But it’s much harder to get people to agree on what a new law should look like. The Senate bill seeks to reverse key provisions of the Affordable Care Act through blocking funding for the Risk Corridor program and discretionary funding for state Marketplaces. And the House approved its own version on Wednesday.
Advertisement
The 2002 No Child Left Behind law, which included a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), expired in 2007. That would enable students from more affluent families the ability to afford private schools, because they have the means to make up the difference.
“I have always wanted us to have high national goals and high standards”, Alexander said in an interview.
Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., proposes a worthwhile amendment that would require states to identify 5 percent of the lowest-performing schools and make necessary changes to improve achievement. It would be the first time such legislation has been enacted since 2001.
Graves said the bill didn’t go anywhere close enough to restoring local control of education policy.
Much like the House bill, the Senate measure also would whittle away the federal government’s involvement in public schools.
“One of the more egregious examples of overreach by our federal government lies within our nation’s school system”.
The House vote marks a major step toward a House-Senate conference committee that could send a bill to President Obama this year.
While the bill isn’t as conservative as some wanted, Democrats are also unhappy, particularly over a provision of the bill that ties federal aid for poor students to individual children rather than schools. Patty Murray (D) of Washington, who cowrote the bill with Sen.
Since 2011, the Obama administration has been issuing waivers from No Child Left Behind in response to demands from governors and school districts.
“I trust the state much more than Washington“, Alexander said. Under that theory, the Senate legislation might be a shift toward a better balance, they say.
The Senate bill would keep the reading and math tests mandated in No Child Left Behind, but give states authority over how to use those tests to measure how well teachers and schools are performing.
Still, Professor McGuinn says, the reality is that a few states may do this well, while many others would not.
The bill, sponsored by Minnesota Rep. John Kline, gives states and local school districts more control over assessing the performance of schools, teachers and their students. And oftentimes, policy debates can sort of fall apart at the will of politics, and you actually don’t ever get a law passed.
No Democrats voted for the House bill, while 27 Republicans joined 186 Democrats in opposing it.
The debate is expected to last through next week, with Senate education committee chair Sen.
In February, a lack of Republican conservative backing for the measure caused party leaders to pull it from the floor.
But despite the massive changes to NCLB being considered, and the vehemency with which different factions argue about the proper role of the federal government or the merits of testing, the current debate also shows just how far-reaching the legacy of NCLB has been.
Advertisement
One of the most contentious provisions that did survive would allow parents to opt their children out of annual testing, and exempts schools from including those students in the student participation requirements.
