Federal Department needs to be abile to have uniform standards applied to all schools in the nation. If not it, as you say, needs different plans for different regions. As that is the case I think we should allow the people in those regions and locals the self-determination to determine what works for them.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Alguien,

You miss my point. In order for elminating the State Department's of Education in favor of the Federal Department of education to increase efficieny the Federal Department needs to be abile to have uniform standards applied to all schools in the nation. If not it, as you say, needs different plans for different regions. As that is the case I think we should allow the people in those regions and locals the self-determination to determine what works for them.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

I can't edit out my double post. If a Mod could delete it I would be most appreciative.

Thanks.

[alguien]

Alguien,

You miss my point. In order for elminating the State Department's of Education in favor of the Federal Department of education to increase efficieny the Federal Department needs to be abile to have uniform standards applied to all schools in the nation. If not it, as you say, needs different plans for different regions. As that is the case I think we should allow the people in those regions and locals the self-determination to determine what works for them.

Scot, I'm not in favor of eliminating either department, state or federal, though I would seriously consider shifting power and funding within that structure. Not necessarily just from state to federal, but from school board to superintendent up to state boards.

Regional differences aside, I do think there are some basic standards that are reasonable to be applied nationally. I think the failure to enforce them, or enforce them in a way based solely on tests, or focusing on the middle while ignoring the gifted, has been a major problem. That's why I like programs like Race to the Top.

[davos]

*mod hat* Thread has passed the 20 page threshold. Closing it and opening a new thread. Will post the text of the last post in this thread in the first post in the new one. */mod hat*