“Who has the primary responsibility for making critical decisions about the education of school-aged children? Their parents? Or government and the school system it operates? That is a fundamental question about education policy that faces the United States as it attempts to build educational institutions for the twenty-first century.” – Jack Klenk

For more information on this topic, click here.

You can download the document here. [PDF]

Primarily, Klenk asks the following linked questions:  “Who has the primary responsibility for making critical decisions about the education of school-aged children? Their parents? Or government and the school system it operates?”

Klenk presents an extended overview of the development of American public education and demonstrates that we now have a “top-down” model that has been designed to promote the preferences of experts, bureaucracies, and unions above that of parents.  Rather, a system must be developed that overturns old patterns of behavior.  The current educational system is overdue for a modernization, that will it make it more flexible, less bureaucratic, and more family-friendly.  To be authentically public, it must serve all parents from the whole public.

For education to serve the public, it must give parents access to a variety of schools, not just the monolithic government option.  The old system is a monopoly that is not suited to modern life.  As with other monopolies, it gives disproportionate weight to itself and special interests, and not enough to the customers – the parents and children.  Furthermore, monopolies always resist improvement-forcing competition.  Any new system of education for the public must leave behind the mindset that only government schools can serve the public.  Parents should be allowed to select the educational institutions that best suit their needs.

However, the reforms must be accomplished in a manner that does not interfere with the freedom and distinctive identities of nongovernmental schools.  This is critical.  Government financial support of parental educational choices cannot be allowed to threaten the independence and distinctive features (e.g., religious education) of alternative institutions.  Vouchers, tax credits, and charter schools are all part of a wave of educational change that appears to be on the horizon as the public realizes that government schools are very costly and are not performing well.

Dr. Klenk is the author of a new FRC booklet titled, “Who Should Decide How Children Are Educated?.”  His new publication, which you can download at no charge, answers this probing question through the application of both careful analysis and common sense.

It’s a question well worth asking.  According to the federal Education Department’s National Center for Education Statistics, in constant dollars, spending per pupil in public elementary and secondary schools went from $2,769 in the 1961-62 school year to $10,041 in 2007-07 school year.

What have we gotten for this massive investment?  According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, “the reading skills of 12th graders tested in 2005 were significantly worse than those of students in 1992, when a comparable test was first given, and essentially flat since students previously took the exam in 2002.”

Jack Klenk believes we can, and must, do better.  He makes a strong case that parents should be allowed and empowered to decide how to education their children.  Here’s an excerpt from his new FRC publication:

“(W)hat we need today is education that serves the public: education where power flows back to parents; where empowered parents are able to choose schools as they see fit (public charter schools, other government schools, private schools, homeschools, cyber schools, or other schools yet to come); where schools of all stripes that offer quality education are free to compete to serve parents; where the success of schools depends more on satisfying parents who freely choose them than on pleasing bureaucracies; and where nongovernmental schools retain their independence.”

Dr. Klenk’s impressive credentials lend support for his case.  He served for twenty-seven years in the U.S. Department of Education under five presidents and eight secretaries. He directed the Office of Non-Public Education which is responsible for fostering the participation of nonpublic school students and teachers in federal education programs and initiatives. Dr. Klenk worked on policies and programs affecting school choice, private schools, home schools, urban faith-based schools, and the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program.

“Who Should Decide How Children Are Educated?” is an important contribution to the debate over the future of American education.  This is more than an academic discussion — it’s about the well-being of our children and the nation they inherit.

The Social Conservative Review:
The Insider’s Guide to Pro-Family News
June 24, 2010

FRC has recently published a comprehensive study of President Obama’s efforts to repeal the historic ban on homosexuals in the Armed Forces. Written by respected military analyst Lt. Col. (ret) Robert Maginnis, “Mission Compromised: How the Obama Administration is Drafting the Military into the Culture War” is an important contribution to the debate over this critical issue.

After over 30 years in the Marine Corps, including service as the senior military attorney, I know the serious risks present if the current “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy and law are repealed. I am compelled to speak out since those currently on active duty cannot voice their opinions. Robert Maginnis uses facts, the law, and a dose of military perspective to debunk the myths put forward by those seeking change from the current law. James C. Walker, Brig.Gen. U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.)

The free PDF of this compelling study can be downloaded here.

Educational Freedom and Reform

• “Christian churches oppose Race to the Top, Obama blueprint,” Valerie Strauss, The Washington Post
• “States of Dishonesty,” Mark Schneider, The American
• “Has Homeschooling Ruined My Son’s Life?,” Timothy Pella, Crosswalk
• “A “Crisis,” More Hype, and Another Call for Bailouts,” Bethany Aronhalt, The Heritage Foundation

Environmental Issues

• “Miracle at the New York Times, Trouble for America,” Rob Schwarzwalder, Family Research Council
• “EPA Backs Reinstating Superfund ‘Polluter Pays’ Tax,” Jim Efstathiou, Jr., Bloomberg
• “Couple Raises Money For Their Wedding Through Aluminum Can Recycling,” MarketWatch
• “Environmentalists as Battered Spouses,” Steven F. Hayward, The American
• “A Tale of Two Disasters,” Paul H. Rubin, The Wall Street Journal

Faith and Policy

• “Obama and Pelosi Hijack “The Word”,” Ken Blackwell and Ken Klukowski, The Huffington Post
• “Islam: Antithetical to Religious Freedom,” Janet Levy, American Thinker
• “Unity or Unanimity at Reformed Council?,” Jordan Ballor, The Acton Institute
• “Retired Bishop: Biden’s Kenya Constitution Support ‘Invites Canonical Censure’,” Kathleen Gilbert, LifeSiteNews.com

Health Care

• “Health Care Law at Odds With Constitution,” Jay Sekulow, American Center for Law and Justice
• “U.S. rules for Medicaid could cause trouble for Va. Budget,” Tyler Whitley, Richmond Times-Dispatch
• “The Bad News About ObamaCare Keeps Piling Up,” Karl Rove, The Wall Street Journal
• “The Road to Price Controls,” Scott Gottlieb, The American
• “Farewell, Medicare Advantage,” Editorial, The Wall Street Journal
• “Defiant Obama defends health care overhaul,” Associated Press

Homosexuality in the Military

• “A Charade with Consequences,” Tony Perkins, The Politico
• “A ban on the procedure could be lifted by an amendment hidden in the attempt to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”,” Anna Clark, Salon

Judiciary

• “From the Hill: Sessions Reprimands White House for Misleading Statements on Kagan’s Harvard Controversy,” Tom McClusky, The Cloakroom
• “Kagan Casuistry: Hypocrisy Surrounds Dems in Kagan Hearings,” Tom McClusky, The Cloakroom
• “Kagan Unqualified To Be on Court,” Rep. Ted Poe, Human Events
• “Kagan and Shariah,” Editorial, The Washington Times
• “Transcript of closing arguments in Proposition 8 trial,” Alliance Defense Fund
• “Kagan “Loved” the Bork Hearings,” Brian Darling, RedState

Marriage and Family

Family Economics

• “Markets and Morals,” Ken Blackwell, Family Research Council
• “The New New Deal,” Charles R. Kesler, Imprimis
• “Hoyer: Permanent middle class tax cuts too costly,” Associated Press

Marriage

• “President Obama’s Homosexual Benefits Order Ignores the Law and the Constitution,” Family Research Council
• “Dating for a decade? Young adults aren’t rushing marriage,” Sharon Jayson, USA Today
• “The Tragedy of Absent Fathers,” Chuck Donovan, The Heritage Foundation
• “Father involvement in pregnancy could reduce infant mortality,” Physorg.com
• “Labor Dept. to order businesses to give “gay employees equal treatment,” Associated Press

Pornography

• “Porn Harms Capitol Hill Briefing,” Chris Gacek, Family Research Council
• “Video from Pornography Harms Briefing today in Washington, D.C.,” Carrie Russell, Family Research Council
• “Pornography — The Difference Being a Parent Makes,” Albert Mohler, Crosswalk
• “Not Just a Guy Issue,” Katelyn Beaty, Christianity Today
• “Parents furious after students shown ‘inappropriate’ sex acts simulated on stuffed animals: report,” Rosemary Black, New York Daily News

Religious Liberty

Check out Persecution.com, one of the best websites regarding Christian persecution throughout the world.

• “Who Are Americans?,” Chuck Colson, Christianity Today
• “Greater religiosity during adolescence may protect against developing problem alcohol use,” Physorg.com
• “National security without religious liberty?,” Thomas Farr, The Washington Post
• “Christian ministers challenge arrests at Arab fest ,” Micki Steele, The Detroit News

Sanctity of Life

Abortion

• “A Woman’s ‘Choice’ That Affects Men: Post-Abortion Trauma,” Jeanne Monahan, Family Research Council
• “FDA Places Politics Above Science, Women’s Health, and Informed Consent,” Family Research Council
• “Video: Capitol Hill News Conference on Federal Funding for Abortion Advocates,” Carrie Russell, Family Research Council
• “Dr. Donna Harrison’s Remarks to FDA on Drug Application for Ulipristal,” Chris Gacek, Family Research Council
• “November’s Pro-Life Women Candidates,” George J. Marlin, The Catholic Thing
• “Congress, Obama, and Taxpayer Funding of Abortion,” Rep. John Boehner, National Review
• “Over $1 Billion in Federal Funding to Pro-Abortion Groups Since 2002,” Dave Bohon, The New American
• “Louisiana To Require Ultrasounds Before Abortions,” Associated Press
• “Planned Parenthood’s missing millions,” Rita Diller, The Washington Times

Adoption

• “Campaigning for Common Ground in Abortion Debate,” Susan Dominus, New York Times
• “Russia, US officials near adoption accord,” Gary Peach, Associated Press

Bioethics

• “Presumptuous Consent,” Jennifer Lahl, CBC
• “A Decade Later, Human Gene Map Yields Few New Cures,” Nicholas Wade, New York Times
• “In the Singularity Movement, Humans Are So Yesterday,” Ashlee Vance, New York Times

Stem Cell Research

• “Sight Restored to Blinded Patients using Their Own Adult Stem Cells,” David Prentice, Family Research Council
• “Gene-Engineered Adult Stem Cells to Fight HIV,” David Prentice, Family Research Council
• “Building Bone for Wounded Warriors,” David Prentice, Family Research Council
• “NIH Working Group Recommends More Embryonic Stem Cell Lines, Rejects Some,” David Prentice, Family Research Council
• “NIH Director Approves 8 More Human Embryonic Stem Cell Lines for Taxpayer Funding, No Patients Helped,” David Prentice, Family Research Council
• “CIRM to People of California: Give Us Your Money and Mind Your Own Business!,” Wesley Smith, Secondhand Smoke

Other Articles of Note for Social Conservatives

• “More Croaking from Prince Charles,” Robert Morrison, Family Research Council
• “Before the Tea Party,” Robert Morrison, Family Research Council
• “Europe: The Unjust Continent,” Samuel Gregg, The Acton Institute
• “Assisted Suicide: why now?,” Wesley J. Smith, Legatus Magazine
• ” A feminism that spans from Palin to Pelosi,” Kathleen Parker, The Washington Post
• ” No Kumbaya in Kabul,” George H. Wittman, American Spectator
• “Obama Cracks Down,” W. James Antle, III, American Spectator
• “Forgotten, but Honorable, Presidents,” Alan Snyder, Big Government
• “Confidence Waning in Obama, U.S. Outlook,” Peter Wallsten and Eliza Gray, The Wall Street Journal

Obama calls for ramped-up education spending. Department of Education outlays would increase from $32.4 billion in 2009 to $71.5 billion in 2011. Obama puts money into a laundry list of initiatives, from a $1.6 billion increase in child care funding to making permanent the expansion of Pell Grant payouts.

He has sought to please his supporters in the powerful teachers unions by pushing to rework the unpopular parts of Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act. Now he’s trying to put $3 billion more into K-12 education generally, with up to an extra $1 billion if Congress reworks the education system in the way he wants this year.

If you look at the 2011 budget’s section for the Department of Education (pp. 63-68), go to page 68 and look for the line entitled “Total, Outlays.”  There one finds that the actual 2009 budget for the Dep’t of Education was $32.409 billion and that the projected amount for 2011 is $71.479 billion.  By my calculation that is a 121% increase in two years.

I am not an expert on direct loan programs, but on the same page the figures for disbursements increases from $100.7 billion (2009 actual) to $135.0 billion (2011 projected) – a 34% increase over two years.  This Congress wants to enact a statute to federalize the student loan programs, so the budget contains this gobbledygook comment: “This measure would then use savings to make historic investments to increase college access and success, and would lay a foundation for success for America’s youngest children.”  What does that mean?  $$,$$$,$$$,$$$.$$  Good grief.

Read more at stopjennings.org.

Shouldn’t this be obvious?  Word from my friends with kids in college is that, shockingly, it’s not.  Nor is it a problem unique to Tufts.

So a tip of the hat to the Tufts’ administration for having the courage to draw a line.  And if Tufts can do it, any school can.

• “Commentary: States should decide on gay marriage,” Jared Polis, CNN (September 24, 2009)
• “Tight schedule on move to block Ariz. abortion law,” Paul Davenport, Associated Press (September 23, 2009)
• “Study confirms most Americans want health care change but not abortion funding,” Catholic News Agency (September 23, 2009)
• “Britain To Clarify Policy on Euthanasia,” Karla Adam, The Washington Post (September 23, 2009)
• “Christian Leaders Urge Sanctions Against Iran,” Angela Abbamonte, Religion News Service (September 23, 2009)
• “‘Our Time has Come’ Or Has It?,” Ken Blackwell, American Thinker (September 24, 2009)
• “Group aims to reverse S.D. ban on embryonic stem cell research,” Katy Urban, KOTA News (September 23, 2009)
• “High-schoolers get stem cell lesson,” Carolyn Johnson, KGO-San Francisco (September 23, 2009)
• Fox News (September 24, 2009)
• “Both Sides On Defensive In Maine Marriage Debate,” WMTW (September 24, 2009)
• “No excuses,” Alisa Harris, WORLD Magazine (September 26, 2009)