I don't trust polls either but I don't know how good a weatherman* you are Mike.  I don't think McCain won over any independents last night.  I think he's been coming across as erratic (and did last night as well) which I think hurts him in an economic crisis -- people are looking for steady leadership.  Obama projected that last night.  That is not to say Obama can't lose, I just think its more likely that he will win.

*By that I do not in any way shape or form question Mike's association with Bill Ayers or any of the other Weathermen and I don't know of any association he may have with the Weather Girls. 

*Someone stated that Obama can't increase funding for teachers, schools do recieve federal funding and can increase that amount to allow schools to increase teachers salaries.

*********

I said that and stand by it. I covered public education for 10 years as a newspaper reporter (and wrote a book on urban education - check it out on Amazon.com!), so I know a little about this topic.

Federal funding makes up roughly 8 percent of education funding in America (that may be off by a percentage point or two, as the last time I checked was a couple of years ago. But it's close). So the vast majority of money spent on education comes from state and local sources. Teacher salaries are determined by either state departments of education, local school boards or, as is the case here in North Carolina, a combination of the two. But the federal government doesn't have -- and has never had -- any say in teacher pay.

And of those federal funds, the vast majority are distributed through two funding sources -- the USDA school lunch program, which has nothing to do with teacher salaries; and Title I, the federal program to supplement poor-neighborhood schools. Title I money may be used to boost teacher pay among many other things (tutoring, smaller class sizes, after-school programs, extra books, etc.), but 1. That decision again would be made at the local level, not the President; and 2. The majority of the teacher's pay still would come from state and/or local sources.

All of that is a long-winded way of saying that it's great for Obama to talk about raising teacher pay. He certainly can use the "bully pulpit" of the Oval Office to encourage school districts to pay more to teachers. But as a matter of policy, there's not a whole lot he (or any President) can do to increase teacher pay. It's a campaign slogan that plays well on the stump and not much more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWwyjmSbJPs

wait maybe this is in the wrong thread.

....I don't know of any association he may have with the Weather Girls. 

***************

You know Tom French is going to jump all over that reference! ;)

(Emoticon added so Tom knows I'm kidding and doesn't beat me to a pulp!)

Bruce what are your views on funding No Child Left Behind?

Bruce what is your book called? That is really cool, when you got it published were you walking on air .  I am very impressed!!!!

Edited to add:

But if you increase federal funding doesn't that lessen the burden on state funding?

Bruce what are your views on funding No Child Left Behind?

Bruce what is your book called? That is really cool, when you got it published were you walking on air .  I am very impressed!!!!

Edited to add:

But if you increase federal funding doesn't that lessen the burden on state funding?

***************

Good question. On funding it or on NCLB in general? If it's the latter, whew! We could be here all day!

In terms of funding, I understand the idea that with greater federal oversight should come greater federal funding. On the surface, that only seems fair.

However, I've also seen some pretty significant waste in many school systems. Even if they got extra tax money, would they use it the right way? I don't know -- I'm sure some school systems would and others wouldn't. Unfortunately, the school systems most likely to waste that extra money probably are the ones who aren't doing well under NCLB to begin with.

Jodi, I'm pretty good at identifying problems in public education. But actually solving those problems? If I was that smart, I'd be a very rich man!

(And to answer your rather kind question, my book is called Turnover at the Top: Superintendent Vacancies and the Urban School. And, yes, I was walking on air for a couple of days.

But I still have a ways to go to catch up with my wife -- she's written five books and is working on number six!)

On funding it.

My understanding of it is, they have put benchmarks in place for the schools to meet, but the resources to achieve these benchmarks have been cut or under funded.

That depends on who you talk to, Jodi. Federal funding for education actually has increased considerably during the Bush presidency (that may surprise many people, but it really is true).

However, it hasn't increased as much as many school leaders would like and they say the federal government isn't giving them enough money to meet the requirements of NCLB, which definitely do put increased pressure on schools to perform.

But then the feds say that the schools already have enough money; they just need to do a better job of setting funding priorities. And there are some superintendents and school board members who agree with this.

So it's one of these issues where there's no clear right or wrong answer. Just differing opinions.