Once again, I mostly agree. I have been a teacher for nearly 40 years and I can think of nothing more destructive to teaching than the U.S. Department of Education. If all they can think of doing is implementing more testing, they obviously are not serving the needs of teachers or students. However, I would favor complete federal funding of education to level the playing field, Then it could be up to local school boards (or better yet, just local teachers) to implement policy, with lots of student input.

I myself work for a government-run organization (I’m a public school teacher), and lately teachers have gotten a lot of flack, so I understand what you’re saying, I think — that people working for government are less efficient because they don’t believe they are adequately respected by the public. It’s a fair point, and I’m sure there’s a kernel of truth to it.

Personally, though, I believe that, even if we could magically make every American show more respect to government employees, that would not be enough to fix the problems.

Ask any teacher what the worst government program of the last 20 years is, and many if not most will likely say “No Child Left Behind.” This legislation was bipartisan, and was very well-intended. The problem is, it was national. We are no better off for it now then we were before it. Because a lawyer in Washington D.C. is not well-equipped to know what is best for everybody in education policy. I would even say that a lawyer in Chicago does not necessarily know the best education policy for Chicago, and a teacher in Washington, D.C. does not necessarily know the best education policy for Chicago.

But the more layers there are between the recipient of services and those making decisions, the less efficient the service is likely to be.

I’ve long held the opinion that a mayor should be more relevant in the lives of individuals than the President. Because what’s good for a kid in Brooklyn is not necessarily what’s good for a kid in the Aleutian Islands. And the knowledge of a lawyer in Washington is probably not sufficient to determine what’s best for EITHER ONE of them, let alone how to tailor a program to meet the needs of both (if such a task is even possible).

If you’ve ever frequented a family-owned hardware store in a small town, and then gone to an urban or suburban Lowes or Home Depot or Menards, you’ve likely seen a difference in level of service. Now, don’t get me wrong, I’ve gotten good service at Home Depot. But I got a lot better service at my hometown True Value Hardware store. The decision-makers understand the needs and values of a community better when they’re part of that community. It’s true in business, and it’s true in government.

At least, that’s my opinion on the topic.