COLUMN: Santorum's education plan good, but lacks in some areas
The topic of education is always a key issue in Presidential elections, and 2012 will be no different.
On Sunday, Rick Santorum went on CBS, saying he wants parents to take a stronger role in shaping education.
Santorum has been a longtime supporter of homeschooling, and some in the media unfairly twisted what he said to make it sound like he wants to end public education. Nothing could be further from the truth. What he said was, “Local communities and parents should be the ones who are in control of public education.”
When pressed for his overall plan, he said, “First I’d get the federal government out … To the extent possible, with respect to mandates and designing curriculum and the like, I would get the state government out,” saying he wants parents to be “in charge, working with the local school district to try to design an educational environment for each child that optimizes their potential.”
In some ways, his plan is good, but in others, it falls short.
In terms of the federal government, the Department of Education has turned into a monstrosity of mandating test standards and failed policies like No Child Left Behind. The constitutionality of the Department of Education is shaky, at best, with supporters of the department saying Congress has the right to regulate education under the Commerce Clause. The existence of the department violates the Tenth Amendment, and the right to regulate education should rightfully be left to the states.
If Americans want a Department of Education, the Constitution should be amended to truly enable Congress to regulate education; however, such an amendment is unlikely to pass, because it would require lawmakers to admit the department has been running unconstitutionally for the past 32 years.
In lieu of abolishing the department, the department’s role should be shrunk to only stepping in as a last resort to help struggling states and school districts.
As for Santorum’s plan to decrease state involvement, this also violates the 10th Amendment. The federal government has no right to tell a state they cannot implement mandates or design curriculum.
That being said, the people who know what students need most are often found at the local level. Teachers in Detroit know what Detroit students need a lot more than a bureaucrat in Lansing. The role of states in education should be setting broad standards and ensuring these standards are upheld.
Struggling districts like Detroit may be unwilling to admit there is a problem until it is too late, and it should be the state’s job to keep school districts in check, but when it comes time to fix those problems, it should be fixed at the local level when feasible.
Broad solutions that give near-complete power to local communities will be just as harmful to students as placing too much power in the hands of the federal government, and candidates should try to find a middle ground that is best for students.
Nathan Inks is the president of College Republicans. The column does not reflect views of the organization.
