������Ƶ

I’ve struggled to understand this year’s efforts to rewrite No Child Left Behind. Congress, usually so cacophonous, has seemed united on one, inexplicable objective: to give when it comes to .

No Child Left Behind is unpopular, sure. Its accountability mechanisms are unwieldy, yes.

But neither of those propositions are proof that states and districts are up to the task of fostering educational equity. Indeed, given their extremely checkered past on educational equity, and given the electoral pressures that state and local policymakers generally face when it comes to their education systems, why should we expect them to prioritize low-income or minority children?

Nonetheless, the march towards decentralization —and elsewhere. So I wrote .

When the federal government sends states money to, say, support English language learners’ linguistic and academic development, states send it to districts—where officials use it to buy . When the federal government asks state education agencies , they . The upshot: it’s a fantasy to trust states () to do right by their underserved students without federal pressure.

Near the end of its NCLB debate, the Senate considered an accountability amendment to try and put some of that pressure back. The amendment asked only that states commit to do  to intervene in schools when they chronically underperform their most vulnerable students—low-income and disabled kids, English Language Learners, students of color. It didn’t prescribe anything. It only asked them to make some sort of tangible change … and  (just 43 votes in support, 42 Democrats and Ohio Republican Rob Portman).

“