There Are No Stupid Questions...Only Political Objections
“It offended her that the past could intrude so literally on the present yet never return.”
― James Hannaham, Delicious Foods
This is one of those weeks where I struggle to identify who presents the biggest threat - those who seek to destroy public education or those who will defend it at any cost. Luckily those two armies are tiny slivers of the larger picture, but lord they make some noise.
Think about education policy advocacy as a bit of a bell curve. On either end live the extremists.
On one end there are those preaching that everything connected to public education sucks. Teachers are spending too much time inducting kids, and kids, as a result, are coming out ignorant. These folks continually bemoan the lack of focus on reading, writing, and arithmetic.
The other side is populated by those who believe that public schools are perpetual victims of society's ill intentions, and lack of willingness to fully fund schools. If only schools were given the proper respect, all would be nirvana.
Luckily, most folks live in the middle between the two poles. here we have people who feel schools should be well-funded but accountable. Teachers are respected, and safety is important. In theory, equity is crucial unless you ask us to sacrifice our kids in its name, then there will be some pushback.
You could probably ignore the two extremes if it weren't for their ability to take over every conversation and suck the air out of it. They've staked a position on every issue, and begun broadcasting before any public arguments have begun. leaving the rest of us to sort through the noise.
This week's just-concluded state hearings on federal funding and its role in Tennessee's public education system should serve as a case in point.
In March, Tennessee's Speaker of the House Cameron Sexton started talking about how Tennessee should reject Federal Education Funds. Sexton's postulate was that by rejecting the federal funds, the state could avoid the federal strings attached to those dollars, and make up the funding difference with state money.
Sexton seemed to be forgetting that federal money was partially money generated by Tennesseans, so by supplanting federal money with state money, Tennesseans were actually paying twice. Never a great idea.
it is worth noting, that when it came to attaching strings to school funding, Tennessee, through the General Assembly and the TDOE, was pretty good at it themselves. Recent legislation dictated to schools what they could read and how students could be taught to read. Additional screening requirements were put in place requiring schools to use a specific screener three times a year and those results are to be reported to the Tennessee Department of Education in a timely fashion.
Adding to the reporting demand schools already face, local districts are now required to file early literacy reports and justify their state money in a lengthy written report. That's a few strings.
Sexton's argument seems to be that a bureaucrat in Nashville is more capable of telling a district in Bristol how to teach than a bureaucrat in DC. Even though, Nashville is only 75 miles closer to Bristol than DC.
On its face, the conversation seems farcical at first glance. Still, taking a look at funding and its impact is an important conversation to have. I doubt any of us blindly accept money without an examination of what we are required to do for it in our private life, why should our public life be any different?
In August Sexton, along with Senate leader Randy McNally appointed a committee to study the idea of foregoing federal money. State Senator Jon Lundberg, who also heads up the Senate Education Committee, and State Representative Debra Moody, who does the same for the House, were appointed as co-chairs. And the howling began.
The committee was charged with four tasks:
Identify the amount of federal funding the state, districts, and schools receive and the laws associated with accepting such funds;
Examine how the state, districts, and schools use or intend to use the funding, and whether there are conditions or requirements for accepting such funds;
Report on the feasibility of the state rejecting federal education funding;
Recommend a strategy on how to reject certain federal funding or how to eliminate unwanted restrictions placed on the state due to receiving the funding.
Despite Lundberg repeatedly saying that as head of the Committee, he approached the task with no foregone conclusions, critics refused to accept him at his word.
In critics' eyes, this was a thinly veiled plot to further rob resources from needy children in Tennessee. The mere action of talking about federal money and its replacement was enough to elicit extreme hyperbole. Nothing said by Lundberg could temper that.
“In this memo, there is nothing that tasks this group with cutting even $1 of education funding,” Lundberg said in his opening statement. “There is no precursor to the outcome of what this task force is going to do.”
There were five sessions held over the last two weeks and despite Lundberg's oft-repeated disclaimer, the hyperbole only grew.
After a comptroller report, Rep. Ronnie Glynn, (D-Clarksville) asked, "If we reject those funds, how would our kids eat?” Really?
“We’re taking this seriously because this would be such a consequential step for the state to take,” said Gini Pupo-Walker, who leads The Education Trust in Tennessee. “We’re trying to ensure lawmakers are getting accurate information during the discussions.”
What? The Education Trust is a self-created non-profit with little or no power. I'm pretty sure "accurate information" equals information that favors our point of view. But everybody had to get in the game, right?
Over the committee's 5 meetings, it became increasingly clear that rejecting federal money was going to be a little more complex than envisioned by the speaker. Plenty of compelling arguments were raised to maintain current practices, with perhaps the pursuit of waivers, were made. No clear reasons for rejection were presented.
Arguing that the federal government shouldn't be dictating policy to Tennessee when under Governor Lee, and by extension Sexton, the state has abdicated control of policy to an outside entity, the Jeb Bush founded ExcelinEd, isn't a strong argument. But we'll talk more about that in the very near future.
Money from the federal government flows primarily through 5 pots.
Title 1Disadvantaged students$358,655,222IDEAStudents with disabilities$292,286,148USDA Child NutritionMeals for low-income students$284,457,608Title IISupporting effective instruction$45,546,902Perkins VCareer and Technical Education$29,506,984
Here's things, while it is all federal money, not all of it comes from the Department of Education. Child nutrition services are derived from the Department of Agriculture. It's a complicated web we weave.
There is no way to predict, how cutting from one pile would affect cutting from another. As pointed out by Tennessee's Commissioner of Education Lizette Reynolds.
“Many federal requirements are also codified in Tennessee state law, and the issue of accepting or rejecting federal education funding is a complicated one, with numerous legal implications and uncertainties,” The Commissioner added, “For these reasons, it’s hard to project exactly how decisions (to opt out of federal funding) would play out,”
There are also several million dollars in federal money that flows directly to school districts outside of the TDOE. How would that money be impacted by rejecting federal funds?
When it comes to freeing the state up from federal stipulations, here's the thing, Tennessee law is aligned with federal law, even if the state did reject federal funds, some requirements could still remain. in some cases, abdicating to state policy, would expose the state to higher costs. To what extent, is something likely decided by the courts.
Ironically, if I were the parent of a child with disabilities, I might prefer state policy to federal policy, as the state policy is much more aspirational than the federal. many of you might not know that Tennessee treats "giftedness" as a disability, and was one of the first states to allow for gifted students to be eligible for an IEP.
Sexton and others have complained about strings attached to the money. So what strings are Republicans upset about?
The best I can tell it's stipulations around transgender rights. However, using federal funds as a political tool would not be without precedent.
In 2021, the Biden administration arguably tried to tie the rights of male transgender athletes to participate as females in high school sports to federal funding.
Ironically the requirement Republicans find most troubling, is likely the same one Democrats would object to - standardized testing.
I will say, in talking to several republican lawmakers, this federal money conversation has opened their eyes to the amount of testing required of students. As one told me, they've realized it's become a case where the federal government requires one, and then the state requires three, and the locals in order to make sure kids are prepared for those, demand three more. We need to now turn the mirror on ourselves and see what we are doing.
His words were echoed by several others.
At the end of the session, predictably, there was an uproar over parents of children with disabilities not being able to speak to the panel, while out-of-state advocates for rejecting funds were.
But as Lundberg told Chalkbeat, "“Our charge is not to look at eliminating programs, or adding programs," said the committee chair, “It’s about, if we say we don’t need the federal government to provide X program, can we as a state do it more efficiently and serve this student population more effectively?”
Yeah, I get it. But in every conversation, there comes a point where your best course of action is to stop talking.
I'll never forget a couple years ago when a certain Democrat leader had the House poised to expand student lunch options. He had bipartisan support secured, but wouldn't stop talking. Ultimately the bill failed as a direct result of his inability to take the win and shut up.
This past week's hearings present similar circumstances. The case had already been made that rejecting federal money was not something that was going to happen anytime soon, no need for further testimony at this juncture.
Hell, it couldn't even be nailed down how much federal money we were actually talking about.
Estimates have varied from $1.1 billion to $1.9 billion. On Tuesday, officials with the state education department said Tennessee is projected to receive about $1.3 billion from the federal government, or about a tenth of the total spending on the state’s K-12 students. They attributed the variance to additional federal education relief in recent years as related to the pandemic.
Another positive outcome of the hearings is that the misconception held by some legislators that the TISA formula includes federal money was cleared up. TISA money is just state and local, with districts receiving federal money on top of the TISA contribution. That's likely to create some future conversations.
Much was made of Representative John Ragans's (R-Oak Ridge) intense focus on food waste in school lunch programs. Critics seized on Ragan's question about the correlation to school lunch programs and student performance.
“We get this money, that’s supposedly aimed at the most needy students and the lowest performing students. What’s the measure of improvement for this money coming in? How much has it improved the performance of these students?”
Again, something probably best suited for a larger conversation - should schools be a vehicle for social needs or should schools focus on educational outcomes - but Ragan's points were salient.
I think much of the Republican argument derives from slow sliding towards the former as opposed to the latter. But boy, good luck trying to have that future conversation.
A presentation by the TDOE revealed that on average, nationally, districts run a food waste cost of about 30%. Figures don't exist for Tennessee, because we don't track it. Now somehow that's ok when it comes to schools, but I don't believe any of us would accept that in our households.
Here's a spot where Tennessee could potentially ask for some waivers, that would reduce waste and save money without negatively impacting kids. But only if we have that conversation.
The TDOE testimony was a highlight for me. Ragan systematically revealed the department's continued lack of focus and preparation. "We can get you that information" and "We don't have that information" were frequent responses, leading Ragan to remark on numerous occasions, "Once again a lack of clarity."
As each day of Commissioner Reynolds's tenure progresses, it becomes more and more apparent that the previously exposed weaknesses of the TDOE continue to remain in place.
In the immortal words of Steven Tyler, "It's the same old story, the same old song and dance."
Speaking of weaknesses, the one thing these hearings did confirm, was the inability of House Speaker Cameron Sexton to be an effective lawmaker, let alone a future State Governor.
The hearings quickly demonstrated his lack of foresight in proposing the rejection of federal money. As it became clearer that the committee wouldn't be reaching the conclusion that he desired, he decided it was a prime opportunity to rekindle a fight with the state's Republican senators.
Last week, a Belmont University student was shot and killed by a stray bullet while walking on the school track. Sexton publicly laid partial blame at the feet of the state senate for not passing legislation at a recently concluded special session. Sexton told radio host Matt Murphy, "We had a bill with General Funk about misdemeanor crimes getting a mental health evaluation.”
Unfortunately, he failed to identify which bill he was talking about, nor can anyone else.
I'm not sure where it is written that picking a fight with the state senate on the cusp of a gubernatorial race is a sound strategy, but trust me it's not.
At this rate, I think Sexton is making a strong argument against any consideration for being elected governor, and I'm not even convinced he holds on to the speaker role.
Years ago, I had a friend who got a merchandise sales position with a touring group. She showed up for the first trip out with about six suitcases. There was no way in hell that she was getting on the bus with that level of baggage. Sexton now faces a similar dilemma.
But don't think there is not baggage on the other side, State Representative Gloria Johnson (D-Knoxville) tweeted the following in response to the conclusion of hearings, "Speaker Sexton took these guys on a wild goose chase and hopefully hurt their re-election bids for following along on this exercise of ignorance."
Whatever happened to the old adage that there are no stupid questions?
Carl Sagan, in his work The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark said: "There are naïve questions, tedious questions, ill-phrased questions, questions put after inadequate self-criticism. But every question is a cry to understand the world. There is no such thing as a dumb question"
or if you prefer, South Park, Mr. Garrison once taught his class, “Remember, there are no stupid questions, just stupid people.”
We can not let people on either side stand in the way of examining all policies. There should be no sacred cows. If your beliefs can't stand up to scrutiny, then you need new beliefs.
It's that simple.
- - -
Time to rattle the cup a little bit before I head out the door.
If you could help a brother out…and you think this blog has value, your support would be greatly appreciated.
To those who’ve thrown some coins in the basket, I am eternally grateful for your generosity. It allows me to keep doing what I do and without you, I would have been forced to quit long ago. It is truly appreciated and keeps the bill collectors semi-happy. Now more than ever your continued support is vital.
If you are interested, I’m sharing posts via email through Substack. This has proven to be an effective way to increase coverage. Readers have the option of either free or paid subscriptions. Paid subscriptions will potentially receive additional materials as they become available. Your support would be greatly appreciated.
If you wish to join the rank of donors but are not interested in Substack, you can still head over to Patreon and help a brother out. Or you can hit up my Venmo account which is Thomas-Weber-10. I don’t need much – even $5 would help – but if you think what I do has value, a little help is always greatly appreciated. Not begging, just saying, Christmas is right around the corner.
If you’d like less opinion and more news, check out my writing for The Tennessee Star. It’s a bit drier but equally informative.