State Control over Education--10th Amendment

State Control over Education--Bill of Rights, 10th Amendment
The 10th Amendment of the Bill of Rights states that, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” This amendment was ratified on December 15, 1791. It gives control over all aspects not specifically mentioned in the US Constitution to the States. It allows implementation of national programs to be placed in the hand of local officials, and it provides limitations to the growth of national bureaucracy. “Congress often seeks to exercise its powers by offering or encouraging the States to implement national programs consistent with national minimum standards; a system known as cooperative federalism” (Wikipedia).
Nevertheless, several events in our history have shown an intermingling of state and federal power in education. The Morrill Acts of 1862 and 1890, for example, granted first land and later money to the states for colleges emphasizing agriculture and the mechanical arts. The 1917 Smith-Hughes Act supported vocational education. In 1944, the first G.I. Bill authorized direct payments to veterans for educational purposes.
Two federal statutes that are particularly notable are the National Defense Education Act of 1958 (NDEA) and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) (Twight, 1994). NDEA authorized federal involvement by providing scholarships and loans to undergraduate and graduate students, in addition to funding state efforts to strengthen math, science, and foreign language courses in public schools. This act was a reaction to the Soviet Union’s successful launching of Sputnik I (the first earth-orbiting satellite) on October 4, 1957.
ESEA was represented as being part of President Johnson’s war on poverty. Johnson recommended “a major program of assistance to public elementary and secondary schools serving children of low-income families.” The bill itself authorized federal financial assistance to local educational agencies “for the education of children of low-income families.” However, much debate exists regarding the true motive for this act, and many feel that it was actually created to disproportionately benefit the wealthy, not the poor (Twight, 1994).
In 1979, Jimmy Carter created the United States Department of Education (US DOE). Many believe that this department was created as a “political payoff” to the teachers’ union, which supported the Carter campaign. Some believe that it was created to shift control of education to the federal level, and others simply believe that it was created as a support to the states. When Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980, he tried to shut down the department and return the power completely to the states, but he was unsuccessful. Since that time, George W. Bush expanded the US DOE and gave them more control through "No Child Left Behind".
In order to accept federal funding, schools must perform in compliance with federal programs or mandates. One such example is the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA). In order to accept federal funding, special education programs must adhere to the regulations established by IDEA (Wikipedia). More recent examples of this include NCLB, as well as the very recent and controversial “Race to the Top” (RTTT). In order to receive RTTT funds, states must comply with numerous federal mandates, such as adopting national standards and administering national testing. Many believe that RTTT is accomplishing more of the same federal control as did NCLB, while avoiding the tedious and messy process of reauthorization of NCLB (Effrem, 2/7/10).
According to Karen R. Effrem, MD, EdWatch Director of Government Relations:
Sadly, despite the many problems with RTTT, far too many otherwise constitutionally minded and levelheaded governors, state legislators, and members of Congress have blindly signed on to support this dangerous program. This support is apparently due to the severe fiscal problems that most states are facing due to the recession…Hopefully, with the public becoming increasingly and actively disenchanted with out of control government spending, regulation, and intrusion, officials from all points on the political spectrum will wake up and reject the statist education proposals in RTTT. States need to assume the rightful place of control and authority over education policy and spending (Effrem, 6/2/10).