The Constitution does not mention Education because it was meant to be under individual state's control.
However, the Constitution was written when most people only went to school, if at all, until 3rd or 6th grade. Most jobs did not require extremely fluent literacy or advanced math/science/social studies skills.
With mandatory education until 16, special programming for those with learning differences (disabilities, ELL, low SES, etc.), and so on, the cost to states to try to fund it alone would be prohibitive, unless the federal government cuts Federal income taxes so that states can "transfer" that cut to their own taxation system, to cover the difference.
The ONLY hold our federal government has over education is the funding allocations put in place to attempt to nationalize the system.
This happened over the last hundred years, in an attempt to align our schools across states, and produce stronger academics vs. other countries to increase our global economic and scientific competitiveness. If you think our system has problems now... if we still had purely state control over our schools, our illiteracy rates would be horrendous.
The Federal government does NOT have to fund anything for education, and inversely, no State must take Federal funding for education.
More than half the states are about ready to tell Bush to take NCLB and stick it where the sun don't shine... but state education budgets are now SO dependent on Federal funds that in order to do this, they have to scramble to find funding elsewhere, or schools will close.
Of course, this is what Republicans want... scapegoat teachers, and make it look like cutting the funds is the states' ideas, so that they don't take political heat for "not caring about the kids."
If they had any real Courage, they would be honest, present the arguement about Education not being Constitutionally a Federal issue, and present a 5-year phase out of Federal funding to education, transferring income tax %tage and funding control back to the states (they can always raise taxes again, later).
2006-07-13 02:11:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by spedusource 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
First it is the United States Constitution! Second the 'assumption ' of a Guarantee via said Document is incorrect. A guarantee is made between two or more people; that may comprise a government entity; In this case the original text has been amended several times and the U.S. Supreme Court has had rulings that became "precedented" interpretation of Law! "the Pursuit of happiness "is a freedom Granted all naturally-born citizens. Not a Right but a privilege! Shortly after 1900 there was a Public Education act to overcome deficiencies in National Education,to include a Cabinet position.
2006-07-12 17:52:52
·
answer #2
·
answered by K9 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Takes far more than congress to add to the Constitution. Need to pass a vote with about 2/3 majority of all voters.
There is no guarantee of any education. In fact, education shouldn't even be part of the federal government. Almost everything except interstate commerce, defense and foreign relations belongs to the states by design. Somehow, the federal government has gotten all of it's size and power under the guise of interstate commerce. Still trying to figure that out.
2006-07-12 17:36:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by oldmoose2 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its not... San Antonio v. Rodriguez, the 1973 Supreme Court case declaring that education is not a fundamental right under the U.S. Constitution. BUT the right to an education is set by precedence and there is the new no child left behind act.
2006-07-12 17:50:34
·
answer #4
·
answered by americangirl77449 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It pre-dates the Constitution:
A high regard for education existed in colonial Massachusetts where the Puritans believed it was necessary for everyone to read and understand the Bible. As a result, the General Court adopted a fundamental public education law in 1647.
2006-07-12 17:42:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I wasnt aware that the constitution guarantees education, but for things to be put in the constitution it only takes an act of congress, hence amendmants.
2006-07-12 17:32:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by hectortuba 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Preamble...."Promote General Welfare" and today's education system is just that...a welfare system for itself. Kids must graduate from a Junior College to have the equivalence of what was a High School Diploma 20 years ago.
2006-07-12 17:35:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mark W 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
i think the only thing it guarantees is an opportunity for education. life is full of choices and some people don't take advantage of the opportunity.
2006-07-12 17:37:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by tex_daddy 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Education starts at home from the day you are born.
Schools continue it.
A child's personality and ability is allready determined by the time they reach grade school.
2006-07-16 11:43:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by peppermint_paddy 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
in case you dont pay teh taxes every1 else has to pay cuz u jumped on a deliver or an innertube or were given around the border etc you would possibly want to no longer have constitutional rights. i dont propose taxes like finding out to purchase stuff both. thats like keeping if i dont pay for that is it nevertheless mine? no. so human beings have distinct evaluations in this yet i ought to say no.
2016-11-06 07:25:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋