That right there is a textbook definition of a blind ideologue. 
What do you think the government should do?
You shouldn’t compare the U.S. with other first world countries, as most of them have national governments. We don’t have a national government; we have a *federal *government. In addition, the powers and responsibilities of our federal government are very limited. According to the 10th Amendment in our federal constitution, education should be the responsibility of state governments, or the people themselves.
Ah…it’s the Antebellum Theory of Government. I think the question of whether the states are actually sovereign entities was settled around 1864.
Federal, state, or local?
For the federal government, that’s easy… its duties and responsibilities are listed in Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.
Or the children themselves. Or, really, each self-respecting child should him- or herself make the autonomous decision as to whether to educate him/herself or not, and if so, how to create an appropraite curriculum.
Should we reserve some space here to respond to Ms. Palin’s address to the Tea Party convention tonight? I, for one, wait with bated breath.
"The Congress shall have power:
to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to . . . provide for the general welfare of the United States . . .
[t]o regulate commerce . . . among the several states . . .
[t]o make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers."
The Tenth Amendment says that the powers of the federal government is listed to the powers delegated to it by the rest of the Constitution. It doesn’t say anything more, or anything less, besides this relatively uncontroversial statement. It’s a “how-to” guide to reading everything that came before it.
Most would agree that the ensuring an adequate education for members of our community is an integral part of the general welfare of the United States, for which the Congress is allowed to tax and spend as it desires. Article I, Section 8 also provides Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce, which we can all agree is affected by the educational levels attained by the residents of the several states. (I understand that the application of the commerce clause to education is somewhat unsettled, but I think there is a colorable argument.)
My main point is this: don’t hide behind the Constitution. You don’t like a federal role in public education, because you know that would mean higher spending for public education. And you don’t like higher spending. I disagree with you, but that’s a perfectly valid opinion to hold. But, just say that, and save us the empty legalism.
Progressives are fond of using the commerce and general welfare clauses to justify any federal program. To them, we have an unlimited government; as long as a federal program “helps” people, then it is justified. Others - such as James Madison - believe the powers of the federal government are very limited, and believe anything not listed in Article 1, Section 8 should be left up to the states, or the people. I agree with Mr. Madison.
Yeah, I agree too. We just disagree as to what actually is listed in Art. I, sec. 8.
Also, if I may ask, who would feed low-income children if their parents were not able to, and the government was unwilling to? What is the answer to that question?
That doesn’t really answer my question. Let me put it to you more clearly. What other countries do not fund in any way education for its citizens? I just want to know how they’re doing, economically, in relation to countries that do. How is the general quality of life of the citizens of solely privately educated countries?
CM doesn’t care if something works. If it pisses him off, it will never be justified!
Federal government is not particularly special or unique to the US. Just off the top of my head, Germany, Switzerland, and Canada are all first world countries with federal governments.
Oh! I can answer this one! It sucks. Like that’s a suprise.
If you look at countries as ranked by their Human Development Index (a composite of education levels, GDP, material wealth, average purchasing power, and life expectancy) you have to go all the way to Vanuatu at #126 to find one that doesn’t offer some form of free education, no matter how bad it might be. Past Highly Developed, High Development, and about half way through Medium Development. For comparison the US, Canada, Japan and Western Europe occupy the top 22 spots.
(http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/)
Vanuata’s government does run some schools, but attendance is not mandatory and you must pay to attend. Many females do not attend at all and most males drop out by sixth grade. GDP was an estimated 573 million USD in 2008. Suprisingly they seem to be fairly healthy overall with an average life expectancy for males at 62 years and females at 65 years, higher than I was expecting.
Vanuata also had at least one riot due to food shortages last year. Fun fact: Teachers are often paid in food. Families don’t send their kids because they don’t have enough food to share with the teacher.
In the Western Hemisphere the lowest two countries on the HDI rankings are El Salvador and Hati, both of whom spend money on public education. El Salvador is ranked 20 places higher than Vanuata. It is better than Hati. But I’m not sure “better than Hati” is really the standard to live by.
The power WAS and IS with the people. And when the PEOPLE wanted Ferderal involvment they elected officials who would implement it. That is how it has always worked. We have empowered our Federal Government because that is the BEST way for our society to work collectively to improve our country.
You understand, of course, that the reason the government has to provide these things is that family, charity and/or church have failed to do so throughout history?
The government exists to provide things that the private sector cannot.
Thank you **Oldeb **for such an informative answer. So, it appears that educating its citizens does promote the general welfare of a nation and all the progressive (and some not-so-progressive) nations do so to varying extents.
I wonder if Crafter Man can tell us what the advantage jettisoning federal funding of education would be.
In his defense, it’s not a practical stance; it’s a principled one. He thinks education ought to be left up to the states.
It’s not an unreasonable idea, as long as you’re okay with living in a country where some states educate their kids to Third World standards.