Clark Comments on Effects of "No Child Left Behind"

General Wesley Clark Comments on Effects of "No Child Left Behind" on State Education Budget

For Immediate Release
Date: November 20, 2003

"I was troubled to learn today New Hampshire schools have to reduce special education grants and other educational funding to pay for federally-mandated tests under the No Child Left Behind Act.

This measure demonstrates the way that No Child Left Behind elevates form over substance. The Bush Administration has focused too much on narrow tests and punishments, and too little on ensuring that every child can learn and succeed. No Child Left Behind imposes a tremendous new mandate on states and local communities and then deprives them of the resources they need to succeed. And now New Hampshire students are suffering the consequences of this administration's hollow promises."

--Discuss--

Asking, not bashing- so please respond with info.

That statement is a good start, and it sounds as though he'd like to see the bill repealed. So do you know if he is like some other candidates who simply want to fully fund NCLB or does he want to scrap the bill as unworkable even if funded?

I admit I've had problems with Clark in the past, tho I have tried not to bash him. (at least not too badly :-)). If he came out for the repeal of NCLB, that would be a tremendous plus for him in my book.

Other than the testing problem, what other specific do you know of that make this bill completely unworkable?

I am no educator, so I can only go by what teachers have been complaining about. It's a one size fits all program that doesn't take into account the various differences in school districts across this country. I've heard complaints that it isn't flexible enough to allow for implementation or improvement.

And the testing problem is a HUGE one that should get more attention than it has. We have had standardized tests in Texas schools for a generation, with a final test required prior to graduation for the past 14 years. Teachers have been forced to teach the test, rather than actually teaching children to think or learn. We have some of the worst schools and scores in the nation, but a district can be called "Exemplary" if it meets a certain standard for our exit test. Never mind that the district may produce kids with low SAT scores, or low graduation rates, or low college admission rates, etc.

It has also been used as a way to browbeat teachers into a certain curriculum and curb their freedoms in the classroom. The teachers' salaries, etc. can be tied to the test scores- thus the huge incentive to teach to the test rather than actually educate. From what I understand (and I am not claiming to be an expert here), the NCLB almost mirrors what's been happening in Texas schools.

As my aunt (a teacher for 25 years) said, "Good God. Bush wants to do to the nation's schools what he did to Texas!" And that's NOT a good thing. Why on earth would we want a test score to be the ultimate test of a teacher's ability or the student's achievements? Procedure over substance.

Maybe unworkable was the wrong word to use, since some of the concepts of the bill could be implemented with a *major* overhaul of NCLB. But given the problems I've heard about, it just seems that it would be easier to scrap NCLB and start over.

If the funding were there. It addresses graduation rates, for example. It's supposed to have funding to rebuild schools. The punitiveness against teachers wouldn't be as severe if all the training programs were funded. And teachers always want control over their curriculum and their classroom, but as a parent, I've seen that method doesn't produce quality schools. You end up with very different standards from year to year and if your kid ends up in a class with a teacher with low standards, they don't learn enough to compete the next year.

It would be alot easier to change the testing requirements and the way this bill designates 'failed' schools than to start over from scratch. Senator Kennedy and many other dedicated Democrats spent an enormous amount of time on this bill. Painting the whole thing with one sweeping brush is wrong. And the chant of 'repeal, repeal, repeal' is nothing more than an election ploy and isn't a solution to anything.

If you don't believe me, do a little research into the Texas school system. If you like what you find out, then NCLB might be good to you. Otherwise, you'll see why many Texans (even some Shrub supporters) have problems with it.

The testing issues are the worst of it and make for good political fodder as well. But this bill has programs and funding that the Texas education system doesn't. I happen to like the idea of being allowed to put your child in a different school if their local school is obviously failing and even shutting it down if it just doesn't improve. But the process in which this bill makes it happen does make it near impossible for the schools to improve, especially without any of the funding or programs that were supposed to help the schools get better.

I'm sick of 5 word 'solutions' to complex problems. Bush threw out 'Leave No Child Behind' and got elected; "Repeal, repeal, repeal" isn't any better.

you have some flexibility in choosing which school your child goes to in Texas too. :shrug:

And how does a school show improvement? By improving standardized testing scores? That's not a good measure for education.

We wil just have to agree to disagree on this. This movement has been used in Texas as a means of furthering support for vouchers and charter schools. You implement these testing requirements, then show how badly the public schools are doing (esp the ones that aren't all white, btw), so that white/suburban voters think they need to just get out of the public school system.

You may be right that NCLB isn't actually the Texas system. But with Shrub and Paige running things, it's hard to see the difference. And I haven't been shown anything that leads me to believe that NCLB is actually different than what's been done in Texas in recent years- just maybe even more of it.

In Iowa, we have had historically good schools with LOCALLY dervied standards. Due to our selection of the Iowa Test of Educational Development (ITED) as our assessment tool, about half our schools will be considered failing. The ITEDs are much harder than most other states' tests so the criteria for failing or succeeding as a school is NOT standardized.

As a teacher, I am professional enough to work with others to develop meaningful and appropriate standards. Its what I'm trained for. Should we have no standards? Absolutely not. We need some, but they should be locally derived, achievable, and should not apply to certain populations of students. For example, a student with a severe mental disability should not have to pass the same test as a Harvard bound grad.

NCLB allows us to exempt 1% of our school from the test--we have that many students in our "Severely and Profoundly Disabled" classes. These are students that are wheelchair-bound, have limited or no power of speech and no control over motor skills.

I also have to test the student that has been institutionalized after having been physicaly and sexually abused by a parent. I have to test a homeless kid--and he must be proficient, regardless of what is going on in his life. Throw the damn thing out and start over. I don't trust Republicans to craft legislation for the public schools. Sen. Kennedy is on record as saying they threw out his most cherished parts of the legislation. It is also why Jeffords left their party.

Edited for spelling--can't let it go as a teacher.

There are bad things in this bill, no doubt in my mind. It's stupid that good schools were graded on improvement only, with no regard to where they started. But it's also true that parents tend to think their local school is either okay or terrible, regardless of how the school actually performs. National testing would give them a real idea of how their school is really doing. Parents have a right to know.

Mentally disabled students shouldn't have to pass the same tests, they've never had to in the past. But kids with other problems have been learning for generations, it's not acceptable that they aren't anymore. I've seen too many schools that just let these kids fail and drop out, it's unspoken policy. It's not fair for teachers to be expected to perform miracles, but if the funding had been provided, programs to reach these kids would have followed. There would have been no way around it.

So I'm not for scrapping this bill. From a parent's perspective, I see some things in this bill that are long overdue.

of the NCLB problem. And your Grandma is right...NCLB was modeled after the Texas school model.

I looked for more specifics on this. Clark's educational issues statement declares NCLB as implemented by the Bush Administration a failure but doesn't really say if it should be scrapped or revised. There is a statement about doing better than what the administration has done on funding, but it is not clear to me if that is referring to NCLB or education funding in general.

http://clark04.com/issues/education/

It at least sounds like he is going further than the candidates who simply say that NCLB would be good if fully funded. That puts him ahead of several of the pack on this issue!

Good overview of what this Bill was supposed to do and some of the initiatives in it and how lack of funding is bigger issue than the testing. The testing can be changed, the lack of funding means our kids stay in crumbling schools, teachers don't get promised training, pell grants aren't funded, and a host of other things this bill promised.

http://edworkforce.house.gov/democrats/rel1803.html

This position was what won me over to Dean. He said we had to scrap it while other candidates first voted for it, then campaigned on the idea it should be fully funded. Why fund shitty legislation? We don't need a failing Texas system of accountability forced on the nation (when most of our systems are far better than the one in Texas).

That is exactly what I've been told- it forces other states to adopt the testing system we've had in this state for the past 14 years. At the same time that Texans are starting to wake up and ask that our system be changed!

Our schools are awful! Why would the rest of the nation EVER be forced to copy our system?

when I met him last month. He wants to repeal NCLB, realizing that almost all of it is garbage. One of the only parts he agrees with is the way schools analyze the standardized test scores by various demographics, to help reduce the number of students who fall through the cracks.

had to cut one million dollars . besides the usual stuff ,they cut grade school programs that improved students who lacked various skills in speech,writing,and social skills. so these kids fall behind and then the schools are put on the watch list. i won`t start on what they do at the high school level to make sure they don`t get on the watch list. the program is a failure and it was meant to be

President Bush's Marquee Initiative: Broken Promises

President Bush has been neither compassionate or conservative when it comes to educating our children. The No Child Left Behind Act, as implemented by President Bush, has been a failure. It is wrong to impose a tremendous new mandate on states and local communities and then deprive them of the resources they need to succeed. The Bush Administration has focused too much on narrow tests and punishments, and too little on ensuring that every child can learn and succeed.

The administration's unrealistic demands have been coupled with a state and local fiscal crunch. States have had to cut $6.8 billion from K-12 education programs in 2003. And it is therefore no surprise that thousands of schools nationwide failed to meet the states' own standards for Adequate Yearly Progress in 2002-2003.

I haven't studied enough on NCLB to know the details. What I will say is why pass a law and then under fund it. How sure are we that it won't work if we have never actually tried it? Wouldn't it cost more to fund a task force to determine another un proven path? Why not fund what we have and tweak it to make it better.

Dean says to REFORM NCLB.

Invest in the Education of America's Future http://clark04.com/issues/education/

Preparing our children for global leadership

I am living proof that in this country, when you get a good education, you can achieve anything-no matter where you start, no matter what your background might be. I want every child to have the same chance I had. I want to make sure that all children have the chance to develop their full human potential.

It is therefore essential that we make public education our nation's top priority. The quality of our public education system is critical to our social and economic strength. And though public schools have served many millions of students well, we still have a substantial "to-do" list to get to a gold standard, inside the classroom and out.

President Bush's Marquee Initiative: Broken Promises

President Bush has been neither compassionate or conservative when it comes to educating our children. The No Child Left Behind Act, as implemented by President Bush, has been a failure. It is wrong to impose a tremendous new mandate on states and local communities and then deprive them of the resources they need to succeed. The Bush Administration has focused too much on narrow tests and punishments, and too little on ensuring that every child can learn and succeed.

The administration's unrealistic demands have been coupled with a state and local fiscal crunch. States have had to cut $6.8 billion from K-12 education programs in 2003. And it is therefore no surprise that thousands of schools nationwide failed to meet the states' own standards for Adequate Yearly Progress in 2002-2003. We can, and will, do better.

A Gold Standard for the Classroom

As we demand more of schools, we also need new investment in the resources and support that schools need to improve. We must:


Meet Our Commitments. I will follow through on the commitments we make to our children. I believe that we need to fully fund the laws we pass, to ensure that no child is actually left behind. I would work to fully fund the reauthorized Elementary and Secondary Education Act and to honor the federal commitment to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

Hiring, Training, and Retaining our Teachers. I believe that teachers are the most important leaders in America. I support initiatives that are designed to recruit the most talented teachers, to let the teaching profession continue to earn the prestige that it deserves. I also recognize that these teachers must be equipped to teach the classes that they are teaching. In the older grades, we must strive to let teachers teach in their area of expertise. Finally, we have to treat teachers with more respect, by giving them the opportunities for additional training and professional advancement they need to stay at the top of their grade.

Providing the Right Facilities. In 1999, approximately 11 million students were enrolled in schools with a building in less than adequate physical condition. Twenty-six percent of public school buildings had less than adequate ventilation. These conditions are unacceptable. I recognize the need to invest immediately in school construction and renovation so that teachers and students have safe, modern facilities with sufficient space to work and learn.

The Right Type of Accountability. I support holding our educational institutions accountable for achieving educational progress, but I believe that we must reevaluate the measures by which we assess that progress. I think we have to look at how tests are being administered - I don't believe that tests should drive instruction. Systems of accountability must remain fair and flexible and recognize the accomplishments of schools and teachers that are making progress educating the most challenging students. In addition, we must make sure that accountability systems are designed to help schools improve-simply punishing underperforming schools without providing the resources or support they need to improve won't reach our goal.

A Path to Success for Each Child. Not all students learn in the same way, and only by offering a wide range of educational options can we ensure that all students develop their full human potential. I do not support school vouchers for private schools. I do believe, however, that there are many ways to expand educational options within the public school system so that each child can find his or her own path to success.
Full Lifetime Education

The ever-improving American workforce demands an educational system that keeps pace with the flexible global economy. It is vital that our K-12 education be world-class, but we must also look beyond the traditional schooling years. I believe that we must ensure that Americans have the opportunity to receive the education and training they need, from cradle to grave.


Engaging Early and Often. Good programs in early childhood years are critical to a child's development. But more than one-third of eligible children are unable to participate in Head Start due to President Bush's refusal to commit the proper resources. Each additional dollar devoted to these early childhood programs represents an investment yielding remarkable returns - so many other problems and challenges facing our education system could be avoided if the gaps were closed. I will work toward ensuring that all children have access to high-quality pre-school.

College. My commitment to education doesn't end with high school. Too many Americans are finding that rising tuition costs make it harder and harder to go to college. And our system of financial assistance to college students is both insufficient and unduly complicated. I will be setting forth a plan to help every young person in this country get the chance to go to college.

Continuing education. I believe that continuing education and training are essential for American workers to be able to compete and thrive in a changing global economy. I believe that the existing job training system can be improved so that it better meets the needs of employees and employers. I support efforts to streamline training programs, strengthen and simplify accountability, and expand resources so that the U.S. job training system is the envy of the world.

One of my favorite thought provoking conversations starts like this:
"Wow. Do you remember in the last election how Bush was so strong on reforming education? Gosh, don't you have (insert association with public education ex: kids in school)? "

Bush doesn't even read. That shows a lot about his passion for education. Ask any teacher in Texas if they are better off now than they were 10 years ago and you will hear what is being duplicated across our nation, horror stories. It is, of course, much easier to lead an uneducated populace. And a handful of businesses are making out like bandits on those standardized tests and mandates too.

Don't forget to talk about Biff's promise to end bi-partisan bickering as well.

Peace,
Teresa
www.votervirgin.com

While we (I anyway) may not be experts in this field, we certainly know how badly Texas schools have been screwed by these requirements. And you hit the nail on the head on 2 points- it is easier to govern an uneducated populace and Shrub's friends' companies have gotten huge state contracts in Texas to conduct the testing.

Texas teachers should be given time on TV, a la a Perot infomercial, to educate the rest of the nation on the evils of NCLB!


And a belated welcome to DU!

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_statement_education_nclb

I have been steadfastly opposed to the No Child Left Behind since it was originally debated in Congress. The truth is that the real achievement gap among our nation’s youth cannot be remedied by 2000 pages of federal legislation imposing a single plan on every school, district, and state. The Bush administration’s “No Child Left Behind” legislation is a draconian takeover of local and state control. While we all applaud the notion of accountability, the methods in NCLB to measure accountability and promote reform are dangerously flawed. It uses standardized tests as the sole measure of learning, forces the use of incomprehensible and invalid statistics to measure annual success, and mandates school and state operations that are estimated to cost local school boards and state education departments a significant amount of money without appropriate aid. It essentially labels schools as failures and then compels those districts to send students to other schools at the taxpayer’s expense. This represents nothing less than the beginning of the dismantlement of our public school system.

Every one of my fellow Democratic presidential candidates who serve in Congress voted for Bush’s No Child Left Behind bill. Only now that the law’s consequences are apparent do they criticize it. Their votes for this bill show that Washington politicians are not in touch with what our schools, our children, and our teachers really need.

As Governor of Vermont, I was an outspoken critic of this federal intrusion into state and local affairs because I understood that it was terribly flawed. I suggested that my state would be better off refusing the federal money and not participating, because Vermont already had accountability measures that empower our schools to succeed. Why should Vermont, or any state for that matter, participate in a system that encourages schools to dumb down standards or encourage dropouts? Time has proven that my skepticism was well founded. Implementing No Child Left Behind has driven up local property taxes, taken money away from needed school programs and made it even more difficult to pay competitive teacher salaries. Unless we seriously reform No Child Left Behind, these problems will only compound.

Recent polls of U.S citizens indicate that the public continues to have great faith and support for their public schools and trusts decisions made by local teachers much more than those by corporate or federal leaders. They believe that teachers should earn more respect and higher salaries and federal and state resources should be spread equally among all students regardless of the circumstances of birth, family, or economic class. I agree wholeheartedly.

We need to reinvigorate democracy at the local level, while preserving the federal role in closing the achievement gap. Education reform should be about investing in teachers, and assisting schools in developing and attaining standards and comprehensive assessments far beyond a single set of multiple choice tests that work without forcing schools to lower the bar to make sure they aren’t shut down. The federal government must do its job by providing full funding for programs for our poorest children and those students with special needs. Schools can only work well if students and families have such basic needs met as health insurance, personal safety, quality child care and early childhood schooling.

My vision for education in this country stretches beyond the age of five through 18. Education must be a broad, evolving process, beginning not from the moment a child enters the classroom, but from the moment that child enters the world. It requires early preparation for success, assurance of health and learning throughout the school years, and a commitment to the accessibility and affordability of higher education so that every student has the chance to live out America’s promise.

We can’t wait until kids are five or six years old to get them on track. We’ve got to help kids long before they reach kindergarten. As Governor of Vermont, I instituted programs that engaged children and their families before they even left the hospital, so children would enter the classroom ready to succeed. As President I will heavily invest in early childhood initiatives, which set up American children to thrive in school and in life, while providing more options for parents. We’ve done it in Vermont; we can do it for America.

As President, I will also work to strengthen our schools with improved student health centers, a focus on parental involvement, recruiting and retaining outstanding teachers and administrators, and resources to fund key mandates. As President, I will fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, increase funding for elementary and secondary education improvement, and oppose efforts to gut vocational education programs.

The greatest investment that America can make to ensure a thriving and participatory democracy is in the quality of education it provides for its children. We must pledge ourselves to an education plan that is more than rhetoric, mandates, sanctions, control, and privatization, but instead one of fairness, justice, and flexibility. We must give our schools back to students, educators, parents, and citizens of local communities and states to achieve the public mission of education of preparing all of our students to be wise, free, and responsible citizens.

Even though what he is calling for is basically a repeal of NCLB, or at least a repeal of the worst parts of the bill. That's why I praised Clark's position as well, since it seems he is basically calling for its repeal through reform. Whatever they call it- reform or repeal- if they do away with the one size fits all mentality and testing requirements of the bill, then they are working in the right direction. I am NOT criticizing Clark on this!

I admit I was mistaken though, since I thought that I'd heard Dean say in a speech it would be better for NCLB to simply be repealed. Maybe I heard him incorrectly. :shrug:

Either way though, their positions are still better than the candidates out defending their votes for the legislation. Clark and Dean still deserve kudos. And I think Kucinich, Sharpton and Mosley Braun have basically said the same things too, so if I am correct, they deserve kudos too!

do something about NCLB.

The key is that his advocacy for reform will be a repeal. It will remove the rediculous requirements placed on successful schools, remove standardized testing as the sole form of accountability, and take steps to allow locally appropriate modifications to the law. This would be a repealing of Bush's infusions into the law. Only recently have other candidates advocated the same (which is great by the way). They had said the legislation was okay, but lacked the funds.

One thing that must be understood is that NCLB is a REAUTHORIZATION of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) which handles all of the federal funding for regular ed and sets some national standards. You can't REPEAL that law. But it is possible to change or repeal parts of its reauthorization (and I think it can be done through excutive order!). Clark, Dean, and I thnk DK and Sharpton are now on board. My most recent mailing from the Kerry campiagn hints that he might be coming around and calling for changing the Bushy parts.

If you really want a decent insight into Dean on Education the http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/dean/dean040403spt.html Edutcators for dean site has lots of info.

Dean is the best on education that I have heard so far. Below is a clip of one speech he made to teachers on the subject.


http://www.educatorsfordean.com/EFD/



And I have to say that all these folks that I'm running against for president were happy to vote for the "No School Board Left Standing Bill." There wasn't any money in-- and there was an awful lot of power that was taken away from local folks, and it seems to me that some of the things in that bill ought to be pretty worrisome. And one of the things that I can't get over is all the Democrats that voted for it. .

Because here's what's in that bill. There's some money for Title I and these are good things. But the bill says that every school has to sign off and assure the government, the federal government that they offer quote unquote constitutionally protected school prayer, whatever that might be. The bill says that the Boy Scouts have to be allowed to meet in every school building in the country and you have to sign off. The bill says that we have to send the names of every rising junior and senior to every higher education establishment and the military. Now it seems to me that these may be good policies and they may be bad policies, but these are the kinds of policies that ought to be resolved by local school boards, local administrations, and local teachers, not by the federal government. .

I have a few regrets about not running for a sixth term for governor. One of them is that had I run and been re-elected, we would have refused the money from No Child Left Behind because we would have been better off without the small amount of money and still being able to run our own school system.

General Wesley K. Clark will attend a fundraiser hosted by www.illinoisforclark2004.com and “C” Company’s Chicago chapter on Sunday, November 23 at 4:00 PM, at the Rock Bottom Brewery, One West Grand Ave., in Chicago. Recommended contribution to attend this event is $75.00. Please RSVP by e-mailing: rsvp@illinoisforclark2004.com. A copy of the invite as well as a contribution form is available at: http://www.illinoisforclark2004.com/downloads/1123rockbottom.pdf. We ask that you bring the contribution form with you. We look forward to seeing on Sunday!

As a teacher, I'm on the front lines daily dealing with the actual effects of this legislation on public ed. And I can tell you that the "unfunded mandate" spin enrages me. Your damned right, it's unfunded. And that makes its short term effect even worse. But funding it wouldn't make it ok. Any candidate who just spouts off about fully funding it doesn't get my vote. That would leave the destruction in place, moving even faster with more $$$, and more long term destruction. Kind of like my state focusing on groping instead of cozy meetings between Arnie and Ken Lay...distraction.

There are many good pieces to NCLB; they all pale in relation to the destruction it is wreaking. It really doesn't matter what great things you want to do for public ed, funded or not, if public ed doesn't exist any more. And that's the end goal. Turning over public ed to private and corporate schools. Who don't have to comply with NCLB anyway.

I've posted too many rants here at DU over NCLB as the WMD of public education to do it again here; do a search if you're interested, and don't forget the archives from the "old" DU.

My take on the candidate's position on public ed:

1. Dennis Kucinich. Full funding, preschool-college, not dependent on standardized scores. To hear him discuss high-stakes testing issues, listen to his interview with the Every Child Matters Education Fund:

http://www.everychildmatters.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ecm_forums

<snip, snip, snip>
What’s happening now? We’ve got the opposite, where local control is being discouraged because schools don’t have the money and
then the federal government comes on top of that with programs like No Child Left Behind where they issue mandates that schools can’t even afford. The whole system’s upside down – power of the federal government to create the discussion about the direction our
educational system’s taking. This No Child Left Behind Act, and for whatever intentions it has, has turned into a condition where we threatened local districts with the loss of funds if the children aren’t passing tests. So what are we doing? We’re creating a nation of test-takers. We’re putting enormous pressure on our children to take tests. Our children, who have such great creativity, who are so
excited to learn: we’re turning them into test-takers. Why?
What is that about? As president, I will engage the participation of educational psychologists, of teachers, of parents, of children,
come up with a whole new approach to education which is based on the quality of the educational experience – on tapping the creativity of the children, not just creating a nation of test-takers as if we’re turning out widgets to be part of an economic machine that is mindless and not directed towards the health of any individual child or family.

So my presidency is going to be about a different direction. It’s about challenging the premises on which we’re operating. It’s not being satisfied with the way things are, but it is going to be about making it possible for local communities to have the resources they need to make the decision that they want to make, because there is
nothing better than a system where parent-teacher groups can come together and talk about the needs of their specific community. And the federal government can help empower that by making sure the resources go through the states to make that happen.

As an educator, I'm on the lookout for the way certain buzzwords/rhetoric are used by candidates, and that definitely influences my choices:

2. Clark--he says so many of the right things. If I just felt secure that his long history of republican friendship wouldn't come back to haunt me. And if he offered more nuts and bolts in his platform.

3. Dean--I've loved his sound bites blasting NCLB. He doesn't go far enough for me. He decries NCLB while thinking the same types of mandates at the state level are fine. But at least he recognizes the damage done in Washington.

4. Kerry/Edwards: they have many good things to say about public ed. I'm a little gun-shy, because I've found some of those buzzwords/phrases in their statements on public ed. I'd need to hear some detailed specifics from them to lay that caution to rest.

Clark voted for Clinton twice and then for Gore. Under Clinton he was Director for Strategic Plans and Policy for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. As a military man it stands to reason he would have had friends and connections on both sides.

>2. Clark--he says so many of the right things. If I just felt secure that his long history of republican friendship wouldn't come back to haunt me.

Although many want to think that Clark is a moderate....he is as if not more progressive than Dean is.

The advantage of course is in the General election......prefer a candidate that is perceived as a moderate....so that he can win...but really will become our best progressive president in a long time.

I can't wait for a new era to start in this country......

less partisanship and more interest in our entire nation as a nation of people.

I am excited and pray that Wes Clark wins the nomination...cause once he does, The General will probably turn out to be easier!

because he spoke against the school competition, tests as idiotic and the neeed to empower teachers. His motto is "No school left behind"
As a mother I am cheering too!

College Tuition
"Wes Clark is concerned that too many Americans are finding that rising tuition costs are making it more difficult to go to college. Furthermore, our system of financial assistance to college students is unduly complicated and insufficient. Wes Clark will be presenting a plan to help every young person in this country get the chance to go to college"

Vouchers
"Wes Clark opposes all measures that would weaken our public school system, including school vouchers. Wes Clark believes that the best way to educate our children is by strengthening the public school system, not taking resources away from them."

No Child Left Behind
"The No Child Left Behind Act, as implemented by President Bush, has been a failure. It is wrong to impose a tremendous new mandate on states and local communities and then deprive them of the resources they need to succeed. The Bush Administration has focused too much on narrow tests and punishments, and too little on ensuring that every child can learn and succeed."