I think the question here is not so much about caring for the poor as it is about
the appropriate role of the federal government in caring for the poor.
The 2002 law was due for reauthorization in 2007, but earlier attempts to craft a replacement fell apart as Democrats and Republicans argued over
the appropriate role of the federal government.
Lawmakers, teachers, district administrators, parents, and other stakeholders — all with strong and differing opinions — have wrestled for decades with questions about
the appropriate role of the federal government compared with that of states and school districts in the operation of schools and the measurement of their success.
The appropriate role of the federal government is to:
Not exact matches
It also touches on the question
of the
appropriate role for the
federal and provincial
governments in creating Pharmacare, and the merits
of a universal plan in which funding continues to be divided between
government and private insurance.
«It's about the
appropriate and effective
role of the
federal government in getting from here to there.»»
So in light
of the fact that the
role of the
federal government is to ensure our civil (citizens) right to equal access, the National Assessment
of Educational Progress (NAEP) is one
appropriate tool for assessing national or state achievement / opportunity gaps.
As it looked at creating social innovation through business, it was clear that there were a couple
of things that would be
appropriate roles for the
Federal government.