Democrats Make Bush's "No Child Left Behind" School Act an Election Issue

[DeepModem Mom]

NYT: Democrats Make Bush School Act an Election Issue
By SAM DILLON
Published: December 23, 2007

WASHINGTON — Teachers cheered Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton when she stepped before them last month at an elementary school in Waterloo, Iowa, and said she would “end” the No Child Left Behind Act because it was “just not working.” Mrs. Clinton is not the only presidential candidate who has found attacking the act, President Bush’s signature education law, to be a crowd pleaser — all the Democrats have taken pokes. Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico has said he wants to “scrap” the law. Senator Barack Obama has called for a “fundamental” overhaul. And John Edwards criticizes the law as emphasizing testing over teaching. “You don’t make a hog fatter by weighing it,” he said recently while campaigning in Iowa.

This was to be the year that Congress renewed the law that has reshaped the nation’s educational landscape by requiring public schools to bring every child to reading and math proficiency by 2014. But defections from both the right and the left killed the effort. Now, as lawmakers say they will try again, the unceasing criticism of the law by Democratic presidential contenders and the teachers’ unions that are important to them promises to make the effort even more treacherous next year.

“No Child Left Behind may be the most negative brand in America,” said Representative George Miller of California, the Democratic chairman of the House education committee. “And there’s no question about it,” Mr. Miller added. “It doesn’t help to have people putting themselves forward as leaders of the party expressing the same disenchantment they hear from the public, saying ‘Just scrap it.’ Congressmen read the morning papers just like everybody else.”

Democrats had long dominated the issue of education until Mr. Bush seized it in his first presidential campaign, making frequent stops at schools to condemn the “soft bigotry of low expectations” for minority children and to pledge that schools in poor areas would improve test results or face federal sanctions. The No Child law passed in his first year of office with the support of a strong centrist coalition.

Seven years later, policy makers debate whether the law has raised student achievement, but polls show that it is unpopular — especially among teachers, who vote in disproportionate numbers in Democratic primary elections, and their unions, which provide Democrats with critical campaign support. “There’s a grass-roots backlash against this law,” said Tad Devine, a strategist who worked for the past two Democratic presidential nominees. “And attacking it is a convenient way to communicate that you’re attacking President Bush.”...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/23/us/politics/23child.html?hp

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. Those bastards!!

So is this why they delayed doing anything about this despicable piece of legislation this fall, as they had promised?? So they could make it an issue in the presidential race????

This is positively INFURIATING!!!!

Kids are getting screwed out of an education for one more year so these selfish pricks can have one more issue to throw in Bush's face.

I swear I have no respect for these Democratic leaders. They are just as bad and uncaring as the Republicans.

[LWolf]

2. I'm so glad to see this pointed out:

<snip>

Seven years later, policy makers debate whether the law has raised student achievement, but polls show that it is unpopular — especially among teachers, who vote in disproportionate numbers in Democratic primary elections, and their unions, which provide Democrats with critical campaign support.

I'm sure that Mr. Miller thinks it "doesn't help" to have candidates saying what the public thinks and feels about this law. He doesn't want to end it. He and Ted Kennedy have been adamant supporters from the beginning.

It certainly DOES help to have every candidate expressing disagreement for the rest of us, though.

The clear winners on the campaign trail are Biden and Richardson, who unambiguously support scrapping it without uneasy mumbles about "accountability." Not that we don't want to be accountable, mind you, but when you turn "accountability" over to politicians, it gets distorted and spun into something that is not accurate, not valid, and not reliable.

Kucinich also has focused clearly on SUPPORT for public education, pre-school through college, with the emphasis on providing what we need to do our best, instead of pointing fingers and threatening "punishments."

Clinton, Edwards, Dodd, and Obama are more ambiguous, clinging to the "standards and accountability" themes. It's good, though, that they are listening to us enough to begin to back off and consider other options.

George Miller and Ted Kennedy would best serve us by joining the effort to scrap NCLB, rather than clinging to determination to "fix" it.