What I've said is not intended to be a defense of David Koch. It is meant to be an accusation towards this subreddit. I don't really feel the need to defend him since nobody here is bothering to provide any evidence that he has done harm. They are just dancing on his grave because he has been deemed a deplorable.
Did you want to debate whether it was necessary for well over 620,000 people to die in war, with another 400,000 wounded, or did you want to discuss David Koch? I didn't know that believing that the president that oversaw the death of more Americans in war than nearly every other president combined was so unspeakable. (You do know he sought to deport slaves out of the US, don't you? Maybe that's where Trump got the idea.)
"We’d like to abolish the Federal Elections Commission and all the limits on campaign spending anyway." The FEC was established in 1974. So for literally hundreds of election cycles, American democracy prospered (or so the narrative goes) and brought us such champions of liberty as [insert all the presidential-heroes students are taught to love], without the FEC being in existence, yet somehow the notion of getting rid of it and sending us back to the dark ages of JFK, FDR, and Abraham Lincoln is absurd.
Please try again. Now I'm interested to see what you think his second most offensive statement is.
I don't write research papers for the internet just like I don't write internet posts for professors. One must always remember why they are writing a thing. For me, it was to elicit a defense of No Child Left Behind by someone; you, ideally. And here we are. It is wonderful, and telling, that you attempt to defend Ted Kennedy rather than bringing yourself to say, "Yeah, Ted fucked up with that." Either you are unable to see Ted Kennedy as someone who would make a mistake (presumably because he was a significant Democratic politician), or you are unable to agree with me on something/anything.
Even though you'd like to hand-wave it away, the fact is that Ted Kennedy was one of the authors of the No Child Left Behind Act and, according to TIME Magazine, No Child Left Behind "may not have been passed without Sen. Kennedy's strong support" and considers it one of his "Top 10 Legislative Battles."
As far as the merits of No Child Left Behind, according to Lily Eskelsen García and Otha Thornton, "No Child Left Behind has failed." But what do they know? They are only the president of the National Education Association and the president of the National Parent Teacher Association, respectively. (I'm not being sarcastic.)
You seem to think that wealthy individuals are unfit for determining what good education policy looks like. I'm curious if you feel Democratic presidents might be well suited for such a task. If so, then perhaps you'll be receptive to what Bill Clinton had to say when he said No Child Left Behind "was a train wreck that was not intended. No Child Left Behind was supported by George Bush and Sen. Ted Kennedy and everybody in between."
Of course if you're looking for something a tad more academic, we could turn to David Hursh's work. Here you can find his paper titled "Exacerbating inequality: the failed promise of the No Child Left Behind Act." Or there is this one titled "Assessing No Child Left Behind and the Rise of Neoliberal Education Policies."
We could also look to "Race, inequality and educational accountability: the irony of ‘No Child Left Behind’" by Linda Darling‐Hammond of Stanford University.
In fact there are so many scholarly articles on the failure of the No Child Left Behind Act that there is a book dedicated solely to them called "Many Children Left Behind: How the No Child Left Behind Act Is Damaging Our Children and Our Schools"
Should I share more peer reviewed sources?
The outcomes and legacy of No Child Left Behind isn't a "mixed bag," as you say. It was a failure, brought to you by the mind and political clout of Ted Kennedy and the pen of George W. Bush.
This source that you provided --> https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp in no way supports your claim of "private schools have fewer special ed students and fewer ELLs." Not even kind of. It only states what percentage of student in public schools are considered English Language Learners by state, and doesn't say anything about private schools. While your claim might be true, your source does not support it, which is unfortunate considering the emphasis you like to place on sources.
The second article you cite, the one from the Baraboo News Republic, states "Participation jumped to 36 [students] this year, taking with them almost $300,000." If you look really quickly at how much Wisconsin spends on each student, it's $11,456. That means it would have cost roughly $412,416 if those 36 students would have stayed in public schools. Instead, it only cost "almost $300,000" when they left. That leave $112,416 dollars with the state/district/school to spend on the students that didn't leave. Oh, no! Whatever shall they do... (That is sarcasm.)
Further, David Koch nor anyone else is forcing these students to leave public school. Students leave public schools when they are given a choice because parents believe their children will receive a better education else where.
As far as vouchers of this kind violating the First Amendment, that is something for those within the juridical branch to decided and it usually hinges how exactly a piece of voucher legislation is written.
Is that really your best shot at David Koch?
I can't help but believe that this really has nothing to do with David Koch, or private schools, or even educating kids. Teachers, of everyone, should be rejoicing if a kid finds a school that is better suited for them than the one they are currently in. I have seen zero evidence suggesting that the programs David Koch advocated for resulted in students receiving worse educations and experiences throughout their time in school, whether it was in moving to a private/charter school, or staying in a public school.
But that isn't the conversation that is taking place here. Instead it is an swarm of blood-thirsty teachers eager to celebrate someone's death. It's sickening, it's pathetic, and it's evil. And these are the same people that are supposed to be educating the next generation... Awesome. (Again, sarcasm.)