Let us hope that as Obama's children "siphon off" resources from schools that the rest of Washington's families must use, he will see the virtue to giving those families the same opportunities that they have given to his.
Watching the early moves of Barack Obama has been enlightening. They have been the actions of someone who does not completely understand the politics of Middle America, but who is at least aware of that shortcoming.
A recent example of this was his choice to wait until 2010 before considering the possibility of repealing the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy for homosexuals. Though it was formerly a campaign promise, Obama's sudden hesitancy betrayed a realization that it was not a priority that he could fulfill unscathed.
Similarly, stacking his cabinet with Clinton-era bureaucrats suggests that Obama is not yet sure enough of himself to create his own administration. That hesitancy is shrewd, and it has been the norm ever since he received a months-long backlash for calling religious Americans "bitter."
It seems likely that Obama will spend more time testing the waters than he does taking action. It will be interesting to see how he moves on certain issues, particularly those with which he has little experience.
Education is one that comes to mind. Were Obama's base to have its way, alternatives to public schooling would probably be abolished. Unless Obama has been frequently exposed to alternative viewpoints (and it is doubtful he has), he may believe that such action would indeed be palatable to the rest of America. If that is his belief, the response will be worth watching.
In a widely publicized decision, Obama decided to put his children in the Sidwell Friends School, a private school costing $29,000 a year. Given this, one would presume that he supports alternatives to public education.
Earlier in the year, he actually did sound supportive: "If there was any argument for vouchers, it was 'Let's see if the experiment works' . . . And if it does, whatever my preconception, you do what's best for kids," Obama said.
But this was in February, in the midst of the Democratic primaries. Days after he made that statement, he issued a press release containing a new position: "Senator Obama has always been a critic of vouchers," and was trying to express "his longstanding skepticism in that [last] interview. Throughout his career, he has voted against voucher proposals and voiced concern for siphoning off resources from our public schools."
Here as elsewhere, it seems that Obama will remain noncommittal and most inclined towards the path of least resistance. In the meantime, it is worthwhile to note that the absence of Obama's children from public schools will "siphon off" about $17,000 per year in funding for the Washington school system. (Each student is worth roughly $8,500.)
Private schools and vouchers aside, what does Obama believe about homeschooling? Unfortunately, his views have been similarly absent from the public sphere.
In December 2007, Obama introduced the Global Poverty Act (S.2433) to aid in "achievement of the [United Nations] Millennium Development Goal of cutting extreme global poverty" by 2015. One of the means to that end, as expressed by the Millennium Development Goals, is the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC).
Given comments made by Obama in the past that were supportive of the United Nations' power to define children's rights, it seems increasingly probable that he supports the CRC.
Many conservatives view the CRC as a threat to homeschooling. The most prominent critics are HSLDA and its chairman, Michael Farris. But the worst that the CRC might do is allow children to opt out of homeschooling against the wishes of their parents.
While we could take Obama's actions on these issues as being indicators of how he views education, it is more likely that he has not really been aware of what he was doing. Empty rhetoric about "poverty" is generally popular among the Democratic base, and that is probably the extent of what he knew.
Regardless of what course Obama directs education to take, we should take comfort in knowing that he will find it difficult to do worse than his predecessor, who increased federal spending on education from $39.9 billion in 2001 to $66.4 billion in 2005.
All that we gained from this federal behemoth was an increasingly dysfunctional system of education, a fact notably illustrated by Obama's present unwillingness to subject his own children to that system.
Let us hope that as Obama's children continue to "siphon off" resources from schools that the rest of Washington's families must use, he will see the virtue to giving those families the same opportunities that they have given to his.
[...] bureaucrats suggests that Obama is not yet sure enough of himself to create his own administration.more Bookmark It Hide Sites [...]
[...] bureaucrats suggests that Obama is not yet sure enough of himself to create his own administration.more Share and [...]