The US should Ensure Access to Quality Education For Everyone

"53% of those who had ever experienced poverty during childhood attended college [1]." --Fair enough, what about the other 47%? You could say that they should work harder, but in that case they would already know that, work harder, and attend college. Please don't take offence, but what are the chances that one person could come up with something that 47% of those who experienced poverty during childhood couldn't? You seem to be operating under the assumption that those who are poor are less intelligent. The fact that this is false is the reason one might intervene in the first place. ï¿½ "You have not defined quality education other than by assuming private schools do this. In order for your proposal to prove your resolution you would need to show that private schools are quality education." --"Environments that are healthy, safe, protective and gender-sensitive, and provide adequate resources and facilities; ï¿½ Content that is reflected in relevant curricula and materials for the acquisition of basic skills, especially in the areas of literacy, numeracy and skills for life, and knowledge in such areas as gender, health, nutrition, HIV/AIDS prevention and peace. ï¿½ Processes through which trained teachers use child-centred teaching approaches in well-managed classrooms and schools and skilful assessment to facilitate learning and reduce disparities. ï¿½ Outcomes that encompass knowledge, skills and attitudes, and are linked to national goals for education and positive participation in society." This is Unicef's definition of quality education, found at http://www.unicef.org.... I would also like to add to that definition that every participant's learning is calibrated for them to reach their full potential, for instance if someone had a gift in observation their scientific side would be developed, and if someone were particularly musical then their musical side would be developed. "I didn't say they would be more driven in post-secondary only that they might. But this is moot now that you've clarified your proposal." --As you say. "You still haven't proven private education is quality education." --I cannot, of course, prove that all private education is quality education. To do that I would have to analyse the success and the trends of every single private school in the world. Although this isn't conclusive, consider this; why do people stay at private schools rather than going to a free public school? Clearly, there is something that 5,488,000 children and their families find there that they don't find in public schools, the number coming from http://www.capenet.org.... From the same website, a full 55% of parents sending their children to public want to send them to private. "Okay since you make this argument, where is the constitutional authority for the Federal government to provide financial incentives to the states for education? What form would these incentives take? Which of the enumerated powers are you referring to (Art I, Section 8 US Constitution)?" --I did not find one. However, according to the Illinois State Board of Education, "The laws of Illinois and the United States guarantee all students in Illinois access to a quality education." According to http://www.usconstitution.net..., 2010, quality education is NOT guaranteed by the constitution, and looking at the aforementioned enumerated powers, I did not find anything enabling the government to "guarantee all students in Illinois access to a quality education." In fact, they seem to have no authorization to give the state any money for education. Hmmm... --I maintain that the states and people are still able to ensure quality education. "If the Federal government ensures this proposition with financial incentives, then where does the money come from if not from the federal treasury?" I clarified that the money would come from those we defined as rich. "Comparing segregation to wealth disparity is not only a false analogy by somewhat offensive. The analogy fails because there are many reasons for wealth disparity but segregation was based on skin color alone." I'll counter this argument from the point of view of a white slave-owner. 'Your argument that there are many reasons behind wealth disparity and not behind segregation based on skin color is not only false, but "somewhat offensive." It is obvious that God made these people inferior and to work for us. It is only natural that we enslave them for this reason. Why should we even give them an education?' Don't get the idea that I share this view, but for someone who does this would be perfectly natural. I apologize if my argument was offensive, but I will not withdraw it. Even without the above reasoning, according to www.northwestern.edu/ipr/jcpr/workingpapers/wpfiles/fairl, the clearest instance of white families leaving public schools is with concentrations of poor black schoolchildren. This is evidence of a clear relationship. In addition, a large percentage of public school attendees are white. Finally, in either case, we are deciding on a human's rights based on the human's superficial qualities: in one case we judge based on skin color, in another based on how much a person has; this is no basis for deciding access to a quality education. CONCLUSION In summary, the poor can be as intelligent and as deserving as any rich. Many of the poor make an honest effort to get a quality education... and fail. Do you want to deprive the poor of the right to a quality education? Do you want to suddenly remove any chance of a good quarter of our population to further the interests of society and government? With this question, I rest my case. Thanks for the debate!