CC Broke the Law, So Does Defunding Schools Using 1619

(Guest post by Greg Forster)

When some Republicans pushed a federal school choice law recently, I wrote that I was “looking forward to the retractions and apologies from all the right-wingers who opposed Common Core on federalism grounds. Including – gosh, will you look at that! – one of this bill’s primary sponsors.“

Now the president has announced he will have the DOE withhold funds from schools that use the 1619 Project. Which is different from Common Core how, exactly?

Federal law unambiguously forbids the DOE from attempting to influence curriculum. The text of the law does not empower the department to make exceptions in cases where the curriculum in question is [insert the various defects of the 1619 Project here].

We’re either a nation of laws or we ain’t, folks.

Want to clean up curricula? Get your lazy asses out and hustle the issues in those school boards and state legislatures. If you come crying to Momma Fed instead, what you’re asking Momma to do is spelled C-O-M-M-O-N C-O-R-E.

8 Responses to CC Broke the Law, So Does Defunding Schools Using 1619

  1. Ze’ev Wurman says:


  2. Shaughnessy, Michael says:

    Let’s see if Nancy Pelosi gets a fine or jail time for her hair cut-that will answer your question as to whether we are a nation of laws or not.


  3. Malcolm Kirkpatrick says:

    Translation: “who cares about double standards? Not me.”

    The Civil War was an unconstitutional Federal intrusion into State-level decisions. But then, slavery was an intolerable evil.

    Compulsory unpaid labor is slavery (definition).
    Schools give to many children no reason to do what schools require.

    We don’t need another Civil war to end K-12 slavery. A Federal committment to treat credentials earned by exam from online DOD schools and online BIE schools and online subsidiaries of the five service academies which: (a) admit everyone who applies, (b) define courses by their syllabi, (c) charge no tuition, (d) employ no faculty, and (e) license independent organizations to administer exams would bust the US K-PhD credential racket.

  4. Malcolm Kirkpatrick says:

    When Congress appropriated K-12 funds, “school” meant, in practice, facilities which instructed children in classrooms. This is not the “school” that Greg Forster demands the US DOE subsidize. If Congress appropriates funds for the protection of the Forster’s warbler and the Department of Interior determines that the last Forster’s warbler died between the time that the President signed the appropriation bill and Interior’s receipt of the funds, what happens to the money?

  5. Lin W. says:

    Teaching a false US history curriculum in our nation’s largest (and arguably most important) city seems like it warrants action, particularly so given recent developments. I could be wrong but it seems to me that teaching divisive Marxist doctrine to children and millions of newcomers to NYC is certain to cause irreparable harm… and it is quite possibly a threat to national security. NYC’s system has more students than the entire school systems of a fair number of states. Considering the pernicious nature of 1619, I suppose there are Constitutional arguments that could be made for federal involvement.

    Mr. Forster is probably correct to call on folks to get more involved in their local communities. Indeed, there’s certainly far too much philosophizing (with little will to take action) coming from think-tank boardrooms (and blogs). For many obvious reasons though, it appears to me to be naïve or totally disconnected from reality to argue that people merely need to get off their bums in NYC to fix curricula.

    I applaud the feds for having the will to try to stem the multiple pathologies infecting our youth in schools. I fear much more is needed at local, state, and federal levels. And, I can’t help but say that I find the priorities of the RINO to be completely incomprehensible. Yet, it explains so much about why we are at where we are at with 1619 becoming an actual curriculum in the USA. Just sad.

    • Greg Forster says:

      Each side’s determination to accomplish its objectives without regard to either the law or the basic moral commitments of the American political order makes it easier for the other side to do the same. The only winning move is not to play.

      This seems especially important if you are an Republican (I’m not) and you work to establish USDOE control over curricula in the government monopoly school system. Once USDOE has that control, which side do you think will end up making the most use of that power over the long term?

      Henry Hazlitt’s “one lesson” doesn’t just apply to economics.

      • Malcolm Kirkpatrick says:

        (Forster): “The only winning move is not to play.”
        Not an option. It’s the top of the sixth inning and both teams are on the field.
        Credit by exam would bust the $1 trillion+ per year US K-PhD credential racket. Without intruding at all on State and local school policy, the Federal government could open an escape option that would free children and parents from K-12 bondage.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: