by AFT President Sandra Feldman
May 2000

Why should
Congress threaten
education programs
that work?

People in Hartford, Connecticut, have good reason to be proud and pleased. For a number of years, students in this poor, urban school district ranked academically lowest in the state, but now things are changing. A new superintendent, working with the AFT local, used Title I money (federal funding targeted specifically to educationally needy children) to put in place a proven program called Success for All. And this year, the district celebrated significant improvements in math and reading test scores.

This is just one story among many in which children are doing better because their schools receive federal funding. But if a measure that Congress is currently debating becomes law, there will be fewer of these success stories.

The so-called Straight A's bill would allow states to lump together federal funding now devoted to programs that are proven to help children learn--as well as programs that help keep schools safe and drug free and enhance learning technology--and give the money to the states to use in any way they choose.

The legislative term for this is "block grant." But it should really be called "blank check." The result would probably be the disappearance--or at least the radical weakening--of programs designed to guarantee funding for critical national objectives like safe schools and lower class sizes.

Guaranteed Funding

The biggest of these programs, Title I, reaches 11 million disadvantaged kids--though in fact many more could use the kind of help it offers. Title I money goes directly to the districts and schools where it's most needed, and it pays for, among other things, extra teachers and programs that help students master reading and writing and achieve higher standards. Over the years, as Title I has been improved and focused on proven programs, student achievement has improved, and in some cases, such as Hartford, Title I has been a big factor in turning around entire schools and even school districts.

It is possible that the states would carry on Title I and other programs that are working--but it's very risky. The reality about block grants is that they allow state governments to spend the money any way they want to. And of course, they have their own priorities, their own pressures and demands to answer to, which do not necessarily include needy children.

This is not to say the states aren't good at lots of things. Most have been working successfully to raise student achievement. But it has been the targeted program funds of the federal government that have spurred most of them on. States have never done a good job of making sure all children get their fair share of the education pie. Schools in poorer communities have always been underfunded. Poor children, who need more than other children, have always gotten much less.

Specious Arguments

Supporters of education block grants talk about giving states the right to run their own school systems without federal interference. They claim they are for "flexibility" and against the "status quo." This is disingenuous, to say the least. Virtually all of the Title I money already goes to the local level, so what kind of flexibility are they talking about? (Flexibility not to spend the money on what works?) As for moving away from the status quo, that already happened in a big way in Title I just four years ago. Strong accountability requirements for districts and schools receiving Title I funds were added, and those requirements have been the engine driving a lot of the academic progress we've been seeing in the states.

Of course, there is a big remaining problem with the status quo: There simply isn’t enough federal education funding to meet needs. One percent of the entire federal budget is spent on K-12 education, in comparison, for example, with the 2.5 percent spent on transportation. No one denies that transportation is critical, but is building highways more than twice as important as educating our kids?

Americans want money spent according to need, not politics. So why would Congress even consider turning the funding for programs that serve needy kids into pork barrels for the states? Straight A’s is bad news for children, and people who care about educational equity should call their members of Congress to tell them so.