Op-Ed

Child Watch: No ESEA Bill is Better Than a Bad One

Published

10 years ago

February 23, 2015

By Marian Wright Edelman
NNPA Columnist

For 50 years Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) has been the primary source of federal funding targeted to schools to serve poor children. Its purpose has been to raise achievement for poor children through extra support to their schools to help meet their greater educational needs. Sadly, from the beginning, states didn’t keep their end of the bargain.

In 1969, the Washington Research Project (the Children’s Defense Fund’s parent organization) and the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. partnered with others and examined federal audit reports on how Title I funds were being used.

Our report, Title I: Is It Helping Poor Children?, found the answer to our question was a resounding “No.” Rather than serving the special needs of poor and disadvantaged children, many of the millions of dollars Congress appropriated had been wasted, diverted, or otherwise misused by state and local education agencies.

Title I funding was often being used as general aid and to supplant – rather than supplement – state and local education funds, including for construction and equipment unrelated to Title I goals. For example, Fayette County, Tenn. used 90 percent of its Title I funds for construction of a predominantly Black school despite a recent federal court order that the school system desegregate, and Memphis used Title I funds to purchase 18 portable swimming pools in the summer of 1966.

The Children’s Defense Fund (CDF) subsequently conducted several other major studies that reinforced the importance of federal accountability for money targeted to help children most in need, especially poor children and children of color. In CDF’s first report, Children Out of School in America (1974), after knocking on thousands of doors in census tracts across the nation and interviewing many state and local school officials, we found that if a child was not White, or was White but not middle class, did not speak English, was poor, needed special help with seeing, hearing, walking, reading, learning, adjusting, or growing up, was pregnant at age 15, was not smart enough, or was too smart, then in too many places school officials decided school was not the place for that child.

It is crucial that a strong Title I program reach the children in areas of concentrated poverty if and when ESEA is reauthorized. Unfortunately, the House Education and Workforce Committee, charged to lead in moving an ESEA reauthorization bill in the House of Representatives, just approved a bill (H.R. 5) in a party line vote that fails to target the needs of the poorest children by adding a “portability” provision assuring these children less help. AASA, The School Superintendents Association, and many others join us in opposing the portability provision.

The portability provision in H.R. 5 would move us backwards by distributing the same amount for a poor child regardless of the wealth of the district or school she attends. This will unravel the intent of Title I by taking resources away from children in areas of concentrated poverty and offering extra resources to schools and districts with a few poor children who may not need them. The poorest students in schools with the highest concentrations of poor children need extra help to combat poverty’s barriers.

Compounding this huge backwards step, H.R. 5 also removes strong accountability provisions required to make sure the children who need help most will actually be helped.

It is morally indefensible and extraordinarily expensive that we have 14.7 million poor children in our country – 6.5 million of them living at less than half the poverty level. All of these poor children exceed the combined residents in all 50 state capitals and the District of Columbia.

That more than 80 percent of Black and almost 75 percent or more of Latino public school students are unable to read and compute at grade level in 4th and 8th grades and, if they reach 9th grade, 3 in 10 do not graduate within four years is a cause for extreme alarm and focused attention. Without targeted federal funding with accountability, the poorest children will lose out.

Poor children are not the only ones at educational risk. Special measures are needed to protect English language learners, children and youths with disabilities, children of color, and children and youths who are homeless or in our child welfare and juvenile justice systems. States and school districts must target resources to address achievement gaps for these vulnerable groups of children. The federal government must hold states accountable for making sure they make progress towards grade level achievement targets, high school graduation, and college and career preparation.

The mistakes of the past should not be repeated and children and our nation need us to move forward, not backwards. No ESEA bill is better than a bill that has poor children subsidize the education of wealthier children.

Marian Wright Edelman is president of the Children’s Defense Fund whose Leave No Child Behind® mission is to ensure every child a Healthy Start, a Head Start, a Fair Start, a Safe Start and a Moral Start in life and successful passage to adulthood with the help of caring families and communities. For more information go to www.childrensdefense.org.

###

Reporter II

Posts by Reporter II

Up Next

To Be Equal: Rhetoric of Race at the Crossroads of Police Reform

Don't Miss

Misguided U.S. Foreign Policy Fueled Terrorism

Reporter II

Click to comment

Activism

Juneteenth: Celebrating Our History, Honoring Our Shared Spaces

It’s been empowering to watch Juneteenth blossom into a widely celebrated holiday, filled with vibrant outdoor events like cookouts, festivals, parades, and more. It’s inspiring to see the community embrace our history—showing up in droves to celebrate freedom, a freedom delayed for some enslaved Americans more than two years after the Emancipation Proclamation was signed.

Published

4 weeks ago

June 18, 2025

Oakland Post

Wayne Wilson, Public Affairs Campaign Manager, Caltrans

By Wayne Wilson, Public Affairs Campaign Manager, Caltrans

Juneteenth marks an important moment in our shared history—a time to reflect on the legacy of our ancestors who, even in the face of injustice, chose freedom, unity, and community over fear, anger, and hopelessness. We honor their resilience and the paths they paved so future generations can continue to walk with pride.

As we head into the weekend full of festivities and summer celebrations, I want to offer a friendly reminder about who is not invited to the cookout: litter.

At Clean California, we believe the places where we gather—parks, parade routes, street corners, and church lots—should reflect the pride and beauty of the people who fill them. Our mission is to restore and beautify public spaces, transforming areas impacted by trash and neglect into spaces that reflect the strength and spirit of the communities who use them.

Too often, after the music fades and the grills cool, our public spaces are left littered with trash. Just as our ancestors took pride in their communities, we honor their legacy when we clean up after ourselves, teach our children to do the same, and care for our shared spaces.

Small acts can inspire big change. Since 2021, Clean California and its partners have collected and removed over 2.9 million cubic yards of litter. We did this by partnering with local nonprofits and community organizations to organize grassroots cleanup events and beautification projects across California.

Now, we invite all California communities to continue the incredible momentum and take the pledge toward building a cleaner community through our Clean California Community Designation Program. This recognizes cities and neighborhoods committed to long-term cleanliness and civic pride.

This Juneteenth, let’s not only celebrate our history—but also contribute to its legacy. By picking up after ourselves and by leaving no litter behind after celebrations, we have an opportunity to honor our past and shape a cleaner, safer, more vibrant future.

Visit CleanCA.com to learn more about Clean California.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

OPINION: California’s Legislature Has the Wrong Prescription for the Affordability Crisis — Gov. Newsom’s Plan Hits the Mark

Last month, Gov. Newsom included measures in his budget that would encourage greater transparency, accountability, and affordability across the prescription drug supply chain. His plan would deliver real relief to struggling Californians. It would also help expose the hidden markups and practices by big drug companies that push the prices of prescription drugs higher and higher. The legislature should follow the Governor’s lead and embrace sensible, fair regulations that will not raise the cost of medications.

Published

4 weeks ago

June 18, 2025

Oakland Post

Rev. Dr. Lawrence E. VanHook. Courtesy of Rev. Dr. Lawrence E. VanHook.

By Rev. Dr. Lawrence E. VanHook

As a pastor and East Bay resident, I see firsthand how my community struggles with the rising cost of everyday living. A fellow pastor in Oakland recently told me he cuts his pills in half to make them last longer because of the crushing costs of drugs.

Meanwhile, community members are contending with skyrocketing grocery prices and a lack of affordable healthcare options, while businesses are being forced to close their doors.

Our community is hurting. Things have to change.

The most pressing issue that demands our leaders’ attention is rising healthcare costs, and particularly the rising cost of medications. Annual prescription drug costs in California have spiked by nearly 50% since 2018, from $9.1 billion to $13.6 billion.

Some lawmakers, however, have advanced legislation that would drive up healthcare costs and set communities like mine back further.

I’m particularly concerned with Senate Bill (SB) 41, sponsored by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), a carbon copy of a 2024 bill that I strongly opposed and Gov. Newsom rightly vetoed. This bill would impose significant healthcare costs on patients, small businesses, and working families, while allowing big drug companies to increase their profits.

SB 41 would impose a new $10.05 pharmacy fee for every prescription filled in California. This new fee, which would apply to millions of Californians, is roughly five times higher than the current average of $2.

For example, a Bay Area family with five monthly prescriptions would be forced to shoulder about $500 more in annual health costs. If a small business covers 25 employees, each with four prescription fills per month (the national average), that would add nearly $10,000 per year in health care costs.

This bill would also restrict how health plan sponsors — like employers, unions, state plans, Medicare, and Medicaid — partner with pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) to negotiate against big drug companies and deliver the lowest possible costs for employees and members. By mandating a flat fee for pharmacy benefit services, this misguided legislation would undercut your health plan’s ability to drive down costs while handing more profits to pharmaceutical manufacturers.

This bill would also endanger patients by eliminating safety requirements for pharmacies that dispense complex and costly specialty medications. Additionally, it would restrict home delivery for prescriptions, a convenient and affordable service that many families rely on.

Instead of repeating the same tired plan laid out in the big pharma-backed playbook, lawmakers should embrace Newsom’s transparency-first approach and prioritize our communities.

Let’s urge our state legislators to reject policies like SB 41 that would make a difficult situation even worse for communities like ours.

About the Author

Rev. Dr. VanHook is the founder and pastor of The Community Church in Oakland and the founder of The Charis House, a re-entry facility for men recovering from alcohol and drug abuse.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Alameda County

Council Approves Budget to Invest in Core City Services, Save Fire Stations, Invest in Economic Development

I am most proud of our ability to fund these critical city services without the use of one-time fixes. We are still suffering the consequences of last year’s budget, where a majority of the Council, myself not included, chose to incorporate anticipated proceeds from the sale of the Coliseum to fund essential services. Since the sale has still not yet been completed, the lack of funds led to drastic cuts in city services, including the temporary closure of fire stations, staff layoffs, and the cancellations of many service contracts.

Published

1 month ago

June 14, 2025

Oakland Post

District 4 Oakland City Councilmember Janani Ramachandran. Photo courtesy City of Oakland.

By Janani Ramachandran, District 4 Oakland City Councilmember

On Wednesday, June 11, City Council took a bold step to prioritize investing in essential city services to get our beautiful Town back on track. As Chair of the Finance Committee, I am proud to have led a collaborative process, alongside Councilmembers Rowena Brown, Zac Unger, and Charlene Wang, to develop a set of amendments to the proposed FY 2025-2027 budget which passed successfully with a vote of 6 – 1. Despite facing a $265 million structural budget deficit, we were able to restore funding to ensure that all 25 fire stations remain open, fund 5 police academies, invest millions of dollars to combat illegal dumping and sideshow prevention, improve our permitting processes, fund a “business incentives” program to revitalize our commercial corridors, improve upon our homelessness prevention work, amplify the city’s anti-trafficking programs, re-instate our tree services division, staff up our Auditor’s office – all while preventing any layoffs of city staff, keeping our senior centers and after-school programs open, and crisis services like MACRO funded.

Our budget comes in response to the widespread and consistent calls from across Oakland’s diverse communities asking us to prioritize funding solutions to the issues that have most directly impacted our residents’ safety and quality of life. Our priorities are also inspired by our belief that Oakland is on the way not only to financial recovery, but also to global recognition. Oakland can attract and preserve businesses of all sizes with safer, cleaner streets. We can and will have more large-scale festivals that celebrate our culture, concerts that uplift our incredible local musicians, conferences that attract patrons from across the world, and award-winning restaurants that top national charts. We are on our way to rebuilding a thriving economy and having a cultural renaissance will create more jobs for Oaklanders while also generating more revenue for the City through sales and business taxes.

I am grateful for the close partnership with our new Mayor Barbara Lee, and know that she shares our values of ensuring we are prioritizing keeping Oakland’s residents safe, our streets clean, and our businesses prosperous in an open and fiscally responsible manner. I am also thankful to our City Administrator, Jestin Johnson, and former Interim Mayor Kevin Jenkins’ efforts to produce the initial proposal that our Council budget team used as a starting point for our amendments, and for their shared commitment to transparency and ethical government. I am especially grateful for every resident that took the time to make their voice heard throughout this rigorous budget process. I have no doubt that we are on the verge of true change, and that together we will bring Oakland back to being the world-class city I know it can be.