Chapter 11

1)
Senator Bernie Sanders’s law is showing a liberal ideology as they endorse higher corporate
taxes, more federal spending, and more funding directed towards education.

As described in the scenario, the proposed law would impact federal fiscal policy through a
dramatic increase in revenue, and a much larger portion of the budget directed towards
education.

Early policymaking stages likely impacted Sanders’s law as the idea of free universities gained
popularity, he and others weighed the costs and benefits of the bill, and they created a plan to
fund it through increased taxes on the wealthy.

2)
The graph in question shows a projection of government spending as a percent of GDP from
1970 to 2080.

While most entitlements keep roughly the same portion of the GDP, the money spent on net
interest skyrockets every decade.

Conservatives would likely respond by trying to cut government spending and limit social
programs while liberals would try to raise taxes on income for the wealthy and capital gains
taxes.

3)
Engel v. Vitale’s battle over a state-sponsored prayer involved the 1st Amendment’s
establishment clause just as Everson v. Board of Education does.

In Engel v. Vitale, the Court decided that forced participation in a prayer created by the
government was too close to establishment of a religion. In Everson, the state was providing
transportation for students to religious schools, but they were not encouraging religion in any
meaningful way. With that, the Court decided that the Board of Education in Everson had not
violated this clause.

The people who strongly agreed with Everson are likely religious conservatives who believe that
the government should be fair to religious, as well as public, education.

4) Does the federal government’s involvement in education promote democracy?

Although many may argue that the federal funds can improve education, the federal
government should not be involved in education as it creates ethical challenges rather than
promoting democracy.
 Chapter 11

In the 1st Amendment of the Constitution, citizens are guaranteed their freedoms of
speech and peaceful assembly, but the federal government’s presence in school may put a
block on speech. Federal funds could be used to sway non-partisan officials and curriculum to
support federal plans and ideas; in doing so, free thoughts and speech are limited by the
federal government.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court has established precedent to limit government control
in student life. The case of Engel v. Vitale centered around a state-sanctioned prayer which was
administered forcibly by teachers- state employees. The Court ruled there that governments
cannot force a prayer as it is in violating of the 1st Amendment’s Establishment Clause, but it
can go even further to disqualify government interference in education.

Those on the opposing side may argue that federal funds can improve quality of
education and assist struggling schools. However, this goes against the entire idea of reserved
powers. The Constitution’s 10th Amendment declares that all rights not explicitly given to the
government are meant solely for the states, and this has always been understood to include
education.

In all, allowing the federal government to engage in public education results in restricted
freedoms and limited oversight rather than engagement in democracy.