YOUR COMMENTS

Bess in Concord - no, your parents were paying the system back for the education they received as kids. Thanks for playing.
- DM, Manchester

DM in Manchester - I went to public schools K-12 - however, I OWE nothing - as my PARENTS paid property, excise, state income, and federal taxes EACH YEAR for thirteen years, and in the 20 years since I graduated from high school have continued to pay. In other words, my parents taxes PAID for my education a long time ago. It would be nice if they, along with others without children "in the system" could stop PAYING over and over and over again.
- Bess, Concord

The Union can be conservative, but showcasing it's stupidity is another thing.
Bush has expanded the size of the federal government, ...ever.
Trying to portray Sen. Obama as the originator of this concept, is not only a disservice to New Hampshire, but also makes the paper look more tabloid with each word.
The Union used to have some credibility.
Has Bat Boy joined the staff recently?
- Goofticket, Green Bay

This is not the only sector of our society that Mr. Obama intends to dump "our" money into. All you have to do is read his book "The Audacity of Hope" to know that this man plans a government funded program for every aspect of our lives. I encourage everyone to read it and see for yoursselves that we can't afford this man in the White House. Something has to be done, yes. But at what cost?
- Warrren, FARMINGGTON

One issue that is mentioned a couple of times today by posters. I can't disagree more with the notion that the public schools should "teach values" or teach "right and wrong". Those should be taught by PARENTS and religious leaders. At no point do I want a schoolteacher dicating what is right and what is wrong. School is to impart knowledge. Values vary widely from family to family and congregation to congregation. You can believe whatever you want; you simply have to adhere to the rules and laws of the land. It can't get much simpler than that. As long as you don't negatively impact others(in school, for this discussion, especially), you can do as you please, in my book.
- Stephen Boyington, Chester

DM in Manchester, I went to private elementary school and private high school and private college. I'd like to be able to pay no taxes for schools, since I don't intend to have kids, but the democrats would never give me that option.
- Mike R., Bedford

The schools that work are accountable to the parents. As with most socialist endeavors each layer of central control introduces goals and agenda items that serve other interests, at the expense of children’s future. The further from home the decisionmaking, the less likely a concerned parent will be able to get an audience with a policymaker, much less make a difference on behalf of the child.
If you want a Washington DC designed education for your child – by all means move to DC! I want families to be in charge of children, with the broadest possible latitude to decide what is best for individual future citizens. I want school officials that know they are employed by the parents they serve.
- Ed Ware, Weare, NH

If you received a public education as a kid then as far as I'm concerned, you OWE taxes to pay for today's kids to be educated, without complaint. Someone payed for you to be educated, and so shall you pay for someone else to be educated. As far as Obama's plan, I'm just surprised the pro-lifers aren't jumping on his statements about brain development beginning at conception.
- DM, Manchester

Michael, liberals are not for expanded accountability - in nearly every state, liberals destory every almost every effort to introduce accountability in education. Liberals also believe there can be free choice with no moral consequences - observe how much they embrace killing unborn children. Conservatives believe in responsibility (tobacco, firearms) and morality (such as the marriage issue). Don't categorize any opinion which is not the same as your narrow viewpoint as "garbage".
- Nicholl, Manchester

Free Choice Michael? Just because the Democratic Party supports abortion rights does not mean we can label them as the party for free choice. When it comes to having the choice of paying lower taxes, the democrats say no. When it comes to having school choice, democrats say no. When it comes to having privatization of social security, the democrats say no. When it comes to free market principals for health care, democrats say no. When it comes to environmental issues, the dems want more government control. The dems want seat belt laws because people are not capable of making choices on their own. The list goes on and on. The Democratic Party stands for big government which means a cradle to grave nanny state and less choice for the rest of us. If the Democrats really want to solve the education problem, they would give more control of the dollars to the parents and ultimately the decision on where to send their kids to school.
- Kyle, Bedford

Adam, I am reading it because I am away from New Hampshire and looking for local coverage of news, and no, I am not a Mass. invader. I have lived in the state my entire life, and my family has lived there for generations. Don't categorize anyone who doesn't share your narrow viewpoint as an outsider. I believe in decentralization of power, local control, and free choice, but within the context of accountability, equity, and protection of the public good. It is incredibly foolish to think that the liberals are still advocating big, centralized government and that conservatives are for keeping the government out of people's business as if it were still the 1950s. Liberals are for expanded accountability and greater spending with more, but decentralized social progams and free choice in areas that do not endanger others (public smoking, guns, etc), whereas conservatives are for social restrictions (civil liberties, marriage, family planning) and expanded military spending. Both parties spend heavily and control aspects of individual life and "freedoms", but there is a clear difference between what is being controlled, by whom, and for what purpose. It's time to turn the page in this country, and the modern liberals are the ones who can accomplish it best.
- Michael, Bedford, NH

Michael in Bedford? Why are you reading a proudly CONSERVATIVE paper, which the Union-Leader is? Are you a Massachusetts invader? Why don't you read the Boston Globe instead for your daily dose of liberal drum-circle idiocy?
- Adam F., Merrimack

Value their own wealth over the education of the children? You're talking about teachers and wealth? That's pretty funny. Wow, to have a Master's degree and make $45k/year, that's wealth? Get real and find a better argument.
- Ken, Manchester, NH

As a former teacher for 7 years, I saw that success in the classroom comes from number 1, INVOLVED PARENTS. Money, technology, Etc. are all secondary. You can have the best teacher possible, and I hope that my daughter will, but the students who "get ahead" are the ones who have parents reading to them, and practicing their spelling and math facts with theri child after school and on weekends. This is the elephant that no one wants to talk about. People need to take responsibility for themselves and stop this entitlement attitude.
- Chris, Bedford

When are the big government liberals going to learn their lesson ? Education can not be improved by throwing more money at it and growing the education bureaucracy. If children and parents are not motivated to succeed in the classroom, no amount of money is going to improve education. Regarding the comments made by Jason, education is a problem in this country for the sole reason that too many parents have relinquished THEIR responsibility to be the advocate for THEIR children. Instead, they would rather have Mr. Obama do it for them. The farther away we get from parental involvement and parental control in education, the worse our schools become. Look around. You can see it everywhere.
- Mike, Manchester

I'm getting sick of conservatives and their endless quest to move the Overton window to the right in the media; calling a moderate and/or populist stance "fascist" or "socialist" or "far-left extremist" or some other Bill O'Reilly-esque term just to mindlessly dismiss a policy. If you don't like an idea, just state so and why! If you result to calling someone's ideas fascist just to get your point across, then you probably don't have much of a leg to stand on. Remember the boy who cried wolf!
- Breyer S., Manchester, NH

I really don't understand how anyone can see this as a good idea. Lets have Washington politicians make decisions about our kids education because they know best. Yet when it comes to their kids education, little johnny is sent to a $30k dollar a year private school ala Chelsea Clinton. These politicians have the means to chose whats best for their kid's education but handcuff the rest of us when it comes to our kids. Just another example of the pandering the Democrats do to the teacher's union, plain and simple...
- Kyle, Bedford

While friends, family and neighbors may wish to help educate my kids, I don't believe they should be compelled to do so under force of federal law. It is my responsibility to provide for them. NCLB is a great example of why federal government should NEVER get involved in education. There is nobody in Washington DC that will act my best interest or my children's best interest. Even if their intentions are good, anyone who has taught a child knows that there is no such thing as a broad federal standard that can be applied fairly to all kids. And unfortunately, when federal funds are added to local education, federal control follows. We look at failed initiatives of the past and ask what can we tweak to fix this mess. Really we should be questioning the role of federal government in education altogether. We have education issues in this country, but they won't be solved by another massive federal program.
- Kevin Olson, Nashua

Education is a real problem in this country because teachers can not teach anymore. They teach in a PC manner to a bunch of kids who do not listen and can not be disciplined. Teaching is more than just how to pass a test. Teachers are not allowed to teach values and right from wrong because some liberal do gooder says it violates someone's rights or offends someone. The answer to children who can not listen in the classroom today is to drug them up. Really good answer. The Dept. of Education today is throwing good money at bad. The only way for a child to get a real education is to send them to a private school, or to home school, where teachers teach and the kids learn. When guys like Obama, and Gov Patrick here in Mass talk about how important education is and how much it has helped them, remember what schools they went too: Private, and got a first rate college education at Harvard. Sorry folks but public education in the U.S. today is a recipe for failure.
- Kevin, Lowell Ma

It's not the funding, per se, that is the problem. The money has to come from somewhere. It's the tangled, ineffective, and expensive web of bureaucracy that comes along with it. Try suggesting that the money be given to the parents to give them more choice in their children's education, and watch how fast Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton will come to the defense to the teachers' unions who value their own wealth over the education of our youth.
- Bruce M., Brentwood

According to your logic then, maybe if we threw more money into Iraq we wouldn't be losing? and maybe if we threw more money in another huge bureaucracy like the DHS we would be safer?
"Small government" people need to wake up and smell their own rank hypocracy. It's only called "Fascism" when you blend government with "for profit" entities like corporations, not when you make pure government programs that help everybody.
- joe T., Derry, NH

"...pro-gun, pro-smoking, anti-choice..." Yeah, right. Gimme a break. The Democrats are the least "pro-choice" people around. Note your two other examples. Want to choose to own a gun? Or choose to allow people to smoke on your private property? Or choose where to send your kids to school? Or choose whether to eat unhealthy foods? Liberals enjoy using the phrase "pro-choice" but they do NOT understand what that really means.
- Bruce M., Brentwood

I am not sure what you mean by "no-one else is promoting any real change." Real change is being challenged all over the country by politicians and unions against "real change". It involves giving parents a choice and letting them decide what is best for their own child, not the federal gov't. The voucher programs so disgusted by liberals is one answer, but even allowing families to remove their children from failing public schools to go to succeeding public schools is another.

There are lots of alternatives to the liberal solution of growing government. Most of them are better (see healthcare).
- Aaron Calkins, New Boston, NH

There is NO mandate for the Federal government to be involved in or funding education. That is a state and local function, period. The Departrment of Education is nothing but a sinecure for retired school administrators to earn enough credits to double-dip. If you're a parent or a concerned citizen, get involved in your kids schools. If you're "too busy" you get what you get. Relying on the same sort of bureaucrats who brought us The Post Office is silly!
- Gene Smith, Contoocook, NH

Unintended consequence

Remember the Libertarian solution zero state funding zero state adequacy total local control like the New Hampshire constitution says.

Editors ought to be pitching less meddling from Concord, not more. They ought to be giving power to parents, not to bureaucrats in Concord.
We expected a smarter education plan from the men as intelligent as the UL Editors Unfortunately, the editors have shown again that as fresh as a lot of their rhetoric is, most of their policy ideas are as stale as the 1960s nostalgia that bred them.

Libertarian Ken Blevens
- Ken Blevens, Bow

For Jason, we're not talking about federal funding (which qualifies to mean you and me paying), we're talking about federal oversight..., big difference. For Michael, what evidence do you have that the federal government might do any better at administering education ? As pointed out, local control tends to work better. And I re-read the article for the word 'fascist'..., none found. For Stephen, we're not talking about family and friends and neighbors and teachers, which is local control. We're talking about federal control. Forgive my presumption, but it must be the education you three got that made it so hard to actually read the article.
- Wade Benjamin, Center Barnstead, NH

Eduaction is a real problem in this country because federal money is involved. With No Child Left BEhind, if a child is deemed special needs, the district gets more money. SO............ every child becomes "special needs". My daughter got a 65 on a test and the school wants her to have a tutor and they can get her special needs attention which would in turn bring in more federal $$$$$. Her issue was that she didn't study, plain and simple. Next test was a 96, because she studied. Did not need any special needs, special tutor.....

The alternative is to shut down the US Department of Education in Washington (seeing how each State has one already) and taking the billions in their budget and distributing that money to the schools based on pupil population. (as in , take the total $$ and divide by total school population , multiply that number by the student population of each school district).

I know the idea of allowing people at the local level decide what is best for their children is somewhat disturbing to any liberal. Take the money out of DC and letting the people decide is a scary thing to a liberal. It takes away their dependents (votes) thus minimizing their power. The people may end up being ble to think for themselves...............now we wouldn't want that would we??????
- Mark, Candia

Believing that a child's family and friends and neighbors and teachers should work together to help that child learn and grow is "nanny state fascism"? It seems more like the American Way to me. I could never be a UL editor, I guess.
- Stephen Boyington, Chester

All the Democrat candidates are cut from the same cloth: they want government as big as possible; they want more control over your life (because, of course, they know best); they want their beholden unions (read: teachers) as large as possible to keep them in power; they want to give illegals the right to vote any way possible because they also are seen as beholden voters.

The only difference among candidate 'A' and 'B' is how much of this they are willing to admit to the American people beforehand. Give credit, I guess, to Obama for being honest. The same cannot be said of 'Ms. Pants Suit.'
- Chris, Brookline, NH

The Union Leader calling someone fascist for proposing that the government actual ensure that every child is given a sound education!? My god. I keep thinking this newspaper can't get any worse, but it does! Despite the rampant homophobic, pro-gun, pro-smoking, anti-choice rightwing garbage it spews, defining those who disagree with its misinterpretation of American values as un-American, it dares to call someone else fascist! Look in the mirror!
- Michael, Bedford, NH

If federally funded help for schools is so bad, then what is your solution?

Education is a real problem in this country, and no-one else is promoting any real change. If this idea is so bad, then what is your alternative?
- Jason Osder, Arlington, VA