• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Nationalizing the Education System

Nationalize Schools?

  • Yes

    Votes: 14 18.9%
  • No

    Votes: 53 71.6%
  • Other

    Votes: 7 9.5%

  • Total voters
    74
Michigan is very different from Washington.

The basic fundamental structure is the same. The State Constitution gives the state the legal authority in the area of education and the State then has cities, towns and villages across the state educate children in schools districts run by local school boards elected by local people. This is known as LOCAL CONTROL of LOCAL SCHOOLS.

Which shows that the majority view local government and state government separately...

NO. What it shows is that the word LOCAL is used in two different ways. We have three levels of government: federal, state and local. That is one application and usage of the term LOCAL.
As previously cited and defined by the Washington State report on education, the word local as applied in LOCAL CONTROL is also used to mean a system in which the State has authority in the area of education and then they have a network of school districts across the state which are locally run and locally controlled by elected school boards.

The word LOCAL is used in different ways in both of these examples.

This is not unusual for our English language. Consider that the word BASEBALL can mean both the round object hit with a bat as well as the over all game itself. It could refer to the business of the same name. The same word is used differently in several different contexts but which are closely related. Many other words in our language have that same property.

So perhaps the disagreement here is in how each of us is approaching this from different perspectives.

I have cited independent verifiable evidence to show that my use of the term LOCAL CONTROL is indeed apt and perfectly fine as I have used it in this thread.
 
Last edited:
why do you ask silly questions that you know the answer to? The tenth amendment was raped by your beloved saint FDR and the court has been screwed up ever since then

In other words - your answer is NO - you can show no Supreme COurt ruling agreeing with your personal opinion. Thank you.

FDR - as vile, evil and demonic as you may think he is - has been deceased since 1945. The justices whom you believe he blackmailed or turned into his willing pawns have long been worm food. Perhaps you can show us how Supreme Courts since those days have agreed with you?
 
Last edited:
In other words - your answer is NO - you can show no Supreme COurt ruling agreeing with your personal opinion. Thank you.

your posts seem labor under the delusion that only the supreme court can opine that something violates the tenth amendment.

which is contradictory to your complaints about the citizen united ruling
 
This thread is about FEDERAL TAKEOVER of schools.
I don't care, your statement was provably false. You can engage in fallacious arguments all you want, trying to distort the meaning of the words you used, but it will not change the fact you are wrong, as I proven over and over again.

In 230 I said this and you then took issue with it

Some studies may put the federal share a tiny bit higher at 9 or 10% - still a relatively small percentage of the total revenues.

The facts are clear and support my initial statement that federal funds only account for a relatively small percentage of school funding.
10% is not a "relatively small percentage" of money. That's absurd. For every million dollars that comes through a school, you're talking about $100,000 of it being federal.

I took issue with your insinuation that federal money is insignificant to schools and could easily be removed. Losing federal dollars is a big deal to schools who are already feeling budget crunches in today's economy as it is.
 
Really!? Who is empowered to do that if not the Supreme Court?

The states created the federal government to do what the states wanted the federal government to do. If the federal government decides to do something other than those enumerated powers allowed to the federal government by the only binding document between the feds and the states (article 1 section 8 US Constitution), then they are overstepping their bounds (which is further made obvious by the 10th amendment).

From Thomas Jefferson:

…To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps…and their power is more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruption of time and party, its members would become despots…

So, we see that the founders realized the misunderstanding that could be made by assuming that the Supreme Court is able to dictate everything with 5 simple votes. Truth is, the Supreme Court is one of three branches of the federal government, and that federal government is completely limited within the bounds of a document that states exactly which powers it has the legitimate powers to do. If the stray from those enumerated duties, it becomes our states' jobs to fight against those powers and refuse any involvement.

For the record, and I REALLY hope you read this: In Dred Scott v Sanford, the SC ruled that African Americans were not citizens, and as such had no right to sue in court. It went as far as to say that the federal government had no power to regulate or restrict slavery. Are you saying that this decision by 5 people is valid? That there is no way for us, as decent human beings to change that?

Instead, the northern states refused to abide by federal laws (an act called nullification) requiring them to return slaves found in northern states. This act was so effective at fighting slavery that one of the Carolinas (I forget which) listed northern states' nullification as a reason for the secession from the Union.

I'm going off topic here, but I think I've thoroughly proved that the federal government (including the court) is not the grand dictator of all things government. The states created them, so they can't be more powerful than the states. Just like the people created the states, and therefore the people are the ones who hold ultimate sovereignty over themselves, their land, and their government.
 
The basic fundamental structure is the same. The State Constitution gives the state the legal authority in the area of education and the State then has cities, towns and villages across the state educate children in schools districts run by local school boards elected by local people. This is known as LOCAL CONTROL of LOCAL SCHOOLS.



NO. What it shows is that the word LOCAL is used in two different ways. We have three levels of government: federal, state and local. That is one application and usage of the term LOCAL.
As previously cited and defined by the Washington State report on education, the word local as applied in LOCAL CONTROL is also used to mean a system in which the State has authority in the area of education and then they have a network of school districts across the state which are locally run and locally controlled by elected school boards.

The word LOCAL is used in different ways in both of these examples.

This is not unusual for our English language. Consider that the word BASEBALL can mean both the round object hit with a bat as well as the over all game itself. The same word is used differently in two different contexts but which are closely related. Many other words in our language have that same property.

So perhaps the disagreement here is in how each of us is approaching this from different perspectives.

I have cited independent verifiable evidence to show that my use of the term LOCAL CONTROL is indeed apt and perfectly fine as I have used it in this thread.

In my job (Air Force) we do tactical air control. We use a term called "Centralized Control, Decentralized Execution".

That's exactly what you're describing, and you're throwing the terms in a different order.

The state has COMPLETE control over what the local schools do. The difference is that they have the local authorities actually execute their rules for them. So, while the local school is the one actually executing the standards and procedures, it's the state controlling what is be taught, and how. Hence state standards for who can actually teach (state minimum requirements like Praxis tests and bachelor's degrees)...
 
your posts seem labor under the delusion that only the supreme court can opine that something violates the tenth amendment.

which is contradictory to your complaints about the citizen united ruling

Perhaps you can tell us who then has the legal and final authority to make those determinations as to Constitutional violations if not the Supreme Court?

What do any citizens complains about a SC decision have to do with a definitive statement about the authority of the Court to make those decisions?
 
In my job (Air Force) we do tactical air control. We use a term called "Centralized Control, Decentralized Execution".

That's exactly what you're describing, and you're throwing the terms in a different order.

This is a discussion of education- not the term as used in the Air Force. As Robert DeNiro said in THE DEERHUNTER..... "This is this, this isn't something else, this is this."
 
This is a discussion of education- not the term as used in the Air Force. As Robert DeNiro said in THE DEERHUNTER..... "This is this, this isn't something else, this is this."

This is a discussion of education - not the term used in THE DEERHUNTER.....
 
Perhaps you can tell us who then has the legal and final authority to make those determinations as to Constitutional violations if not the Supreme Court?

What do any citizens complains about a SC decision have to do with a definitive statement about the authority of the Court to make those decisions?

The states have the ultimate power to nullify the federal laws if they are in violation of the enumerated powers. Look at weed laws, that is one of the three forms of nullification at stare levels (normally described as a "civil disobedience" style of nullification)
 
This is a discussion of education- not the term as used in the Air Force. As Robert DeNiro said in THE DEERHUNTER..... "This is this, this isn't something else, this is this."

And obviously you're acting this way to skip the fact that I've proved my point. The state of Michigan exercises the centralized control, decentralized executed model with respect to education...
 
This is a discussion of education - not the term used in THE DEERHUNTER.....

The term WAS NOT used in THE DEERHUNTER. :doh why would you think it was? :shock: Your response make no sense. :roll:
 
And obviously you're acting this way to skip the fact that I've proved my point. The state of Michigan exercises the centralized control, decentralized executed model with respect to education...

You are missing the point as provided in independent evidence I presented that the term LOCAL CONTROL refers to the state system as employed in Michigan and many other states.
 
You are missing the point as provided in independent evidence I presented that the term LOCAL CONTROL refers to the state system as employed in Michigan and many other states.

No, you referred to a washington state document about their education system...

The DEFINITION of Local Control:

Local districts, rather than the state, independently make decisions on policies regarding curriculum and its compliance to state..

According to the Northwest Educational Technology Consortium

There is STATE, there is FEDERAL, and then there is LOCAL... Three separate entities. You're trying to combine two for some reason, just to mix two terms and start some ridiculously off-topic garbage. It's pointless, but I'm going ahead and playing the game, because it's easy to point the fallacy.
 
No, you referred to a washington state document about their education system...

Which describes a system of LOCAL CONTROL being state constitutional authority which is then administered and carried out through cities, towns and villages in school districts run through locally elected school boards. Just like we have in Michigan.

There is STATE, there is FEDERAL, and then there is LOCAL... Three separate entities. You're trying to combine two for some reason, just to mix two terms and start some ridiculously off-topic garbage. It's pointless, but I'm going ahead and playing the game, because it's easy to point the fallacy.

I already told you just that. Why are you repeating it back to me? Words have different meanings and in this case LOCAL as in LOCAL CONTROL does also. You are simply repeating what you already said and independent verifiable evidence shows that the term LOCAL CONTROL as it applies to educational systems is being used correctly by me in this thread.
 
Which describes a system of LOCAL CONTROL being state constitutional authority which is then administered and carried out through cities, towns and villages in school districts run through locally elected school boards. Just like we have in Michigan.



I already told you just that. Why are you repeating it back to me? Words have different meanings and in this case LOCAL as in LOCAL CONTROL does also. You are simply repeating what you already said and independent verifiable evidence shows that the term LOCAL CONTROL as it applies to educational systems is being used correctly by me in this thread.

The individual school districts are not allowed to stray from the state's standards or procedures. Therefore, the state is in control of all things public education related. The districts simply execute what the state dictates. That is NOT local control, it's state control.
 
This thread got boring fast. The Feds always look at anyone but them as local. Of course, those at the state level always look at the municipalities as local.

I've never seen a conversation that involved Federal, State and local where the local meant the State.
 
The individual school districts are not allowed to stray from the state's standards or procedures. Therefore, the state is in control of all things public education related. The districts simply execute what the state dictates. That is NOT local control, it's state control.

You are using the term differently. As per the structure of Washington state and the state of Michigan and many other states, a system of state Constitutional authority over education administered through a network of districts with elected school boards is knows as LOCAL CONTROL.

Again, from the previously cited Washington state report on education in their state

How are public schools in Washington organized?
Washington is largely considered a “local control” state. This means that local school districts are generally responsible for delivering the actual instructional programs for the state’s elementary and secondary school-age population. Each district is governed by a locally-elected school board whose members serve staggered four-year terms. Each school board hires a Superintendent who oversees the day-to-day operation of the school district. Currently, there are a total of 295 school districts.

The term is used the same way that I have used it in this discussion.
 
You are using the term differently. As per the structure of Washington state and the state of Michigan and many other states, a system of state Constitutional authority over education administered through a network of districts with elected school boards is knows as LOCAL CONTROL.

Again, from the previously cited Washington state report on education in their state



The term is used the same way that I have used it in this discussion.

The local districts don't control anything. All they do is administer the education standards passed to then from the stat government. You're changing the way this is looked at just to fit your argument, which is irrelevant anyways.

Let me ask you this: if there was a state that didn't make any state level decisions on education, and specifically prohibited he federal government from funding any education ventures in their state, and left all education matters to the counties or municipalities of its state, what would you call that system?
 
I've never seen a conversation that involved Federal, State and local where the local meant the State.

Thank you! About time someone else weighed on on this! I feel like I'm bashing my head into a brick wall hoping the wall will give (if only I enjoyed it, I'd make a great Marine!!)
 
The local districts don't control anything. All they do is administer the education standards passed to then from the stat government.

Really?! The local districts don't control anything? :shock: They control nothing?! :shock:

Would you consider the complete staffing of all persons employed in that district as nothing? Would you consider the actual running of the schools from one day to the next year in and year out as nothing? Would you consider the adoption of the materials, textbooks, planning tools, methodologies, approaches, planning and means used to teach and education children as nothing?

The word HYPERBOLE does not begin to approach your claim in this regard. :roll:
 
Really?! The local districts don't control anything? :shock: They control nothing?! :shock:

Would you consider the complete staffing of all persons employed in that district as nothing? Would you consider the actual running of the schools from one day to the next year in and year out as nothing? Would you consider the adoption of the materials, textbooks, planning tools, methodologies, approaches, planning and means used to teach and education children as nothing?

The word HYPERBOLE does not begin to approach your claim in this regard. :roll:

That's all crap that the district does to execute the tasks given to them by the state. Hence my statement about execution at the district level.... Now will you answer my question?
 
That's all crap that the district does to execute the tasks given to them by the state. Hence my statement about execution at the district level.... Now will you answer my question?

Do you actually have any real life experience in the field of education?
 
Let me ask you this: if there was a state that didn't make any state level decisions on education, and specifically prohibited he federal government from funding any education ventures in their state, and left all education matters to the counties or municipalities of its state, what would you call that system?

I'd really love an answer to this one!
 
Back
Top Bottom