My claim was that democrats are the ones screaming for more money whenever the statistics on education make them look badly. You are the consummate example of goal post moving.
The statistics are bad across the board, Replicant of Democrat. So, let's stop with the accusations and start considering the solutions.
It is useless to go to tertiary schooling if one's secondary-education has been inadequate - and the SAT-tests are showing enormous differences state-to-state.
Whyzzat? Because state secondary schooling is free and depends upon taxation, principally property taxes. Which is not how it should be done. It should be on a per-pupil basis and coordinated by each state, with government financial assistance where necessary. To improve schools, means or teachers.
And to stop with the hodge-podge of different teaching regimes. We need BADLY some basic courses, beyond reading, writing and calculating that are measurable. The US is by no means in the top-range when measured internationally. See the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA)
Study Key Findings results - they are nothing to crow about.
Secondary and Tertiary schooling should be kept in-state, since the cost is additional out-of-state. And tertiary learning must be kept as low-cost as possible for the poorer kids to enter. This is where the Federal government has a duty - that is, the well-being of any child will be largely determined by their income over their entire work lifespan.
And we have seen, in state schools, come first recession, all hell breaks loose in teaching as the tax revenue-funds wither.
That is simply not a sufficiently good reason. The US needs a Back-up Plan to guaranty that teaching secondary-school kids is not sacrificed.
If it is, we are just creating tomorrow's unemployed.
We need imperatively to push our children into Tertiary Education (vocational, 2- & 4-year) where the ability to read, write, understand/think and communicate become central to working adequately well.
That Back-up Plan can be Federal spending where necessary. Which is a touchy subject, so perhaps a certain sum per student should be accorded across all states - and the states spend it as they see fit (to teach).
BUT, let that sum also have a conditional requisite. For instance, national junior-level testing exams (like the SAT but not the SAT) to ascertain the level of learning actually attained. Why not the SAT?
Because, as far as I can tell, the SAT has remained M/C & T/F, which is not sufficient in a world where writing is still a major indicator of our capacity to communicate. Communication (verbal and written) is the fundamental ability for people to comprehend one another. (Not the Boob-Tube!)
Without which a society cannot function adequately ...
_____________
