cross-posted from the Nevada Tenth Amendment Center

Why do public schools spend millions of dollars designing, implementing, and evaluating high-stakes accountability tests?  Why is the 650-plus page No Child Left Behind Act shamefully 43 times larger than the Constitution only to impose exceptionally burdensome regulations on states, districts, and schools?  Why is it that the Department of Education spends nearly $107 billion annually  in taxpayer money on elementary and secondary education alone, and doesn’t have much to show for it? 

Students hate school and end up dropping out.  Parents are dissatisfied with the product their children receive.  The Department of Education is bleeding taxpayers dry and failing to deliver what it was set up to do.  Why?  As Aaron Smith eloquently explains, the DOE has produced nothing but unconstitutional government meddling, and its power will only continue to expand unless it’s abolished.   It produces a one-size-fits-all educational product that ignores the needs of the individual.  To the contrary, in a free market system of education, the market would ensure results and schools would either perform or go out of business.  Individuals would retain their power of choice and parents would be the decision makers on how their children got educated.

“Market-based reforms cannot begin to occur unless states are stripped of their monopoly on defining “education.” Until then, government will be free to impose its bureaucracy and arbitrary standards on everyone. The fundamental question that must be asked is, Who should determine how a child is educated: government or parents? Naturally, the statist who wishes to use his superior intellect and insight to instruct society on how to live will select the former — and, in his mind, rescue citizens from ignorance and ineptitude.”

Read more here: