Tennessee state senator: Reduce welfare payments to families if children don’t do well in school
A Tennessee state senator has come up with what I believe is a first: Republican State Sen. Stacey Campfield of Knoxville proposes to cut welfare benefits to parents whose children don’t make “satisfactory academic progress” in school.
Campfield believes that his bill would compel parents to work harder to ensure their kids excel in school. As you might imagine, his Senate Bill 1312 is triggering a lot of comment.
(If you want to read about another odd law, here is a story about an Arizona legislator who wants all public high-school seniors to recite an oath supporting the U.S. Constitution to be able to graduate.)
Here is a news article from the Knoxville News Sentinel:
While the Knoxville Republican says SB132 is a step toward “breaking the cycle of poverty,” Linda O’Neal, executive director of the Tennessee Commission on Children and Youth, says it could make life more difficult for parents and children who are already struggling.
Campfield said in an interview that the best way to “break the cycle of poverty” is through education and a child’s success in schooling rests on a “three-legged stool” — teachers, schools and parents.
He said Tennessee has already embarked on education reforms designed to improve the quality of teachers and the quality of schools. There should also be a focus on the “third leg,” parents, he said. “We’ve set the tone (through legislation) to push and improve teachers and schools,” Campfield said. “Now is the time to push those parents. This bill is giving them motivation to do more to help their children learn in school.”
“If the family doesn’t care if the child goes to school or does well in school, the odds of that child getting out of poverty are pretty low,” the senator said.
The bill applies to the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program. Current law says parents or guardians of children who are receiving benefits can lose 20 percent of those benefits if a child does not attend school. Campfield’s bill adds a new requirement that the child make “satisfactory academic progress” as well and raises the penalty to 30 percent of benefits.
“The maximum benefit for a mother with two children is $185 a month,” O’Neal said in an interview. “That’s already low. If you take $60 plus dollars away, you’re just further limiting people who already have extremely few resources… It’s just piling on.”
The bill defines “satisfactory academic progress” as advancing from one grade to the next and “receiving a score of proficient or advanced on required state examinations in the subject areas of mathematics and reading/language arts.” Those who fail to meet “competency” standards on end-of-course exams could also be deemed fall short of “satisfactory academic progress.”
On his own blog, Campfield explains his bill:
One of the top tickets to break the chain of poverty is education. To achieve a quality education is like a three legged stool. The state has put a lot of responsibility on schools and teachers to improve student performance. If the children don’t produce, it could impact the pay of the teacher and the standing of the school with the state. We have pushed two of the three legs of the student performance (teachers and schools) to improve, and they are.
While those two legs are important, one other leg has proven to be more important. The third leg has shown to have a greater impact on the children performance than the school, than the teacher, than race of the child, than the income of the parent, than the location of the student. The third leg of the stool (probably the most important leg) is the parents. We have done little to hold them accountable for their child’s performance. What my bill would do is put some responsibility on parents for their child’s performance.
If your child is failing their classes, if your child is not showing up to school, if your child has quit school. That is unacceptable. It is highly unlikely that child will ever escape poverty. The state can not continue to support the generational cycle of poverty. Just because parents may have quit school does not mean it is acceptable if their child does. Parents are responsible to make sure their kids are ready for school and that they get an education. If parents are not holding up their leg of the job (and your kids are not special needs) then the state is going to start holding back a portion of that parents government benefits.
The goal is not to punish anyone. No one will necessarily or instantly lose benefits because of this bills passage. The goal is to encourage parents to do what they should already be doing. We have to start breaking the cycle of generational poverty. I, nor anyone can assure a perfect 100% solution where everyone gets everything and no one loses benefits. but if we can pull 99% out of the cycle of poverty I will take that step.
–From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
159 comments Add your comment
Engaging Parents In School… » “Tennessee state senator: Reduce welfare payments to families if children don’t do well in school”
January 26th, 2013
9:26 am
[...] if children don’t do well in school” Posted on January 26, 2013 by Larry Ferlazzo Tennessee state senator: Reduce welfare payments to families if children don’t do well in school is the headline in the Atlanta Journal Constitution. It begins: A Tennessee state senator has come [...]
Mary Elizabeth
January 26th, 2013
9:40 am
To Sen. Stacey Campfield:
Thank you for responding to posters on this blog. I want to urge you to read the article below that I had written and posted on my personal blog, regarding an in-depth look into education. Many of the educational realities that I have explained in that article are not fully understood, yet, by all teachers, nor even by all administrators, nor the general public, including political leaders. I had earned a B.A. in English in 1970, and an M. Ed. as a Reading Specialist in 1973. I have functioned as an Instructional Lead Teacher, grades 1 – 7, and as an English teacher, Reading Department Chair, reading teacher, Student Support Team Chair, grades 8 -12, in the course of my 35-year educational career. I am presently retired.
http://maryelizabethsings.wordpress.com/2012/07/29/why-there-are-myriad-instructional-levels-within-each-grade-level/
From the link on “Mastery Learning,” which is included within the above link, are these words:
——————————————————————————–
“All students do not master curriculum concepts at the same rate. This is the result of many factors. -Some students have higher IQs than others. -Some have dysfunctional family environments which may cause an inability to focus. -Some have learning disabilities. -Some have mental illness or emotional problems. -Some have physical impairments. -Generational poverty can effect the ability of some students to learn.”
——————————————————————————————-
As I mentioned above, not all educators are aware of the degree of variation of instructional levels within students on each grade level. Since variation in I.Q. is one factor which might cause some students to be behind others, on a given subject in a given grade level, would you wish to create a situation whereby those children might further hindered through cutting financial resources to their parents or guardians when the real reason for the problems that those particular students might be having in school has not been fully analyzed and understood even by their teachers or parents? As I had posted earlier, the long-ranged answer to educational and societal problems is enlightenment and education – for all concerned. This is what I have found to be true in my educational experiences in educational leadership with parents, students, teachers, and administrators in schools of 800 (elementary/middle school) and 1,800 students (high school) in a 35 year period of time.
beanster
January 26th, 2013
10:16 am
Perhaps there is a way to incentivize parents who receive TANF to become more involved in their child’s education. While I appreciate the concern of the above poster, simply stating the ideals mentioned to be the solution is currently a failing proposition. I firmly believe it is not our teachers but our parents who are to blame for our society’s educational shortcomings.
I love teaching. I hate what it is becoming...
January 26th, 2013
10:31 am
@DecaturParent “It is not unreasonable to expect a parent on Welfare to make sure their children are in school.”
The current law already does so…this article is about NEW requirements…
Current law says parents or guardians of children who are receiving benefits can lose 20 percent of those benefits if a child does not attend school. Campfield’s bill adds a new requirement that the child make “satisfactory academic progress” as well and raises the penalty to 30 percent of benefits.
Look, I can understand where legislation like this comes from… I consider myself a “liberal” but that does not mean that I do not get frustrated when I have to teach a child whose welfare mother has six other children, all from different fathers, who takes absolutely no interest in her children’s education, and only shows up at school to scream and blame everyone else when one of her children gets into trouble for misbehaving. Yes. I gets my blood pressure up, indeed.
However, this measure is too simplistic, for not only would it punish said mother, it would also punish her children who didn’t ask to be born into such a dysfunctional environment. In addition, it would be damaging to families of slow learners, LD students, ESOL students, etc. Some children work very hard in school, but just cannot make the progress of classmates due to language barriers, learning difficulties, undiagnosed learning or medical conditions, or low intellectual ability. Such children may strive to do well, but their grades (if they are not artificially inflated) will reflect performance, not effort, and thus, may be too low to satisfy Campfield. Not all children live in Lake Wobegon (Garrison Keillor shout out).
Plus, you add additional pressure on teachers, who now would have to be burdened with the knowledge that if they were to give a student the failing grade he/she earned, they might well be denying that child a roof over his/her head and food to eat. Anyone else want to make that call?
Shar
January 26th, 2013
10:40 am
Parents, to say nothing of siblings, cannot be held accountable for their child’s success in school. Students cannot be held accountable for whether or not their families have heat and food. Teachers cannot be held accountable for whether their students are beaten or go hungry – of course they will inflate grades to avoid those outcomes.
However, not holding parents accountable for the crucial elements to their child’s success that they can influence is also not acceptable. Parental accountability cannot be limited to parents who are on public assistance, or to measures which impoverished or under-educated parents are not capable of affecting. Senator Campbell’s bill does not punish every uninvolved parent, just the ones receiving TANF, and is therefore unconstitutional and unhelpful to failing students of, say, dual income type A uninterested parents. It is also a sledgehammer instead of a scalpel and does not account for improvements in something other than grades, in differences in a particular student’s access to quality teaching, to outside support, to different school funding levels throughout the state, and a host of other factors that have strong bearing on student success.
That said, I have always been amazed at the lack of emphasis on the parents’ impact on school and student performance, and frustrated by the dearth of legislative efforts to increase parent involvement. Parents are NOT responsible for a student’s grades or scores, but they ARE responsible for caring for their children in such as way as to encourage success.
Specifically, parents should get their children to school on time, ensure that they are healthy and well-rested, that they are properly fed or get to school early enough to be fed, that they have spent appropriate time on their homework and it is complete and that their children are prepared to behave in a manner that allows teachers to teach and classmates to learn. Further, parents should be required to volunteer some minimum number of hours every semester at school to better understand what their child is doing on a daily basis and how he/she compares to their cohort, and parents should come to school a minimum of twice a year for teacher conferences or parent workshops, or more often if the teacher requests it.
Those are things that every parents, regardless of SES, can and should do to support their children’s education. If they fail to do these things, their children should be assigned to a school that operates at least 12 hours a day and that will compensate for parental shortcomings by providing 3 meals a day, homework help, after school activities, periodic medical assessment and which requires the child to behave acceptably. Parents who do these basic things can be offered school choice among a variety of educational options – shortened days, arts-based or other alternative curricula, and other elements of school choice.
Taking money away is simplistic, illegal and inept. While I sympathize with Sen. Campbell’s aims, there are far better ways to address his goals.
Mikey D.
January 26th, 2013
11:00 am
@Bootney and td:
I am a stubborn, free-thinking, moderate independent who knows that the best ideas come from the center, not from the lunatic fringe of either party. Please don’t try to paint me as a bleeding heart liberal. I’m speaking out currently against the far-right idiocy because here in Georgia, that’s what we are dealing with on a daily basis. If I lived in California, I’d be speaking out against the big-government liberalism that’s pushed that state to the brink of bankruptcy. I get so sick of people entrenching themselves at either end of the fringe and being too ignorant to understand that the common ground is where the solutions lie.
Mary Elizabeth
January 26th, 2013
11:17 am
@ beanster, 10:16 am
“While I appreciate the concern of the above poster, simply stating the ideals mentioned to be the solution is currently a failing proposition.”
======================================================
Beanster, please read my post and my links in greater detail. What I have stated is not simply “concern” or “ideals.” What I share is based on programs that we implemented in the schools in which I was a reading, instructional leader. A specific program that I implemented at my high school for our 9th grade students – who were behind grade level significantly in their reading skills – was called the “Dual-Textbook Reading Program.” This program received a $25,000. grant from Georgia’s Department of Education the year after I had retired. I had designed the program and had left the purchase order with the principal for the materials necessary for this program to succeed, further, in the years after my retirement.
I had previously mentioned that our reading department served up to 600 students daily in its heyday, in which we were the largest reading program, in a high school, in the state of Georgia, with three reading specialists and two reading paraprofessionals serving students. We worked closely with the teachers of all four major curriculum areas – English, mathematics, social studies and science – to train these teachers in reading-in-the-content-area techniques and approaches. We shared the in-house Nelson Reading Test results of all of the students in the classes of these teachers, yearly, so that their instruction would be more precisely targeted to the varied needs of their students.
Simply because one has a vision and cares for the welfare of others does not mean that the ideas that one has envisioned have not been implemented successfully in day-to-day reality. The ideas that I have envisioned and implemented, over the course of my educational career, have impacted many for good. This is why I continue to share my thoughts, and programs previously implemented with success, on this blog.
Yes, there is much more to accomplish in public education to make it more successful overall, and I want to help, as I am able, to make it more successful, by continuing to educate teachers, administrators, the general public, and political leaders as to the wide-range of instructional variations that now occur in students in each grade level. These instructional variations among students will, no doubt, continue to occur because of the inevitable differences in the instructional needs of the students themselves, including their varied rates of learning new concepts. Educators must address these continuing instructional variations, with wisdom and precision, for success to occur in students and in public education, in general. Punishment is not the answer. Enlightenment, as to instructional realities, is an answer.
Responsibility Shunned
January 26th, 2013
11:36 am
@SHAR “Parents, to say nothing of siblings, cannot be held accountable for their child’s success in school.”
Um, whaaaaaaat!?!?!?
liberalefty
January 26th, 2013
11:42 am
more bs from a far right birther who loves god but hates blacks,hispanics, gays and liberal women,,,now in his hatred of poor people he wants to starve children
beanster
January 26th, 2013
12:06 pm
@ Mary Elizabeth – I apologize for over-simplifying your approach/accomplishments over the course of your career. That was not my intention per se. Rather, my intent was to suggest that many of our education system’s problems could be better addressed and solutions more quickly implemented by putting more responsibility on our parents instead of our teachers. I am not necessarily advocating the Draconian system suggested by the TN state senator. However, I wonder if there could be a way to incentivize some of those parents whose children are a continual drag on public education? I am not a teacher. Perhaps it’s impossible. From my view, our current system isn’t working. As others after me posted, the problem is considerably complex. I just think there must be a way to change the cycle of dependency that currently exists in our society.
When I was 17, I held a job as a valet parking attendant. The job wasn’t particularly enjoyable to say the least. One day I remember lamenting the trials and tribulations of the job to a fellow parking attendant. She and I were from different neighborhoods but became quite good friends during our time of employment together. As I remember, the discussion turned to what we could do to find a better job earning more pay and garnering more respect for ourselves. I talked about going to college. She talked about having babies as soon as she turned 18. Being the naive 17 year old I was, I inquired as to why. She explained it to me. This is an example of the cycle of dependency I mention above. There are some who would like to believe this idea is mythological. To those I dare say — baloney.
living in an outdated ed system
January 26th, 2013
12:38 pm
This piece of legislation is fundamentally flawed and I would never support it. It does not address the reason why poverty exists and why it is so much harder for these parents to help their child to learn. I think this state senator should spend a bit more time in poor neighborhoods and see what is really going on. I see parents who are unemployed, or may work two jobs, or even work the graveyard shift. I also see children who may not have a two-parent home, or maybe one parent is in jail.
There are better ways to align incentives than the approach this state senator is taking. Clearly he has looked at the controversial research of Roland Fryer; however, it is, quite frankly, grossly insensitive for him to pressure parents this way, when they may simply be unable to do what it takes because of their adverse circumstances.
Shar
January 26th, 2013
1:57 pm
@Responsibility, parents cannot make their kids have good grades/scores unless they are capable of doing the work themselves (and I have known several who have taken that tack). Parents have no immediate control over the quality of their child’s teacher, the level of professional development he/she has had, the level of funding of their individual school, class size, availability of tutoring, books and supplies, enrichment, curriculum, other needy kids in the class that take the teacher’s time and attention, their own child’s IQ — all of these things and more affect the child’s in-class experience and performance. The parents’ brief is to get their child to school ready to learn, which means on time, rested, fed, healthy, with their homework done and knowing that they must behave appropriately. It is also a parental job to insist that homework be done, and to show up at school to augment the taxpayers’ investment in their child’s education with their own efforts, both as volunteers and in discussing progress with their child’s teacher as needed.
They cannot be held accountable for grades. They can be held accountable for readiness, conduct and follow through. And one sibling cannot be held accountable for another’s academic success.
Marge
January 26th, 2013
2:10 pm
So republicans are cutting the funding to the bone for education and now they are trying to blame the parents and children of the poor if they do not have the resources and have poor performance. typical republican action.
I Teach Writing
January 26th, 2013
3:33 pm
@Sen. Campfield — Thanks for the prompting to “look it up.” I did. I also read SB132 (current session), so I know exactly what you’ve proposed. Here are some things I found:
The concept that’s been so successful, especially in Mexico and Brazil, is called Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT). The most studied version of such a policy is Mexico’s Oportunidades program, which has been around (counting it’s precursor program, Progresa, since 1997). Brazil’s Bolsa Familia program, itself an outgrowth of previous programs, has been around since 2003. Similar pilot programs have sprung up worldwide, including Opportunity NYC, a now-complete, three-year trial targeting six of the poorest areas of New York.
All programs share one key component: they’re reward oriented. Performing a desired parental behavior (getting your kids vaccinated, making sure they have preventative care appointments, getting them to school consistently) generates extra cash for the parent (in nearly all cases, programs targeted mothers explicitly). Families in extreme poverty also received a base benefit that was not action dependent. Structurally, then, these programs are the opposite of what you propose, in that you’re proposing a static benefit program with a single punitive rider — “If your children don’t do X, we’ll take away some of your base benefit.”
That approach, it seems to me, IS reinventing the wheel. The CCT works by incremental cash transfers that can build a substantial benefit. It’s a micro-carrot approach. You’re offering a stick instead of a carrot, and you’re tying a big stick to a single action. Although, using the fuzziest of behavioral definitions, one can probably squint and see a similar outline to your proposal and, say, Oportunidades, to claim that “this is already being done in over 40 countries” is a raging misrepresentation of the truth for any definition of the word “this” that passes the smell test.
I Teach Writing
January 26th, 2013
3:34 pm
*its precursor
(What subject do I teach, again?)
Mary Elizabeth
January 26th, 2013
4:01 pm
beanster, 12:06 pm
Eleanor Roosevelt did not look at the poor from the vantage point of judgment from above. She involved herself directly in the tenements in NYC, and as a young woman, Eleanor brought her future husband and cousin, Franklin, with her to work with the poor in those tenements, for their betterment.
In the course of my 70 years, I have seen society turn away from valuing developing programs to help those in poverty as happened in the 1960s, with LBJ’s “War on Poverty,” to valuing looking after one’s self primarily and making money for one’s self, which has become a primary national obsession since the 1970s, imo. Along with these personal monetary goals, ideologues fostered the political goals of cutting government to the point that it would have little effect in helping to uplift those in impoverished conditions in our nation. Poverty tends to be generational unless educational intervention occurs which helps to change this unfortunate situation. It appears to me that many today are content simply to stand in judgment of poorer citizens, instead of desiring to help to them, as did Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt, in their era of America’s history.
From a historical perspective, slavery existed in our nation for over 200 years – until 1860. Slaves were not even allowed to learn to read. Thereafter, Jim Crow laws enforced a poorer quality of education upon African-Americans, as well as forced a segregated life, without economic or cultural possibilities, upon the poorer black citizens. I began my teaching career in the last of the segregated schools in Georgia. I was the only white person in the all-black school. The year was 1969-70. That means that Jim Crow, in reality, only ended in 1970 in Georgia – 110 years after slavery was abolished, and only 43 years removed from today’s world. That was only two generations ago. We cannot change dependency (which was built into the national dynamic of this nation, itself, with slavery) in only two generations. However, we can “roll up our sleeves” and know that it will take “a village of caring citizens” and not just parents (who have often been victims, themselves, of generational poverty and its demoralizing effect on hope for a better life) to change society for the better and make it more equitable for all citizens. Victims of poverty sometimes think there is no hope for them because no one cares – or even sees – what they endure. We need balance, once again, in our nation. Government CAN be an agent to help alleviate much poverty and illiteracy. I believe in helping to instill self-reliance in others, not through punishment or through undue judgment, but through opportunities which a good, solid education will give the poor, along with the inspiration to improve their circumstances through educators who care for them and who believe in them. Poverty knows know single race of people and it is one of the main reasons for the poor quality in our schools because of such inequities among students. We must start to attack poverty, once again in our nation, instead of incessantly attacking our public schools.
Mary Elizabeth
January 26th, 2013
4:15 pm
Correction in my 4:01 pm post: Slavery existed in the U.S. until 1865 (not 1860) when the passage of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution abolished slavery throughout the U.S.
Mary Elizabeth
January 26th, 2013
4:15 pm
Correction to my 4:01 pm post: Slavery existed in the U.S. until 1865 (not 1860) when the passage of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution abolished slavery throughout the U.S.
Dr. Monica Henson
January 26th, 2013
4:34 pm
The sad, simple truth is that there is no law against being a crappy parent. Its corollary is that crappy parenting knows no socioeconomic, racial, or ethnic boundaries. The mission of the public schools has got to become helping students to succeed in creating choices for their own futures regardless of how caring/involved/supportive their familes are…or are not.
long time educator
January 26th, 2013
7:15 pm
When a society comes together to solve a societal problem, they should start with the end in mind and enact strategies to get there. Our tax system is full of these ideas; we want more home ownership, so we give a home mortgage deduction on taxes. Sometimes there are unintended consequences, that until the law goes into effect, do not become apparent. The current welfare system was well intended in the beginning. It was to be a short term fix to help a family get back on its feet. The unintended consequence is a whole underclass who are content to live on the welfare of others rather than work to take care of themselves. We need to look again at the end result society wants: self supporting adults taking care of any and all children they bring into the world. The strategies we have put in place are not only not working, they are actually exacerbating the problem. We need to stop the current system and try some new strategies to get the end result we want: self-supporting adults who parent their own children responsibly. It may seem cruel to talk about reducing or stopping welfare payments, but it is actually more cruel to allow this dependency and lack of initiative to continue generation after generation. Asking someone to take care of themselves implies that you have confidence that they can take care of themselves. Treating someone with pity and condescension implies you have no confidence that the person can care of himself. Which is actually more respectful of the human dignity in each person? Work builds self esteem, confidence and is its own reward. Rather than welfare checks, we should offer employment to everyone. All but the most severely disabled should contribute to the general welfare in some beneficial way every day.
Pride and Joy
January 26th, 2013
8:37 pm
I read a study about a school that PAID kids for good grades. It sounds horrible but it worked. Maureen, do you have access to that information?
I wouldn’t trust giving the parents money. They already do stupid things with it but in this study, high schoolers I think, the poor kids were given a couple hundred dollars to do their work that year and the bonus worked. High school students can be responsible for their own work outside of their parents influence.
I hate the very idea of it but a couple hundred bucks is cheaper than a high school drop out’s welfare check every month.
Pride and Joy
January 26th, 2013
8:40 pm
Mary Elizabeth, I always respect your posts. Tell me what you think about this, please. Women couldn’t vote until after the turn of the 20th century and were and are still discriminated against; yet, women outnumber men in college and often graduate at the top of their classes, much more than men who have always had access to education. I find these facts contrary to your opinion that Jim Crow and slavery is still holding back black Americans. Please comment if you care to.
madness
January 26th, 2013
9:01 pm
Really, you are so right dawggirl and others! How can we make teachers accountable to the point of tying a student’s success to their paychecks and not requiring parents any responsibility for their child’s academic behavior???? We are perpetuating failure by continuing to fund irresponsible parents. Students AT school will eat two meals, they will not go hungry, punish the parents. Reward the students for their success.
Pride and Joy
January 26th, 2013
9:11 pm
Dr. Monica has once again drilled down to the root of the problem and given us a solution — focus on the kids. We can’t change the parents. Focus on the kids and what I want to add is — the sooner the better — identify the kids with no support or little support at home when they are in Kindergarten and intervene all the way until they can care for themselves. We can’t keeping depending on parents because bad parents won’t change.
Contractor
January 26th, 2013
10:45 pm
I think there need to be certain provisions like attendance and the ability to pass a grade and move on. No one expects EVERY kid to make A’s in EVERY single class, so that would be unfair to hold them to a standard like that. I do feel as if this is a great idea under the right provisions. The issue in America these days is that parents are nothing close to parents, and it’s the kids that are getting the short end of the stick with their lack of upbringing, no values, and lack of manners. All of this adds to poverty because they have no idea how to be contributors to society. The only way to get through to people these days is to hit them in the wallet, and when you’re not willing to earn your money, you better be willing to do your kids a favor atleast and help them get educated. The people against any form of a bill like this are just pathetic people in their own right that always want to blame others and believe that everyone should get a medal for participation. Education is the only thing that can not be taken from an individual, and without that, you have what you see in society a lot today, homeless people with absolutely nothing. Great step in a good direction, and will motivate plenty of loser parents when you threaten their free loading ways, but it will help the children that are too young to help theirselves.
Beverly Fraud
January 26th, 2013
10:52 pm
“While those two legs are important, one other leg has proven to be more important…We have done little to hold them accountable for their child’s performance.”
On this point the Sen. is unequivocally right. If this isn’t the right bill, that does not detract from the fact that this conversation NEEDS…TO…HAPPEN!
Charles
January 26th, 2013
10:53 pm
Welfare is not a right .. rather, it is a privilege. Privileges are not owed .. rather, they are earned. Therefore .. if you want to receive welfare, you should be willing to “do” what is required to earn it.
Old timer
January 26th, 2013
10:59 pm
The rural system I taught in, in TN had 25 percent of the student in Special Education…I thought 10 percent was more average……
bug
January 26th, 2013
11:00 pm
Big momma why don’t you post a solution instead of bitching?
Democratic Educator
January 26th, 2013
11:07 pm
As a democrat I’d be opposed except that I am also a high school educator that has seen the number 1 problem I personally face on a daily basis is trying to get students from a poor socio-economic condition to actually complete their school work. I would certainly support such a program providing the school systems could give the parents a waiver if the child truly was trying in the classroom but still came up short. There are a few instances where a child truly is trying and completes homework but just can’t grasp the content required by to pass Georgia EOCT’s especially those that are SPED. But unfortunately the majority of failing classes is simply a lack of effort and when the parents are contacted nothing is changed. Indeed many parents today blame the teacher for students failing to do their work…
believe it or not
January 26th, 2013
11:10 pm
Teachers are being held accountable for all their students. Their evaluations are partially based on student achievement. If teachers are going to be judged so should parents. Teacher’s pay will be according to their students success. Why not tie welfare to student success. That seems fair to me.
Bill Mackinnon
January 26th, 2013
11:19 pm
This is punishment-based policy, the only incentive mechanism is negative- the parents just lose money. It is an example of the teranny of low expectations AND saving taxpayer money on the backs of the poor. Try the other way- reward success. Start with basic TANF benefits. Add dollars per month for: staying in school, completing each grade, passing competency exams, engaging in school volunteerism, etc. the State of Tennessee should consider it an investment in this population.
Suggesting it should work because of 40 other countries’experience only has the appearance of validity. This seems like typical conservative, reactionary thinking. It isn’t even a nice try, except politically.
Bill Mackinnon
January 26th, 2013
11:20 pm
That should be “tyranny”
Ellen
January 26th, 2013
11:23 pm
I was a very stressed out child being raised by an abusive drug-addicted father. My mother managed to hold our family together with the help of public assistance. So much of our family’s burdens fell to the children to managed. My siblings and I learned to fend for ourselves, look after each other and survive–because we were pretty much left on our own. Out of the four children, two of us have managed to graduate from college; one is in the US AirForce; and the youngest is a long-haul truck driver. None of us have had run-ins with the law and we are all productive members of society. But putting additional burden of the family’s survival on our shoulders would have broken me as a child. I think you have to walk a mile in the children’s shoes to truly grasp the kind of stressors they have to deal with. Don’t add to their burden. Children can’t help whom they are born to.
Watchful Eyes in Dixie
January 26th, 2013
11:32 pm
@ DecaturParent – I really respect you. Thanks for your honesty. Because of the sacrafices you are making now, your children will always know mand remember that. You have mad an investment in their future. Few parents on welfare understand that.
gateacher
January 26th, 2013
11:38 pm
what? and take away their child’s right to fail? sarcasm intended
Ga Patriot
January 26th, 2013
11:39 pm
The problem is that the wrong people are having children. These children are not doing poorly in school because of poverty, poor nutrition, or bad teachers. Quite frankly they are born to people who do not value education and although some children automatically are self-motivated or competitive to work hard without demands from the parents, they are too few.
If you are on welfare AND your children are not well rested, on time and with their homework in their hand, then the parent is the problem. People on welfare having more than one child and not pulling out all stops to ensure their success in school needs to be held accountable. The first thing is to make them get their lazy bums out of bed every morning and attend parenting classes while their child(ren) are in school.
Tap Out
January 26th, 2013
11:43 pm
Making it more difficult for a family to survive will not help create a better home environment for struggling students. Republicans again attempt to prey on the weakest and least influential in society. We should base politicians pay on how successful they are at lowering the state jobless rate and improving education. How much can the state be hurting if we taxpayers can afford to fund a $150k crony job.
Sissy
January 26th, 2013
11:46 pm
This is going to the extreme. Anything for a vote or headlines.
DustBust
January 26th, 2013
11:49 pm
Anyone who thinks this is a good idea is just a horrible piece of garbage. You SOB’s would actually get a good nights sleep knowing that some family (IN THE UNITED STATES) is starving because their child’s grades aren’t up to your standards. Good southern Christians I bet you are.
Sandra
January 26th, 2013
11:50 pm
The kids have enough to worry about with passing such tests as the CRCT, so why add fuel to the fire? This guy needs to worry about something else instead of that.
Courtney
January 26th, 2013
11:57 pm
Great Idea!
Point/Counterpoint
January 27th, 2013
12:03 am
Poor parenting can be found in all neighborhoods. What punishment does he suggest for bad parents who aren’t poor?
Jay
January 27th, 2013
12:16 am
So, in a nutshell, they’re going to put pressure on the child to succeed in order to put food on the table…Okay, it’s only fair that, folks making over 250K, if their kids have failing grades, we raised their taxes…IJS!!
Derry Err
January 27th, 2013
12:26 am
I’d be more likely to support incentives for high grades than penalties for children in families who are already struggling.
jb
January 27th, 2013
12:31 am
Sorry but if you don’t get your kids to school = no welfare money. Get up off your @ss and work, just do something- anything- get your kids to school at least.
Miller
January 27th, 2013
1:01 am
Seems like a reasonable approach to me. The Bill only requires chidren to pass from grade to grade. It doesn’t require As or Bs, etc. I see no problem with requiring that minimal effort be undertaken to receive welfare benefits as it relates to educating the children. It is not “mean” to set standards. If anything, it’s cruel to the children to not do so.
yoyo5749
January 27th, 2013
1:07 am
This Senate Bill 1312 does not make any sense….The Republican want to cut, cut, cut more benefit to balance there budget…Hey, I have an idea….State Sen. Stacey Campfield of Knoxville, stop given yourself a pay raise….
Gwinnett Mom
January 27th, 2013
1:59 am
It is not unreasonable to make sure parents make their children go to school. However, to deny or reduce benefits because students are not performing well is ridiculous. There are many things that contribute to children not performing well like not having enough food to eat, lack of sleep, anxiety, fear, etc., I am a single mother of seven. I can remember when I did not have a college education and I was struggling to provide basic necessities (food, clothing, shelter) I wanted to be more involved but many times parents risk losing their jobs if they have to take off work especially when you have to take off for already for WIC appointments, routine physical check ups, routine dental check ups, and God forbid your child get sick and kids do not ever get sick at the same time. Sometimes parents have to choose between taking off for a school event or making sure they have enough hours to pay rent or buy groceries. Those who get TANF do not have enough to survive as it is instead of making their life more difficult how about implementing mandatory programs like Parenting Workshops, GED Classes, Life Skills Classes, Resume Writing, Job Search Skills. Those who do not comply will not qualify for benefits. In my opinion, this program is set up for people to fail.
One of the less than fifty percent
January 27th, 2013
2:11 am
Breaking the generational poverty barrier is one key to less government. I love the idea, but I am not so ignorant as to believe it is all positive. Many have mentioned the pressure it would put on kids which cannot be understated, but I think that is the backbone of this problem.
As I was growing up my parents PUT pressure on me to make good grades, knowing full well they could not afford to send me to college. I knew that if I wanted to go to college I would have to get a scholarship, float a loan with ridiculous rates, or try to work full time to pay my way thru. Many parents just don’t grasp that some pressure must be put on kids to achieve.
For those of you who are against this because it will cause pressure on the kids I say this .. welcome to real life. Does it stink, yep, but it happens to most middle class and below families .. well, at least it did before HOPE was around.
I seriously do not understand how the media and those supporting government handouts consistently assume that the tax-paying public had easy street all their lives. Sure, some families have been middle class for a few generations (there were few during the great depression), but they got that way by pressure and by not falling into a pattern or repeated bad decisions. Why do most middle-class families have fewer than three kids? They know that more would be hard to support. Ask yourself why lower income families do not recognize this. Is it because the middle and upper classes are forcing them to have more children than they could ever think to support on their own.
There are no easy answers, but buying votes by increasing the reliance on government handouts is not the answer. You can bet that is THE biggest reason one party props up these programs and if you think otherwise you are just not living in the real world. The best idea is to give people the tools to get off the government handouts, but the hard part is finding a good method. At least one party has an interest in doing this, even at the cost of votes. I am not sure if this is a good idea, but it’s much more worthy of a shot than oh say .. Obamacare .. which is forcing companies to drop full time employees and insurance on people who actually try to earn a living by working.