Great Public Schools for Every Student

More NEA Websites

Our Members

• NEA Today
• NEA Today
• NEA Today
• Join NEA
• NEA Today

• Issues And Action
  • No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) | ESEA
  • Professional Pay
  • Education Funding
  • Minority Community Outreach
  • Dropout Prevention
  • Legislative Action Center
  • Achievement Gaps
  • Reference Center
  • More Issues...
• Tools And Ideas
  • Lesson Plans
  • Classroom Management
  • School Life
  • Teaching Strategies
  • Advice & Support
• Grants And Events
  • Grants & Awards
  • Read Across America
  • National Teacher Day
  • Annual Meeting and Representative Assembly (RA)
  • NEA Meetings
  • Education Events Calendar
  • Diversity Calendar
  • American Education Week

Statements about Pontiac v. Spellings

On April 20, nine school districts in Michigan, Texas and Vermont, along with the National Education Association, and 10 NEA affiliates in Michigan, Texas, Vermont, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Utah filed a lawsuit asking the courts to recognize that the No Child Left Behind Act requires the federal government to pay for billions of dollars in new mandates, and to prevent taxpayers in school districts across the country from being forced to shoulder the burden of these regulations at the expense of proven classroom programs for their children.

Policymakers and education organizations alike recognize that the federal government must pay for the billions of dollars in new mandates that taxpayers are forced to cover.  Read some of these statements of support for Pontiac v. Spellings:

League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)

The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) stands in support of the NEA's decision to challenge the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).  We are increasingly concerned with the impact that NCLB is having on Latino children across the country.  The combination of increasing penalties for schools, excess burdens on states in part caused by the under-funding of NCLB, and the recent education cuts in the President's budget cause us to ask how we are going to be able reduce Latino drop-out rates?

Native Hawaiian Education Association (NHEA)

We are particularly concerned that that the resources of the State of Hawaii Public School System needed to provide adequate services to our children are being significantly stretched under NCLB.  We also recognize that various goals of NCLB are unrealistic with respect to the challenges faced by our student population and their families within the timeframe of these unfunded initiatives.  Unless schools and teachers align their classrooms with the standards and expectations, it would be unrealistic to hold the students accountable for lessons they have not been taught.  Mahalo nui loa, Mr. Weaver for the courageous step you and the network of schools are taking.

FairTest Statement on National Education Association Lawsuit over NCLB

The National Center for Fair & Open Testing (FairTest) is pleased that the National Education Association has taken the initiative to organize school districts and others to mount a legal challenge to the misnamed "No Child Left Behind" Act (NCLB). Sadly, because NCLB is inadequately funded and because it mandates ill-chosen solutions to the very real problems of educational inequity, the law will ensure that more, not fewer, children will be left behind...

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid's statement:

"No one disputes the purpose of NCLB: ensuring that no child is lost in a public school system that is not performing up to par. However, three years since it went into effect, its flaws are apparent and exemplified by the legal actions taken by the states, local school districts across the country, and the National Education Association.
"I supported NCLB, and will continue to ask, vote, and fight for funding at the levels necessary to properly implement the law. However, I also support the plaintiffs in these lawsuits. School districts should not face punitive damages or be forced to find money to pay for unfunded mandates."

Rep. George Miller of California statement in support of adequate funding :

"It is absolutely outrageous that states and organizations should have to sue the federal government to keep its promise to help better educate America's schoolchildren, but that's what it has come down to. It could be changed overnight, with one directive from President Bush to Congress -- to fully fund No Child Left Behind. I do not believe that we should quit this important education law.  But the President has created a problem that only he can now fix.  If he would rather have results than lawsuits, then he will tell Congress to fully fund the law."

American Association of School Administrators statement:

"Now, more than ever, school districts are expected to do more with less. During the current school year, more than half of public school districts nationwide saw cuts to their Title I funding."

Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro

"The Bush Administration and the Republican majority have not maintained their commitment to students or teachers by shortchanging states on the federal funding required for NCLB to be successful.  The administration's inaction has forced unfunded mandates on states and school districts that are already facing budget shortfalls.  Though it is a sad day when states and school districts have to take their case to court to get relief, this administration has left them with no other choice.  

"The No Child Left Behind Act was supposed to raise school standards and ensure student achievement.  But since NCLB became law, it has been a huge disappointment to the teachers, parents and schoolchildren who have depended on this program to improve the quality of education in this country.  Connecticut, for example, was forced to eliminate its successful out-of-level testing program - which the state administered for nineteen years - in order to comply with Adequate Yearly Progress under NCLB.

"We need to maintain our commitment to education, which is why I introduced the No Child Left Behind Reform Act last week.  This legislation will amend the law, providing states with more flexibility in measuring student achievement, allowing schools to target school choice and supplemental services to the students, and ensuring that NCLB's highly qualified teacher provisions are both rigorous and reasonable."

Congressman Ted Strickland's statement:

"I strongly support the National Education Association, the local school districts and state affiliates in filing this lawsuit challenging the unfunded mandates of the No Child Left Behind law.  I hope their efforts will bring a long-needed remedy this injustice - an injustice that undermines the spirit of NCLB and does more harm than good to America's schoolchildren.

"Because the Bush Administration and its allies in Congress have underfunded NCLB by $39 billion since its implementation, states and school districts have been forced to spend their own funds to comply with NCLB or risk facing harsh penalties.  Cost studies in several states, including Ohio, have shown that states and school districts have been forced to divert money from proven programs to pay for testing and other requirements under NCLB.  Forcing states and schools to abandon practices that increase students' success directly contradicts the goals of NCLB.

"This lawsuit should force the federal government to fulfill the promises of NCLB and provide states and school districts with the funding it promised.  Until that happens, schools will continue to be forced to spend critical resources on compliance and bureaucracy rather than teaching."

Superintendents back suit against 'No Child' law

"Where can I sign up?" Lawrence County Schools Superintendent Dexter Rutherford joked Wednesday when told about a legal challenge of the federal No Child Left Behind law.

Local superintendents applauded a lawsuit that The Associated Press said the National Education Association and school districts in three states filed against the controversial NCLB. The suit's aim is to free schools from complying with any part of the education law not funded by the federal government.