LONDONDERRY, N.H. — Jeb Bush wants a federal school choice program included in any reform to the No Child Left Behind Act.
The program would allow families living below or near the poverty line to use their federal education funding at any public school they desire. Bush implied he would like to see private schools included in such a program as well. The program would not require any new funding, it would just give low-income families more flexibility with their existing federal funds. Rather than a nationwide mandate, states would have the choice to opt-in to the flexible funding.
“I’d love to see this notion of portability of federal monies so that the federal government is a partner of reform rather than kind of a top-down provider of money with all sorts of strings attached,” Bush said Wednesday at the New Hampshire Education Summit, hosted by The 74 and the American Federation for Children.
Read the full article at The Washington Examiner here.
Young Voices Advocate Jared Meyer joined Al Jazeera America to Discuss the Minimum Wage.
You can watch the full interview at the Manhattan Institute, here.
Last week the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in ClearCorrect Operating, LLC v. ITC. The hearing addressed a 2014 ruling by the International Trade Commission (ITC) in a case brought by Align Technology.
Align Technology contended that ClearCorrect had illegally imported digital files used for the production of invisible teeth aligners, for which they hold patents.
The ITC ruled in favor of Align, asserting that its regulatory powers extend to “electronic transmission of digital data”. This should cause great concern.
Some organizations, such as the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), support the ITC’s argument. These organizations focusing on the intellectual-property component of the case, have argued that deference is due the ITC, because it is “one of the most open, inclusive and fair bodies in our government.”
But this is not just an intellectual property issue. The implications are far broader.
Despite what supporters of the ruling maintain, the ITC was never meant to have jurisdiction over the transmission of digital data.
Read the rest at The Hill here.