Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

'No child' lawsuit gets what it deserved

Published November 30, 2005 at midnight

Text size  

More Editorials

More stories »

A federal judge in Michigan dismissed a lawsuit brought by assorted teachers unions and school districts against the No Child Left Behind Act, saying Congress can't be prohibited from setting conditions on the recipients of federal funds.

That seems an eminently reasonable decision; it would be hard to argue, you would think, that those who want federal money are entitled to it even though they can't or won't comply with the rules for handing it out.

The lawsuit had claimed that the available money didn't cover the cost of compliance. That might even be true, in some cases, but it isn't relevant. If the deal is bad, don't take it.

Reg Weaver, president of the National Education Association, predictably said his group would appeal. People's tax dollars, he said, "are being used to cover unpaid bills sent from Washington for costly regulations that do not help improve education."

We've acknowledged that some portions of the law are overly restrictive, and we're not thrilled by the idea of so large a federal role in education anyway. But the underlying premise of the law - that regular testing to a known standard is a means to true accountability - is sound.

There can be no doubt that the results of statewide testing have revealed long-festering problems, and motivated school district officials to become really serious about trying to fix them. If Weaver thinks that does not improve education, then he is simply wrong.