General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: 'Reaching Out' to the Black Community With a Wagging Finger, a Closed Fist, and an Empty Hand [View all]bigtree
(85,977 posts)You may well find Romney parroting some similar proposals, but without substance, we'll just have to assume that he's still favoring investment in private institutions over public education. He's still criticizing President Obama for his opposition to Romney's school voucher proposals.
His campaign released a white paper highlighting his support for federal vouchers a plan to reroute tax dollars sent to public schools to help educate poor and disabled children, instead letting that money follow the students to private schools. The federal government will spend $48.8 billion this year on poor and disabled students.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/nationall/education/mitt-romney-promotes-school-vouchers-in-attack-on-obamas-education-policy/2012/05/23/gJQAZN37kU_story.html
here's a perspective from the Nation: http://www.thenation.com/blog/168059/what-we-still-dont-know-about-mitt-romney-and-education
Does Romney support the implementation of the Common Core curriculum standards? Partly in response to federal funding incentives put in place by the Obama administration, forty-six states have agreed to adopt these shared English and math standards, which will be far more challenging than many current state curriculum guidelines, and will include more writing, more non-fiction reading, and greater conceptual depth in math. Meanwhile, conservative legislators in South Carolina and several other states are pushing to prevent the Cores implementation, complaining it robs parents and local districts of influence. Romneys education white paper never even mentions the Common Core, and makes no statement at all on matters of curriculum. A campaign staffer told Education Week that while Romney supports the Core, he believes the Obama administration has gone too far in pushing states to adopt the standards. Thats a pretty theoretical definition of support, since implementation of the standarnds will be the programs key challenge.
Will Romney protect funds for poor and disabled kids? Romneys white paper lays out a teacher quality proposal similar to the one advanced by House Republicans earlier this year. But he has been silent on another priority of the Congressional GOP: allowing local schools and districts to redirect Title I and IDEA fundsnow targeted exclusively toward poor and disabled childrentoward other types of programs that serve larger populations. This is a direct attack on the federal governments traditional, civil rights-oriented role in education funding. Would Romney sign such legislation?
What about preventing draconian local budget cuts? The House GOP wants to give states and districts access to federal dollars regardless of how drastically they cut local school budgets. Current law helps tamp down on local budget cuts by tying federal aid to maintenance of effort on programs for disadvantaged children. Does Romney agree with the House Republicans, or with the law as it is written, and has been supported by both parties in the past?
How about the youngest learners? High-quality preschool is one of the most effective interventions to build childrens cognitive, social, and emotional development, yet only about half of American 3- to -5-year-olds are enrolled in any kind of organized program. As my colleague Maggie Severns writes at Early Ed Watch, Romney hasnt uttered a word on the trail about pre-K, childcare or full-day kindergarten, all priorities the Obama administration has attempted to address (with mixed success) through its Race to the Top program. As governor of Massachusetts, Romney actually presided over an increase in pre-K enrollment, yet he isnt bragging about this now, probably because pre-K is expensive.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/168059/what-we-still-dont-know-about-mitt-romney-and-education
You're leaving out an awful lot of stuff when you just blithely equate the two candidates' views and efforts on education. It's almost surreal to have that debate here on a Democratic board.