http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
http://www.federalbudget.com/
2007-03-16 03:00:43 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Sure. The Federal Gvmt shouldn't spend ANY money on education. That's not a function of the Federal gvmt, not authorized anywhere in the Constitution, and is solely the responsibility of the State gvmt.
2007-03-16 03:13:33 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
In order to answer your question, let's look at the fundamental powers granted to the Federal Government by the Constitution, and at the 10th Amendment which firmly said that only those powers granted specifically to the Federal Government by the Constitution and amendments were allowed.
The fact stands that the Federal government was granted NO powers regarding public education in this country, meaning that all their spending, loan support and educational direction are unconstitutional.
Therefore, if we stand upon the rule of law, it is not OK that government is spending even one penny on education.
That is my view. Other views would necessarily have to also claim that the Constitution is an obsolete relic. IMO, you either have to fully support the whole of the Constitution, or you don't support it at all.
2007-03-16 03:20:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
This country already spends 2 1/2 times on education than the other developed country's. You can't just keep throwing money at a problem hoping that will be the cure. Until parents get involved at home with their children's education we will still have a high illiteracy.
2007-03-16 03:09:14 · answer #3 · answered by Simon M 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
actually in most cases the federal government is not the one who pays for the majority of education, that is done at the state and county level ( property taxes pays for majority of education, along with the state lotteries in many states)
And it is not really even the role of the federal govenment to pay for education but again state and local responsiblity.
And as long as the programs they are funding are getting enough money, it does not matter which program gets more money than other programs or payments
2007-03-16 03:07:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
The fed does not have as much bearing as the state and local governments when it comes to school funding.
Let me throw this at you though;
Do you spend more in interest than you do for food, car, gas, housing, etc.?
If you do, it's not a very sound economic policy.
2007-03-16 03:13:41 · answer #5 · answered by davethenayber 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, well they have no choice in this matter. If they don't pay interest, they default the loan, and if they do that, nation can go bankrupt, like Brazil did a couple of years ago.
2007-03-16 03:04:25 · answer #6 · answered by Dr Dee 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes. considering, when Bush took office, the Federal budget allocation for education was around 33 billion, and it is now around 57 billion.
(I had a lib tell me it was raised due to inflation, not because bush wanted to fund it more)
2007-03-16 03:05:46 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
I suppose you could immediately tell all of us how much the States are spending per child right now in public screwal?
2007-03-16 03:06:43 · answer #8 · answered by aiminhigh24u2 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because throwing money at a problem makes it disappear? Schools are funded locally.
2007-03-16 03:20:45 · answer #9 · answered by MEL T 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Until we start actually teaching kids it wouldn't matter if we spent 4 times the amount we do now. Money will not make better teachers.
2007-03-16 03:05:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋