Government by Waiver: No Child Left Behind Follows the Health Care Precedent



By Guest Blogger 08/11/2011

2 Comments | Print | NO PDF |

In a recent piece in National Affairs, I wrote of the serious threat that government by waiver has to the rule of law. The pattern first surfaced in connection with the requirements that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare) imposed on those employers who ran so-called Med-Mini plans, which provide modest benefits for low-income workers, but which are expensive to administer because of the high rate of turnover among low income employees.

The choice in these cases was stark. Such employers as McDonald’s could escape the clutches of the law by abandoning all health care coverage for these employees, at a time when the national government had nothing to put in its place. Or it could turn a blind eye to the regulation and allow the plans to continue for a fixed period, after which it could reevaluate the situation.

HHS chose the last course, which is the voice of prudence. But it is important to remember that this reversal does not count as a partial repeal of the statute. The decision is made administratively. It can be subject to government conditions. It could last only for a limited time. It need not be granted to all parties, even if they are in the same position—whatever that might mean in these cases. All in all, it is one thing to blunt the bad effects of an unrealistic statute. It is another thing to be happy with the extra dollop of discretion that it confers on government officials.

The setting with respect to No Child Left Behind is yet another variation on the same theme. The initial statutory program sets idealistic goals that everyone on the ground knows to be unattainable. Any statute that talks about “no child” being anything has to be a form of pompous overstatement in light of the tens of millions of children in our educational system, at least one of whom is sure to fall behind.

The posturing that drives the adoption of the passage makes it impossible, of course, just to repeal it. After all, who is in favor of every child being left behind. So as with the government waivers in health care, we see the compromise. Keep the grand ambitions, and then grant ad hoc waivers on the ground, given that the alternative of shuttering countless schools only makes matters worse.

Yet this entire approach of government by waiver should be greeted not only with relief, but also with despair. The only reason we have to worry about the waivers is that we have committed ourselves to legislative programs that are beyond our grasp. And we do that because we have too much faith in the ability of the public sector to perform miracles when it is so beset with difficulties that it can hardly keep its head above water. A bit of moderation is in order. Fewer impossible mandates means fewer waivers, which could mean a welcome retrenchment in the kind of overambitious public initiatives that risk major failure for what will turn out in the end to be illusory gains.

- Richard A. Epstein

This article originally appeared on Advancing a Free Society.




Comment on this article
  • LarryG says:

    NCLB does not specify academic standards. It allows the state to do that.

    How many states have chosen to specify NAEP proficiency standards?

    When NAEP says that 30% of students tested meet the benchmarks for well-defined academic proficiency and the state standards say that for the same set of students, 60% of more of them are classified as “proficient” than what kind of waivers should be granted?

    We rank no better than 15th in the world on academic standards and yet we play the blame game with NCLB.

    One must wonder what our priorities really are.

  • Anne Clark says:

    Yeah – why try to do something bold when we know it’s not going to be perfect – esp. since it emerges from the bowels of Congress. Better not to try. Great advice for the nation. “Beyond our grasp”?

    Let me check Cory’s facebook page – I’m sure he’s got a couple good quotes for you…

    “We are all faced with a series of great opportunities brilliantly disguised as impossible situations.” – Charles Swindoll

    “Defeat is not the worst of failures. Not to have tried is the true failure.” – George Woodbury

  • Comment on this Article

    Name ()


    *

         2 Comments
    Sponsored Results
    Sponsors

    The Hoover Institution at Stanford University - Ideas Defining a Free Society

    Harvard Kennedy School Program on Educational Policy and Governance

    Thomas Fordham Institute - Advancing Educational Excellence and Education Reform

    Sponsors