Politics

Congress Struggles to Replace No Child Left Behind

Published

11 years ago

July 14, 2015

Oakland Post

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan (Courtesy Photo)

By Jazelle Hunt

NNPA Washington Correspondent

WASHINGTON (NNPA) – As Congress works toward a comprehensive education policy that will replace the Bush Administration’s No Child Left Behind, two different bills from the House and Senate are up for consideration.

No Child Left Behind expired in 2007 – the law was the last time the original Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) was renewed.

If either of the current proposals is signed into law in their current states, it could spell difficulties for Black and Brown children, according to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan.

“I always say that education is the civil rights issue of our time,” he said. “The next question we as a nation should be asking is whether Black children, Latino children…children around the nation – are they receiving the quality of education they need and deserve? And too often the honest answer is, not even close. There should be nothing political or ideological about this; this is about fighting for kids’ educational opportunity.”

Secretary Duncan believes that Congress’ resistance to federal oversight will weaken whatever law is passed. Neither the House’s Student Success Act (SSA) nor the Senate’s Every Child Achieves Act (ECAA) gives the Department of Education the authority to hold states accountable for educational outcomes, create national standards/mandates, or pass judgment on a state’s education system.

Also, neither bill closes the ESEA’s “comparability loophole” – a loophole that allows states to skimp on state and local funding for needy schools, forcing them to rely heavily on federal Title I money. As a result, high-poverty schools remain under-resourced and saddled with underpaid, inexperienced teachers, because the state won’t match the federal funds.

“Education will always be a primarily a local issue, but [there is] a clear federal role here on several levels. First of all, taxpayers…are putting billions of dollars out to states every year for poor children, for English language learners, for children with special needs,” Duncan said in an interview with the NNPA News Service. “And there’s no real accountability. Transparency by itself doesn’t change a kid’s opportunities.”

The similarities between the laws end there.

In general, the SSA seeks highly flexible public education by prohibiting almost all federal involvement, allowing states to create and rely on their own education plans instead. There are guidelines for what these plans must address, including a system to find and correct racial disparities, or deal with ineffective teachers. But the bill painstakingly avoids telling states how they should meet these guidelines.

A state can also create whatever curriculum it wants – as long as it includes at least math, literacy, and science, and state tests to go along with the curriculum. States would also be largely responsible for holding themselves accountable for their own strategies and all students’ academic success. The Department of Education would only be responsible for reviewing the states’ self-evaluations to make sure tax dollars aren’t misused. In that case, Secretary Duncan is only allowed to issue recommendations and public reports.

The SSA also includes a controversial “portability provision,” which would direct Title I funds wherever a low-income student is enrolled. Even a well-resourced public school or a private school could receive Title I funds if it has a single low-income student.

“House Republicans have chosen to take a bad bill and make it even worse,” Duncan said in a statement after the SSA was passed in the House. “This bill – which was passed in an entirely partisan fashion – represents a huge step backward for America’s students. They deserve better.”

The Senate’s ECAA attempts to provide state flexibility and more support than No Child Left Behind did, while still providing some federal guidelines. For example, while states would create their plans, the plans must be aligned with college entrance requirements or career/vocational education standards, and must include high standards for early childhood education programs, students with disabilities, and English language learners.

Under the bill, states are encouraged to use a variety of data in fostering and measuring student achievement, including projects, portfolios, and annual state exams. Both states and the Department of Education would share “best practices” from schools around the country.

The ECAA also sets aside funds solely for states to reward the best teachers and supports and interventions for less effective ones. Additionally, the state plans must distinguish between low-performing schools and those that need support for less-controllable factors, such as a high migrant student population.

Even the bill’s supporters have reservations, however. Last month, the Congressional Tri-Caucus, a coalition of the Black, Asian, and Latino Congressional caucuses, issued an open letter stating that while they appreciate the bill’s bipartisanship, it does not yet “do enough to protect the historically disadvantaged and vulnerable students the ESEA is intended to serve.”

A few amendments have been made since then, including guidelines for disabled students, increased access to STEM lessons and opportunities for “underrepresented” students, and better means of identifying and supporting homeless students.

Duncan hopes the final law will draw on best practices from school districts around the nation; cap the amount of time spent on standardized testing; close the comparability loophole; compel states to intervene and support the lowest-performing five percent of its schools; and grant the Department of Education Department the authority to implement and enforce these benchmarks.

The Senate will likely vote on a final version of the ECAA this week. When it does, key members of both chambers will have to find a way to combine their proposals and send one bill out for the President’s signature. If he rejects it, it’s back to the drawing board – or the ESEA just won’t be reauthorized anytime soon.

“Everyone has their opinions and debate is healthy and important. So I’ll just [reiterate], this is a civil rights law,” Duncan told the NNPA News Service. “This is fighting to increase equity and opportunity so that every child has chance at life. Educational opportunity has to be the equalizer in our nation, the one thing that will help equality the gap between the haves and have-nots.”

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Activists Fight for Voting Rights In North Carolina: “This Is Our Selma”

Don't Miss

NAACP Youth Seek ‘Black Lives Matter’ Activism For Nation’s Oldest Civil Rights Organization

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of July 1 – 7, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of July 1 – 7, 2026

Published

3 days ago

July 5, 2026

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

NPRC Joins National Grand Jury Proceedings Seeking Accountability, Constitutional Restoration

Organizers state that testimony will explore historical and political developments that they believe have contributed to the expansion of corporate influence over public institutions and governmental decision-making. Participants are expected to discuss concerns regarding constitutional governance, individual liberties, property rights, and the protection of vulnerable populations, including seniors and persons with disabilities.

Published

2 weeks ago

June 26, 2026

Oakland Post

Photo by Billie Powers.

Special to The Post

The National Probate Reform Coalition (NPRC) has joined Toll and Roll and a growing coalition of advocacy organizations, victims, whistleblowers, and citizen groups in support of a nationally broadcast People’s Grand Jury proceeding scheduled for July 1 and July 7.

Organizers describe the event as a public forum designed to examine allegations of government abuse, judicial misconduct, legislative failures, and the erosion of constitutional protections affecting millions of Americans.

The proceedings will feature testimony from victims, families, advocates, and organizations from across the country who contend they have experienced harm through government actions, institutional neglect, and failures of oversight.

According to organizers, the People’s Grand Jury will focus on concerns involving probate courts, guardianships, conservatorships, child welfare systems, property rights, civil liberties, and what participants view as a growing disconnect between government institutions and the constitutional rights of the people they are sworn to serve.

NPRC is participating because many of the issues being examined mirror the concerns raised by advocates, victims, and families who have participated in its monthly town halls. For years, families have reported cases involving exploitation of elders, questionable guardianships, estate depletion, denial of due process, and a lack of meaningful oversight within probate court systems.

“This proceeding gives victims and advocates an opportunity to place their experiences on the public record,” said Tanya Dennis, lead facilitator of NPRC. “For too long, families have struggled to have their voices heard regarding elder abuse, probate exploitation, and government inaction. This forum allows those stories to be shared before a national audience.”

In keeping with principles of transparency and fairness, invitations have been extended to legislators, members of the judiciary, law enforcement representatives, and other public officials who may wish to respond to concerns raised during the proceedings or defend actions taken by their respective institutions.

One of the primary outcomes sought by organizers is public consideration and support for the People’s Remedy and Restoration Act, a proposed legislative framework that advocates believe would strengthen oversight, increase accountability, provide remedies for victims of governmental abuse, and restore constitutional protections.

The proceedings are expected to be broadcast nationally, providing citizens throughout the United States an opportunity to observe testimony, review evidence presented, and participate in an ongoing conversation regarding government accountability and the protection of individual rights.

Advocates hope the hearings will encourage meaningful dialogue, legislative reform, and renewed public engagement in the democratic process.

Individuals, organizations, public officials, and members of the media interested in attending or obtaining access information may contact the organizers at tollandroll2025@gmail.com.

As Americans continue to debate the future of constitutional governance, judicial accountability, and the protection of vulnerable citizens, the July proceedings are expected to serve as a significant forum for public testimony and civic engagement. For more information, go to https://tollandroll.com

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Local Civil Rights Attorney, Activist Walter Riley Reveals Life Lessons from 70 Years in the Movement

Widely known in Oakland for his unifying leadership on issues of social justice and human rights, Riley is also recognized for his famous son, Raymond “Boots” Riley, a rap artist, political activist, and successful filmmaker, whose latest film, “I Love Boosters,” is now in theaters and capturing national attention.

Published

2 weeks ago

June 26, 2026

Oakland Post

Walter Riley. Courtesy photo.

By Ken Epstein

Prominent civil rights attorney and activist Walter Riley recently went on radio station KPFA 94.1 to discuss his new book co-authored with local veteran organizer Jesse Strauss: “Civil Rights and Structural Attacks: Conversations with Walter Riley.”

Born in North Carolina, Riley has lived in San Francisco, Chicago, and Detroit, but his longtime home is Oakland, California.

Over the years, he was a leader in the South against Jim Crow, participated as a student in the historic 1968 San Francisco State University strike that created Black Studies and Ethnic Studies in the U.S. and scored victories in the fight for open college admissions.

He was also a labor organizer and was involved in early Black Panther Party formations, anti-war protests, and was a leader of the Progressive Labor Party, a pro-Mao, Marxist Leninist party.

In an interview on KPFA’s “Upfront” with host Brian Edwards-Tiekert on June 18, he discussed some of his formative experiences, born in 1944 to a family of sharecroppers who worked on a tobacco farm near Durham, North Carolina.

“I came from a farming family, the ninth child of 11 children,” Riley said. “My mom and dad got married as teenagers, and they were together for their entire lives. Growing up in this large family, we had to deal with various aspects of what it meant to live in an economically depressed area with parents who had come through what they called “Hoover times” (the Great Depression) in the South.

“They were proud of every one of their children when they took some stand, to develop and show some sense of dignity,” he said.

In his neighborhood, slavery was not a distant memory. There are many people “who knew firsthand what it was to have family members that had lived as enslaved people and lived in communities where enslaved people had lived.

“(Under tenant farming), the landowner negotiated for the entire family: the farmer, the wife, the children – everybody was involved on the farm. Kids were often engaged. We had to shovel, hoe tobacco to keep the weeds from taking over, to make sure that tobacco worms didn’t eat up the tobacco. If a child was old enough to plow, they would walk behind a horse or mule and plow a field, working from sunup to sundown,” he said.

The houses did not have indoor bathrooms, running water or electricity. “A lot of the names in the Black community were the same names as these slave owners. We could see the names of folks on the streets, street names of people who had enslaved people, and they were symbols to me of a world that did not see me as a human being, that has not treated my ancestors as humans, has treated us as chattel to be sold, to be owned, to be property,” Riley said

“When we were counted by our government, we were counted only for the purposes of allowing white people, white men, to have a vote.”

By 1950, when he was 6 years old, his family moved to another house, leaving tenant farming. His father took a job in construction.

“My parents wanted the younger kids to have education,” he continued. “The older kids had to work on the farms. By the time I came along, I was the second child born in a hospital. “My parents looked forward to younger kids to have more sense of independence from the economic and social depravities that they saw around them.”

Watching television, he became aware of the suffering under Jim Crow, including the lynching in Mississippi of Emmett Till in 1955 and Mack Parker in 1959.

When he was 13, he joined a picket line in town in front of a variety store chain that did not hire Black people and became active in the Civil Rights Movement. By time he was in high school, he had become a leader in the local chapter of the NAACP and met Malcolm X and later Medgar Evers, leaders who were both assassinated.

Married and with a child, he moved with his family in the early 1960s to San Francisco, attending San Francisco State University while working full time.

He participated in the San Francisco State University strike, the longest student strike in U.S. history, where students and their supporters prevailed in the face of mass arrests and daily violent police attacks.

While many people remember the strike for its historic victory – the creation of the first Black Studies and Ethnic Studies programs in the country. “But open admissions was the thing,” he said. “Open admissions had to do with people being able to go to school for free. People should be able to go to school just because they come here and say, ‘I want to go to school. I want an education’ (because) we live in a rich country.”

Studying Marxism, including dialectical materialism, he gradually began to understand structure of the system that needs to be changed, he said. “It requires a lot of study, and it still does.”