Tuesday, April 13, 2010

What happened to civil rights in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act signed by President Johnson on April 11, 1965? | California Progress Report

What happened to civil rights in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act signed by President Johnson on April 11, 1965? | California Progress Report

What happened to civil rights in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act signed by President Johnson on April 11, 1965?

Posted on 12 April 2010
Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionSend to friendSend to friend
By Jack Loveridge
Justice Matters
With the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) getting underway on Capitol Hill, a meaningful anniversary will pass unobserved in Washington. Forty-five years ago this Sunday, President Lyndon Johnson signed the act, rebranded by the Bush Administration as No Child Left Behind, into law. With the stroke of a pen, the federal government’s role in public education was revolutionized, placing emphasis on ensuring educational opportunity in low-income communities.
The law came as a critical step in the Great Society legislation package designed to fight poverty and racism. For Johnson, who was trained as a schoolteacher and had taught in a poor Latino community in Texas, ESEA held as much potential for fighting racial injustice as the Civil Rights Act passed the previous year. With the federal government mandating desegregation, education commissioner Francis Keppel designed ESEA to ensure students of color were not just seated in classrooms, but that they also received a high quality education and had the real opportunity to continue to college.

Schwarzenegger's "Marine Poaching Areas" to Go Into Effect on May 1


Prop 8 Supporters Target New Enemy: Impartial Judges of California Courts


About That Pensions Report

By Robert Cruickshank
The headlines were breathless: California pensions short by $500 billion! An independent analysis by Stanford graduate students was commissioned by Arnold Schwarzenegger, and is being used by California's own deficit scolds to argue for cutting pension benefits. For that reason, it's important we get this issue right.