Gabriel Ozuna is an undergraduate at Yale University (Class of 2015). He was born and raised in the Rio Grande Valley and is a proud resident of Donna, Texas, where he graduated from IDEA College Preparatory.
With less than a month to go before Election Day, it is easy to get lost in the unavailing political banter that always seems to drown out the real issues, which I think neither candidate wants to face. Any intelligent debate gets reduced to an overly simplistic bullet-point plan, slogan, or criticism of one’s opponent. But the current education crisis desperately demands that both candidates submit comprehensive proposals on how they plan to overhaul the educational system after the election.
Unfortunately, yesterday’s debate between Obama's and Romney's education advisers, Jon Schnur and Phil Handy, failed to give much further insight into what changes we can expect in the next four years. Schnur began his defense of President Obama’s first term by describing the President’s “commitment to education” even in the midst of economic collapse. Apparently, writing in a $100 billion provision into his stimulus package makes up for Obama’s failure to enact lasting educational changes in the long run. While the initial cash flow may have helped sustain some programs like Pell Grants and Head Start, the money we threw at them is now gone with little more to show for it than an increased deficit.
Handy, on the other hand, idealistically restated the same educational platform the Republican Party has held for the last decade--using state and local policy to raise educational standards frosted with a fantastic promise of “vouchers for all!” Now, there is much to be said for localizing how schools are run and evaluated in a state-by-state basis so that school districts are better held accountable to local entities like parents and communities. But we need specifics about how Romney plans to create incentives for states to raise their academic standards under his proposed “revamp” of NCLB.

Photo by VOA via WikiCommons