The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 6 of 16)

: /p>

Creighton writes: "If six million full-time U.S. students were working rather than studying..."

As if our booming economy could absorb an extra six million (semi-literate) workers.

p>Adam should spend a little more time on the western shore of the pond. br> -- Steve Kraisler /p>

Mr. Creighton's elitist, yet entertaining, article could have been cut in half if he had just mentioned one important fact:

Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution, especially in Article I (Section 8), does it authorize the Federal Government to fund, or lay duties, excises or taxes in order to fund, or in any way be involved in primary, secondary, or post-secondary education, nor be involved in any other form of education, whether it be vocational, technical, or otherwise. Nor does it allow the Fed to tax non-productive students, for that matter.

p>Education is a state issue, not a federal issue. For example, Virginia's Constitution sets aside about a third of its text to address the issue. The U.S. Constitution is very specific in what the U.S. Government can do (subject, of course, to how SCOTUS interprets the document -- another issue that will be addressed many times in other columns). Contrary to popular opinion, if the U.S. Constitution does not specifically address a given issue, that does not give the Federal Government carte blanche over said issue -- in other words, it is a limiting document. Give the $68 billion back to the taxpayers. Let each state figure out how to best educate its citizens in the public arena. Milton Friedman would have loved nothing more than to see 50 independent experiments. br> -- Owen H. Carneal, Jr. br> Yorktown, Virginia /p>

topics:
Taxes, Education, Trade, John McCain, Bill Clinton, Television, Religion, Islam, Abortion, Constitution, Law, Military, Iraq, Iran, Israel, Pakistan, NATO, Africa, Oil