tv Book Discussion on Failure CSPAN August 14, 2016 12:45am-1:46am EDT
middle-class america people who are farmers, people who are union workers. i have an uncle who works in the quarry. everyday people who aren't on the coast who value family and they have different values which i get into the book as well but it's really all of those people that don't get the attention of the beltway gets. [inaudible conversations]
>> hello and welcome to the arterton foundation. i am andrew parks the assistant director. thank you all for joining us today at the louis lehrman auditorium. i just want to take the opportunity to remind everyone watching in-house to silence your cell phones. for anyone who is watching on line, you are broken to submit questions via e-mail link email@example.com. hosting today's program is lindsey burke. she researches and writes on federal and state education issues as a will skillman fellow at heritage foundation but she focuses on reducing -- and empowering families with school choice. with that, lindsey burke. >> thank you andrew and thanks to everyone for being here today and everyone watching on line as well. we are really excited to welcome vicki alger to heritage today to
discuss her thorough and really interesting new book on the failures of federal intervention in education. she doesn't mince words at all. she wrote "failure" the federal miseducation of america's children and she argued that it is time to end, not mend federal intervention in education. dr. alastair explains in her book the federal government lacked education alone for about 100 years recognizing that it was the purview of states and localities. but gradually federal restraints gave way and by 1979 face of the first cabinet level agency for education established. it was the first of the u.s. department of education and today that agency houses nearly 5000 employees, manages over 150 federal education programs and has a discretionary budget of about $70 billion.
that might add it's really the tip of the iceberg because we see this somewhat parasitic relationship the state education agencies as says well that have to be responsive to these federal mandates and dictates and as a result have increased their staffing over the decades as well. so what have we gotten for this federal largess. as dr. alger contends it's not improving outcomes. to red tape, it's bee rock was the as wasteful spending. the u.s. has increasingly centralized education policy to incur increased spending and efforts such as common quarry. it's interesting to note that other countries, high-performing countries have gone in the opposite direction d centralizing education authority and actually empowering families and fostering competition so is there a better path for the u.s.
can we too embrace decentralization and competition in education? i will let vicki answer that question. we do have a major opportunity to advance education choice through innovative options like education accounts and restore private landings is a major step to reducing federal intervention and a general just limiting federal meddling in what is quintessentially state and local issues. dr. alger is a research fellow at the independent institute and a senior fellow and director of the women for school choice project of the independent women's forum. party that dr. alger was associate director of education studies at the pacific research institute and director of the goldwater institute's education of paul pelosi initiative pitcher received her ph.d. in
political philosophy from institute for philanthropic studies at the university of dallas. please join me in welcoming dr. vicki alger. [applause] >> good afternoon could i would like to thank lindsey burke and andrew for putting this wonderful event together. it's such a thrill to be here at the heritage foundation and thank you all for coming to talk about this very important topic that actually touches everyone of our lives. and thank you for listening to opening a discussion on my new book about the federal department of education's failure. as i was traveling here i recall the word of a former democratic member of congress from illinois who was a former teacher and lawyer about his vision for the department of education read it would be a pure fountain for
which a peer strain could be poured upon all the states. we want a controlling head at which the conflicting systems in the different states can be harmonized by which there can be uniformity. i take the high ground that every child is entitled to education at the hands of somebody and this ought not be left the individual or the states so far as we have any authority to regulate it. sound familiar? it's probably not who you think. this argument was actually made by representative samuel moulton of illinois 150 years ago. one year before the u.s. department of education was originally created back in 1867. as the title of my book suggests, i have a different view about the purity of the
d.c. stream pouring on states like my home state of arizona. which was while widely hailed as one of the national leaders and school choice. i think -- i see we have some arizonans in the audience. i wondered are we better off because of it? frankly i don't think we are and based on increasing calls for the department abolition this presidential election cycle i think it's fair to say a lot of us think it's time to pull the plug on the department of education. what does that really mean? if the department's history teaches us anything it's the government or our proceeds are not like fine wines. they don't get better with age. history also teaches us that your proceeds are resilient. u.s. department of education was
downgraded committee funded in the shuffle from one federal agency to another throughout much of the 19th and 20th centuries. rather than abolishing it in 1980s we decided to keep it around and try and use it to promote an excellent agenda. the result today, common core. this is what we were promised at all back in 1979. the u.s. department of education was supposed to do essentially three things. one, improve student achievement , two supplement not supplant state and local government and three, improve management and efficiency of federal education programs. so how did those promises turn out? let's turn to number one. improve student achievement. achievement across subjects and grade levels on the nation's report card as well as various international tasks have been essentially flat during the
periods perceiving the u.s. department of education and up until today. as far as i can tell from the track record we are spending above average amounts for average student achievement in spending up to one third more than top performing countries in the world. u.s. department of education was also supposed to supplement not supplant data and local government. our founding fathers never intended for the federal government to be a quote unquote hardener with states in education much less a boss. in fact the word education doesn't even appear in our constitution. by going along with this partnership it had been a bad deal for students, schools and tax periods. turning the no child left behind arab from 2002 to 2009 the department of education paperwork increase by an estimated 65% and was larger
than the burden imposed by the department of defense, energy and justice to name a few. fact the administrative burden is now so great boss employees of state education departments are higher just to deal with federal education programs. today in the common core era spending is estimated to be $80 billion according to a former u.s. department of education official. that's nearly 20 times the entire $4.4 billion race to the top program that was supposed to incentivize state reforms. and what about number three? u.s. department of education was supposed to improve management and efficiency of federal education programs. after a full 30 years in operation the government accountability office or gao found the education department was one of a dozen or so
agencies operating nearly 300 federal social education and training programs and that no's uniform definition of education program even existed at the federal level. the gao also found within the department of education alone, eight different offices administer over 60 federal teacher quality programs. how are programs like these performing? according to the office of budget are all empty just 6% of u.s. department of education programs are deemed effective. but how can that be? from 1980 through 2010 the department of education program spending increased by more than $57 billion outpacing student involvement by more than five to one. after more than three decades with the department of education
the educational performance of american students has not improved and despite massive spending increases funneled through this department to department has not achieved the administrative efficiencies reduce paperwork or that her management of federal programs. it's unlikely that more time, more fiddling with the chart or funneling more money through the department is really going to improve education in the united states. it's high time we reject the notion that the federal government has traditional or historical role in education. on the contrary, such notions have no constitutional basis even if the u.s. department of education were getting great results. it's time that we also reject half measures such as incentivizing the state to improve with promises of more flexibility. there is no evidence that
officials in the federal government including those in the u.s. department of education know best. neither for that matter to state officials. the key difference for those of us who believe in constitutional federalism is that state citizens are best situated to hold state lawmakers accountable and enact reforms that actually worked in fact is we are seeing today the u.s. department of education is often a hindrance and an obstacle to effective programs that parents want into which children are succeeding. consider parents with legitimate concerns about subjecting their children to common core tests. these parents are opting their children out of testing in droves. does this look familiar to anyone? has anyone got one of these letters? gets a letter sent out in late december from the u.s. department of education to all
the state chiefs of education. i call it a happy new year nasty-gram. as a result of parents exercising their god-given inalienable right to direct the upbringing and a dish -- education of their children they decided to opt their children out of common core test. what do we get in return? this letter from the u.s. department of education sending tips to the state chiefs on how you can threatened schools and how you can threaten students. essentially this letter is threatening to withhold our money from our students and our schools unless we towed the line there is a word for this kind of relationship and it's not partnership. it's time to and federal control through the u.s. department of education. now efforts to abolish the department of education began
almost amid italy after was first established in 1867 and again in 1979. each time these efforts fail because neither truly sought to abolish the department of education. instead for example beginning in 1868 the department was downgraded, and it was reshuffled around until ultimately it was her store to full cabinet level department in 1979. restoring constitutional authority over education requires a genuine abolition plan. history has shown that half measures will not prevent the u.s. department of education from operating as a costly pass-through for the political agendas of washington d.c. and special-interest groups. ..
form of a tax rebate. $216 billion of funding along with the estimated $275 million but would be restored to the states to be a minister would no longer fund these programs to the federal government but pay for them until the expiration date continuation of various programs the minister by the less department of education depends on taxpayers to have ongoing funding through the state. what happens to schools
during this transition? as things stand right now between states in the federal government between one and five years is no means guaranteed 100 percent of the actual cost. so if they experience uncertainty by relying on federal but dayton -- federal funding. they are subjected b-2 education agenda as the and mandates that require extensive replacement of the previous programs with ones from the current did ministry shin. what is different ones returned to the states
parents and educators can work more closely to ensure clear education priorities for communities across the state with all the chaos and cost of the people -- up people of education and now is the time to end the department of education one central unlike 36 years ago of education programs and services for the taxpayers. sixty-one school choice programs in dutch district of columbia. of those tax credits and deductions programs back and
five educational savings accounts programs and together they helped more than 1 million schoolchildren and families. not to mention one those of charter home and online schools. they did not build any of those programs. citizens in the state's did and they are improving student achievement to introduce competition for student at a fraction of what we're told we should be spending. more than 30 years of the creation of the department of education, they're not better off that they can be after waiving that constitutional barrier under the guise of partnering with state government, it is time to dissolve that partnership
to follow the u.s. department of education once and for all. [applause] >> 8q so much that was excellent. but what these say to someone who says the states were not doing a good job before? bid is this a critique you hear frequently quite. >> that is the number one critique and frankly that isn't just the progressive era. the thinking that washington d.c. knows best bet you just
cannot trust the states or trussed up parents there is of fundamental distrust. going through that history is that early on constitutional circumspection. presidents. pour james madison he tried more than anybody else even during the constitutional convention of the u.n. if federal role in education so badly but he said until we amend the constitution be congress has no authority obviously no longer were we
looking at enumerated powers that is in the national interest for the federal government or the national government so that is how they can do an end run around the education -- constitution but that coincides with the disdain and disrespect and disregard for parents and the state's. so to reenter your question in a nutshell, looking at the department of education v gave them a fighting chance. we put the experts in and charge. that is the best case scenario so we certainly want could not do any worse in did you look at these scientific findings of these
programs in the state we're doing a heck of a lot better . that is what we should be expanding. not d.c. >> please wait on the microphone. >> where we saw federal intervention there was this idea that there was a national defense component of so for all why alabama there was this constitutional link. did be just try to justify that with national defense '. >> absolutely. when i think of national education act the defense is
clearly in the national interest. i am reminded of the words of the senator from my home state by senator byrd care -- barry goldwater. with that there were 12 federal mandates. by today's standards that is a rounding error. but this argument be resonates with me. if the good people of this day had been the funding gaps we are more than capable to make up for that. are you willing to make up any funding gaps.
they certainly are not advertising is controversial. but that is to the state superintendent and public construction. i'm sorry i don't have a better answer. me. >> can you talk about other countries? are there any that go this far? >> it is interesting to me, china or asian countries have high degrees of centralization so they say that they are doing well because they have very strict government control.
some of the second is even though they are about one of the state's they have standards but they give schools and parents autonomy. for example sweden has a voucher. deal goes to montessori, religious, there is no push back from the teachers unions we could not do that. that is not true. kong. above one of the examples across us global nonetheless best performing countries on earth is the neighbors to the north. did on of a centralized
government every province is in charge of their own education way diminish that isn't a fair comparison. canada does have poor people and children as speak other of languages they spend less but it is very decentralized and they have voucher programs. so what matters most in powering parents and teachers. i may get a very important distinction between teachers and the politics of the teachers' union with the parents back back and that has a continuous improvement that we see around the country at a fraction of the price of beef.
>> i have a two-part question. and whether your idea of how to grow with the program? >> that is an excellent question because generally we are the first we have a friendly rivalry with florida to implement and go back and forth. i would say, i would leave political consideration. that is the way to go. it is so interesting we will be celebrating toward the end of the month.
thousand here and there, and the accounts were frozen and they were held accountable. but were taking a practice test or getting ready for college so getting ready for that individualization which is a stark contrast to a the homogenization that what i like is any money left over becomes a college savings
account so they can pay the of responsible way. it is harder for neighboring states be. it is nice to share those experiences and then customize rather than the top down. >> so why do we have a disconnect between financing higher education that it is portable but as a student you can go where you want to and why is there a disconnect how we finance higher education or k through 12 to do some sort
fast forward and now b.c. through 12th grade we see the politics. a very diverse educational landscape, the common school model and those of us because of the constitution to join in the union so you have that diversity on the one hand and one-size-fits-all and that is a challenge in that regard. >> talk about the duration of these legislative programs bobby. i don't know the statistics.
to all programs at a legislated end. >> that is a great question chapter 10 i go through to give a blow by blow. if you talk about the pill granted is one year. if you talk about the multi-year research or improvement grant can be between two and five years so it really does depend on the program and how it is appropriate did. we there is a variance but no reason why states could take over management to help disadvantaged to dance. but it did chapter 10 outlines those in exacting detail if.
>> be you mention the states could takeover simple education funding so you have the federal government of the spending been increasing representing a relatively small share so does that factor and to how we've restore state and local control? >> you would think all of the mandates and regulatory guidance, we would get to one-third or more of our funding to be federal.
that is 10% or less any given year but we are so dependent on that 10 percent. we are addicted to our own money. is only 10 percent but it is very heavy handed mandates. all of the rules and guidance and flexibility. with everything succeeds the elementary and education act. i really wanted to believe they would get flexibility with that secretary was going to follow the letter of the law but then we got the letter. / best they are contributing
$0.10 of every dollar that we send brcs spending one quarter with all the red tape that comes with that. >> based on research in k. 12 education i am surprised that the amount of the k. 12 education immobile with health and human services so what resonates isn't just about educating or social workers pick cetera. can you talk about that? >> absolutely. we especially with schools
one-stop shopping, it was never supposed to be that way. you are setting yourself up for failure to back any 1800's they thought this is a great idea that pesky constitution we cannot impose this school system. and expose that purpose that is to make good subjects to be compliant and go along to provide social services everybody takes care of everybody. pdf although it does sound like a good idea conceptually, in reality
most families do not need a social worker or to be told what to pack in their children's lunches. with get school benches i have stepson's in public schools and the lunches are terrible. they are even worse than your cooking. [laughter] so to take these overuse set yourself up for failure and cannot do that in a free society basically making children creatures of the state i would say be careful what you're signing away for the sake of convenience but. but is the state to come take over that is a pattern
that we have seen so frequently. we can do that with low in combat is the springboard for universal access. that very quick lead degenerates into universal mandate and compulsory one size fits all. it is not send them to preschool to get what you want you must send them to this type. we cannot leave them home with grandmother because she is not certified and is not know where she is doing be. we're trying to put to molds onto each other. >> i came from the soviet union and education now see
donate i have a hard time believing bad debt child generally could not afford to go to school that the community would not rally be. that is how it would be before government involvement so i agree. thanks for bringing up nevada bob's and now we can see how it is working firsthand that is the direction we should be going >> it was written such away
but highlight the shortcomings of that approach. >> absolutely. we had a reauthorization but it boils down that you read through these pages all the talk about flexibility be, and the fact that we have to have our plans approved here in d.c. by the secretary of education let's face it they are not friendly. >> that letter proves they are not friendly to parents so my biggest warning with
>>host: be history and military history with the will this imprint. >>host: what do you want to talk about what. >> we have three titles the first is honor before glory about the segregated unit of japanese soldiers who volunteered to serve while in internment camp they went for the go for broke regiment with those 200
soldiers that could not break free it was a nail biting book. also we have another bout takes place in nine mountains the eastern mountains of afghanistan called the chosen few. is the paratroopers that were chosen to win the hearts and minds they had 15 months of constant fighting very heroic two of them returned home to win a the medal of honor. we also have another book by stephen harding.
he has published most of his books with us that is what a publishing company does not like better than when they turn out a good book again and again. this has a delicious subtitle. a sunken ship and a banished crew and a final mystery of pearl harbor. what is the mystery? there was a cargo ship missing between seattle and honolulu as pearl harbor was happening and he does a lot of research that perhaps the ship's sinking was the first casualty of the war is a wonderful history a wonderful military history. >> does he solve the mystery in the end? to make he does i will not tell you.
>> is there a secret to marketing military history quick. [inaudible] go to your base getting reduced into the journal of the naval academy and institute. a niche approach when and targeted but we can get mainstream beatify as well. >> the use send your authors out by. >> we do that judiciously. but if we are confident they will draw, the right subject matter absolutely obvious. there are those that you can rely on my car purred bookstore, politics and prose or harvard bookstore. >>host: one more book? >> it is by brian wilson and
high-school dropout was on a mission to take his country back berger of reasons he were a - - walked out of the courthouse a free man and then to debate the verdict will look to wonder stand the history of america he stumbled across the council of conservative citizens. from the 19 fifties council that had terrorized people close to schools and to work hand in hand to defy civil-rights law. but despite the about racist beliefs system, it boasted bobby of having those members of the legislature and most powerful allies
including the then senate majority leader bob at by 2004 baird. >>host: other powerful politicians ccc gave 65,000 including the 2016 presidential campaign of random paul, rick santorum and ted cruise. quebec then tri-c and joyce precisely -- precisely the cachet that racism requires to achieve its own goals and american society. by hatred and allies that
base of a desperately craved. he drank the poison drove into his car and drove to the church and landed in a bible study but those african-americans who were the very model. they would pray, read the bible, but they were so nice then shot them dead leaving just one woman alive so she could tell the world what he had done and why. they are taking over our country and he knew this to be true. now after he'd gone down nine african-americans in charleston south carolina donald trump bobby fired up this silent majority
audience of thousands in july 2015 with the promise don't worry be will take our country back. me. >> with the center of arts and culture it gives me great pleasure to welcome you to this particular conversation. this center for arts and culture but teams up with the new press with of criminalization of black girls in schools. this conversation is deeply meaningful to the new press as we share a commitment to amplify and spotlight and marginalize voices.