State and Local Funding Flexibility Act - The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same?

07/16/11

According to the bill summary published by the House Education and Workforce Committee:

''The federal government operates a host of elementary and secondary education programs, each with its own set of strict rules dictating exactly how funds may be spent by state and local school leaders. The manner in which funding is funneled through separate streams severely limits states' and school districts' ability to apply limited resources toward meeting the unique needs of their students.''

''...Chairman John Kline (R-MN) and Committee Republicans introduced the State and Local Funding Flexibility Act (H.R. 2445), a proposal that provides states and school districts maximum flexibility in how they spend federal dollars on education programs.

The bill will allow states and local educational agencies to use funds received under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) for additional activities authorized under the law, providing state and local officials with greater control over their education decisions, eliminating bureaucratic red tape, and encouraging local innovation to reform public education.''

The State and Local Funding Flexibility Act will provide every state and school district in the country the flexibility currently provided to rural school districts under the Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP). ...REAP Flex has been widely used by rural school districts to direct federal resources to meet the needs of their students. The bill will build upon the success of this program by applying it to all states and school districts and expanding the program to include ESEA formula funds...

By maintaining a focus on student performance and enabling states and school districts to determine how best to deliver those results, the State and Local Funding Flexibility Act will help restore state and local control of education and reduce the federal role in public education.''

According to the July 14^th press release, with the passage of the Elementary and Secondary. Education Act in 1965, LDF states: ''Congress recognized the need to provide additional funds to states and school districts that served disadvantaged students, many of whom are African-American and Latino. The [State and Local Funding Flexibility Act] would provide states and school districts limitless power to divert funding from programs that serve disadvantaged students. This 'false flexibility' is insulting to educators and students alike.''

The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund is the organization which valiantly argued and won the landmark case Brown v. Board of Education.

Brown v. Board of Education was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that made state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students unconstitutional. The decision overturned the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision, which allowed state-sponsored segregation. The unanimous vote on May 17, 1954 stated ''separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.'' Segregation was ruled a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, thus fueling and enabling the civil rights movement, according to information at Wikipedia.com.

The July 13th careertech.org article, ''House Committee Passes ESEA Funding Flexibility Bill'', describes the bill as controversial, as, essentially, it will allow funds that are ''designated to aid the most disadvantaged students, to be redistributed to other programs as determined by states or locals.''

According to the careertech.org article, Democrats are concerned that the funds for the most disadvantaged students will be diverted and that they will suffer as a result. Republicans contend that the bill puts control back into the hands of states and locals.

In addition, in response to concerns regarding civil rights, Rep. Glenn Thompson (PA) was quoted as saying: ''In no way does the State and Local Funding Flexibility Act grant any sort of authority to deny equal access to education for all students.''

Is it possible that the language bears just the slightest resemblance to the 'separate but equal' doctrine that was struck down only - and the word bears repeating - only 57 years ago? Is it possible that the passage of this bill could be cultivating a landscape ripe for regression, and one seemingly in direct opposition to the educational heights we aspire to for our children? Is it possible one might, at some point, make the trite observation that, the more things change, the more they stay the same?

The progress made over the last 50 plus years should not be taken lightly, or for granted, especially when one considers that the Brown v. Board of Education decision has been described as ''the most important American governmental act of any kind since the Emancipation Proclamation.''

Indeed. According to the July 14^th press release, the LDF states: ''If we are to ever fully realize the promise of Brown, we must reject the notion that transferring funding from disadvantaged students or forcing students to compete for funding could possibly benefit anyone. In reality, it will hurt us all.''

Let us applaud the unflagging and proactive efforts of the leaders of LDF, who continue to fight, in word and deed, against bills such as these, so that the horrors of small mindedness are smote down before they ever have the opportunity to take root.

Through litigation, advocacy and public education, LDF seeks structural changes to expand democracy, eliminate disparities, and achieve racial justice in a society that fulfills the promise of equality for all Americans.