Federal Funds Eliminated

Throughout his campaign George Bush repeatedly told America he would not leave one child behind. So why has he eliminated all federal funds targeted for class size reduction? A proposal that would fold funds currently targeted for class size reduction in to block grants to be forwarded to the states and used at the discretion of local authorities.

Several important studies, some of them conducted over many years, have shown that class size reduction in the early grades has many benefits, including higher pupil achievement in reading and math. Smaller classes have been shown to be particularly beneficial for poor and minority students.

It's no coincidence, that for-profit companies are opening charter schools that compete with public schools, claiming they can save taxpayers money. When asked on the campaign trail by a reporter, if he supported the movement to privatize, Bush dodged the question (as he often did) saying they are not privatizing education in Texas. "In my state, charter schools are public schools" he said. What he conveniently omitted, is that in Texas, many of the charter schools are run by for-profit companies, although still part of the public education system.

Many of the shareholders in those companies made large contributions to Bush, who is suppose to provide $3 billion in federal loans for new charter schools and subsidies for students to attend private schools. Donald Fisher(Chmn-The Gap) and John Childs, backers of the Edison Schools-the nation's largest private manager of public schools, gave $830,000 in campaign contributions to Republicans. Edison's competitor-Advantage Schools also supported the GOP. Investor John Hennessy, was a lead fundraiser for Bush and contributed $164,000 to Republicans.

Some of Bush's large supporters of vouchers, have come forward to help win public support for turning education over to these for-profit companies. John Walton--Walmart heir, has spent millions promoting vouchers.

Senator Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington State, offered an amendment to the president's proposal last week that would, as she put it, "continue the progress we have made over the past two years" by providing $2.4 billion in the next fiscal year to help recruit and hire teachers for the express purpose of reducing class sizes in grades one through three. Her amendment died in committee.

Meanwhile, the president is insisting on an elaborate system of testing to measure student performance. Does this make any sense? Are we about to see a repeat of his first foray into- Education in Texas?

Higher standards and increased testing are meaningless if we don't provide the real-world resources that enable children to learn more.

Good Education Costs Money