TONIGHT

• Home
• Video
• Podcasts/RSS 
• Local Showtimes
• Past Shows
• Blogs
• About the Show
• Tell Tavis
• Features
• Mobile

RELATED LINKS

• National Education Association
• Article on NEA lawsuit
• National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education

E-mail a friend

Tavis: Reg Weaver is the president of the National Education Association and a long-time advocate for public education. Yesterday he and the NEA filed a first-of-its-kind lawsuit against the Bush administration demanding that the president properly fund his No Child Left Behind law. The NEA says despite all the talk of success by the White House, the program has a $27 billion shortfall. Reg Weaver joins us tonight from Washington. President Weaver, nice to have you on, sir.

Reg Weaver: Well, thank you so much for having me here.

Tavis: Glad to have you. Let me start by asking you what you all did yesterday with this lawsuit. Tell me about it.

Weaver: Well, yesterday, on behalf of some school districts in Vermont, 7 school districts, one school district in Laredo, Texas, and one school district in Pontiac, Michigan, on behalf of parents and children, the National Education Association filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education. And the lawsuit was basically filed on one particular section of the bill and that is section 9527A. We believe that section 9527A says that if, in fact, the federal government mandates certain kinds of programs, mandates certain kinds of areas on states and on locals, then they have a responsibility to fund it, and if they don't fund it, it is not the responsibility of the local and the state to use their funds to fund federal mandates. We believe that if, in fact, you mandate, you have to pay.

Tavis: Let me put this in context for those who might not be as politically astute or follow the process as people like you and I do who pay attention every day to what happens inside the Washington beltway. But these things generally known as unfunded mandates happen not just in the Department of Education but all throughout government. There are examples of programs that the government will demand that a state do, but they don't necessarily put the money up for it, so they're called unfunded mandates. I say that because I'm curious as to why this particular unfunded mandate got the ire of the NEA and why you think this case would do what others have not been able do where unfunded mandates are concerned.

Weaver: Well, we've been talking about No Child Left Behind for at least 2 1/2, 3 years. We have tried to work to get it changed politically, we've tried to work to get it changed legislatively; we've worked to get it done regulatory policy-wise but were not successful. And so the only other route that we could think of was to file this lawsuit as it relates to the funding. We believe that this law needs to be fixed and it needs to be funded. There are some areas of the law that are in the process of being granted flexibility by the U.S. Department of Education, and that has occurred, but not nearly to the extent that we believe that it should. This lawsuit deals with the funding aspect of No Child Left Behind. And even if the law was fully funded, there are some other areas that we believe need to be modified and changed in this particular piece of legislation. But, Tavis, it's not only the National Education Association. There are untold numbers of people all across the country who have raised severe concerns about No Child Left Behind. You look at the state of Utah; look at the state of Virginia--Republican-controlled legislatures. They have serious concerns as it relates to No Child Left Behind. We have support on both sides of the aisle, Republicans and Democrats. There is support out there on the parts of many, many superintendents, school board members, teachers, principals. Support staff. It's just something, Tavis. We all believe that the goals and the objectives of the law, they're good goals, they're good objectives. They are ours. We have worked for years to try to make sure that there is a closing of the achievement gap, that there are highly qualified teachers in the classrooms. Those are good goals, but I think it is a cruel hoax to try to continue to convince the American public that you can close the achievement gap and that you can achieve reform without having the resources.

Tavis: Let me ask you then how you respond to critics who might see what the NEA did yesterday under your leadership as obstructionist. That is to say, that if you're willing to admit to me that you think that the goals of No Child Left Behind are admirable, but you're attacking it on a technicality because it's a unfunded mandate, what Reg Weaver and NEA is really doing is being obstructionist here, because they don't have a problem with the president's goals, they're just trying to attack the president.

Weaver: But then again, in order to accomplish a goal in education, and as a schoolteacher, I can very well say that, in order to accomplish a goal of having a gap closed, you need resources. You need smaller class sizes. You need qualified and certified teachers. You need state of the art technology. Those things cost money, and to pretend that those resources can be implemented, those reforms can be implemented without resources, I don't believe is telling the public the truth. And so I would certainly hope that I would always be on the side of advocating for kids to have the resources that they need to be successful, rather than using language to try and fool the American public that what you're doing is in the best interests of kids. If in fact you believe that you are providing those kids with the best opportunity for getting a quality public education, then you have to match your rhetoric with the resources. And that's what this administration is not doing.

Tavis: At this early stage, what are you hearing from the Department of Education about what their response is going to be? How will they respond to this lawsuit?

Weaver: Well, I think that there has been a response that has come out, and it was one that we anticipated. And, you know, they indicate that they are not surprised, in essence, by what the NEA is doing, and the NEA should do this and the NEA should do that. But my response is, the thing that we're talking about is something that needs to be done in order for children to be able to be successful. And, Tavis, you know, the funding is an issue. And if you look at this... in 2004-2005, there were at least 10 states and at least 7,000 school districts--almost half of the school districts in this country--who received less Title One funds this year than they did last year. Now, you know, who primarily benefits from Title One funds. It's usually children of color and children of greatest need. It is anticipated that in the year 2004-2005-2006, 9 states and 2/3 of the districts will receive less Title One funds. Now, that is critical because in the year 2005-2006, there are 3 things that kick in as it relates to No Child Left Behind which require funding. The first thing is the states will be required to test all children in grades 3 through 8, as well as in high school. That costs money. The testing industry certainly can make out on this. 2...-by January 8, 2006, education support professionals are going to have to be able to indicate that they have matched the definition of highly-qualified ESP, as per the law. And third, every teacher by the end of 2006 is supposed to be highly-qualified. Tavis, those things cost money, and so at a time when No Child Left Behind is talking about doing an advance, in terms of implementation of the law, you're having states and you're having districts to receive less money.

Tavis: Well, I understand the point you're making, Reg. I hear you loud and clear, and I am going to continue to follow this story, as I'm sure the rest of us will around the country, the media, as to what happens with this lawsuit now that it's been filed. The NEA has taken on the Bush administration. We'll follow it. Hope to talk to you more about it in the coming weeks and months, Reg.

Weaver: Well, thank you so much, Tavis. And I look forward to that.

Tavis: Glad to have you on the program. All the best to you.

Weaver: Thanks much, my friend.

Tavis: My pleasure. Up next on this program, author and former Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong, "The Sins of Scripture." Stay with us.