Common Core question for proponents

[Anonymous]

Also, the PP who says it's a state and local issue apparently isn't aware the Common Core is a STATE initiative. It was developed and spearheaded by the STATES. Though, it begs the question of why you would think it's strictly a state and local issue when the exact same need for reading and math skills exists whether you're in DC, New York City, or Louisiana.

Of course there is a need for reading and math skills in every state. But that does not mean that every state has to have the same written standards. The states are charged with education by the US Constitution. They are totally within their rights to write their own standards and the feds cannot tell them how to do it.

[Anonymous]

Though, it begs the question of why you would think it's strictly a state and local issue when the exact same need for reading and math skills exists whether you're in DC, New York City, or Louisiana.

It doesn't matter what the states and localities need. They are charged with forming and financing their own schools. Learn what FEDERALISM means. The states are not allowed to form their own military or print money. They do have the power over their schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Of course there is a need for reading and math skills in every state. But that does not mean that every state has to have the same written standards. The states are charged with education by the US Constitution. They are totally within their rights to write their own standards and the feds cannot tell them how to do it.

Where?

[Anonymous]

^ And that includes universities!

[Anonymous]

Of course there is a need for reading and math skills in every state. But that does not mean that every state has to have the same written standards. The states are charged with education by the US Constitution. They are totally within their rights to write their own standards and the feds cannot tell them how to do it.


Where?

The tenth amendment. There are other things the states also have control over---marriage laws, adoption laws, liquor license laws, etc.

The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Since education is not mentioned in the Constitution, it is one of those powers reserved to the states. Of course, the United States Supreme Court can declare that something not mentioned in the Constitution is so closely related to something that is mentioned in the Constitution that the unmentioned power is a fundamental interest, which rises to constitutional protection. So far, the Supreme Court has not declared that education is a fundamental interest. Thus, states have plenary, or absolute, power in the area of education.

[Anonymous]

The tenth amendment. There are other things the states also have control over---marriage laws, adoption laws, liquor license laws, etc.

also medical marijuana laws, insurance laws, real estate laws, right to death laws, driving laws, labor laws (unions), etc., etc.

In fact, most of the laws that affect people on a daily basis are not federal ones. For a reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Of course there is a need for reading and math skills in every state. But that does not mean that every state has to have the same written standards. The states are charged with education by the US Constitution. They are totally within their rights to write their own standards and the feds cannot tell them how to do it.

Where?

The tenth amendment. There are other things the states also have control over---marriage laws, adoption laws, liquor license laws, etc.

The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Since education is not mentioned in the Constitution, it is one of those powers reserved to the states. Of course, the United States Supreme Court can declare that something not mentioned in the Constitution is so closely related to something that is mentioned in the Constitution that the unmentioned power is a fundamental interest, which rises to constitutional protection. So far, the Supreme Court has not declared that education is a fundamental interest. Thus, states have plenary, or absolute, power in the area of education.

They evidently don't have absolute power, since Congress makes plenty of laws about education which the Supreme Court has not declared unconstitutional.

[Anonymous]

Here is a bit more information so you can educate yourself on federalism (Federalism 101):


http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/federalism

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Here is a bit more information so you can educate yourself on federalism (Federalism 101):

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/federalism

Here are three federal statutes about education:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/chapter-33
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/chapter-39
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/reg/ferpa/index.html

The Supreme Court has not (yet) found them unconstitutional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Of course there is a need for reading and math skills in every state. But that does not mean that every state has to have the same written standards. The states are charged with education by the US Constitution. They are totally within their rights to write their own standards and the feds cannot tell them how to do it.

Where?

The tenth amendment. There are other things the states also have control over---marriage laws, adoption laws, liquor license laws, etc.

The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Since education is not mentioned in the Constitution, it is one of those powers reserved to the states. Of course, the United States Supreme Court can declare that something not mentioned in the Constitution is so closely related to something that is mentioned in the Constitution that the unmentioned power is a fundamental interest, which rises to constitutional protection. So far, the Supreme Court has not declared that education is a fundamental interest. Thus, states have plenary, or absolute, power in the area of education.

The Tenth Amendment does not charge the states with education. As you say, the Constitution doesn't say anything about education at all.

[Anonymous]

They evidently don't have absolute power, since Congress makes plenty of laws about education which the Supreme Court has not declared unconstitutional.

Yes, under the 14th amendment and the Civil Rights Act, there are some ways that the feds can impact education. That is why the feds give money to "poor schools"---to equalize education to certain groups of people. They also give money to schools with large immigrant populations due to immigration being a federal operation, etc.

As far as school standards go, that is something entirely new. NCLB did not put standards in place. It allowed the states to choose their own tests for testing. It only asked for reporting of test scores. However, many people think it went too far in its punitive measures based on those test scores. There has not been a Supreme Court case based on NCLB (as far as I know). The CC cannot be mandated by the federal government. That is why states are dropping out. There is nothing that forces them to use it and there cannot be (unless there is a "test case" in the Supreme Court).

[Anonymous]

Here are three federal statutes about education:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/chapter-33
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/chapter-39
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/reg/ferpa/index.html

The Supreme Court has not (yet) found them unconstitutional.

Because these are related to the civil rights of Americans with disabilities. This is a broader issue.

[Anonymous]

^Those are civil rights issues, not education issues.

[Anonymous]

If the feds want to write the standards for all schools in the US and want to have them evaluate their teachers using certain "tests", then the fed is getting pretty close to running the schools. The localities could maybe then stop collecting taxes and let the feds pay for the schools? Taxation at the local level without representation is as much of a problem as it is at the federal level. If the local elected school boards have no power over these things, why bother? The federal government has been gaining more and more power and local communities are feeling weaker and weaker. At some point, yes the SCOTUS could be involved. Where do you draw the line?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If the feds want to write the standards for all schools in the US and want to have them evaluate their teachers using certain "tests", then the fed is getting pretty close to running the schools. The localities could maybe then stop collecting taxes and let the feds pay for the schools? Taxation at the local level without representation is as much of a problem as it is at the federal level. If the local elected school boards have no power over these things, why bother? The federal government has been gaining more and more power and local communities are feeling weaker and weaker. At some point, yes the SCOTUS could be involved. Where do you draw the line?

The feds have not written and are not writing the standards for all schools in the US. Nor are they requiring states to evaluate teachers using any particular method.