We can only hope that a Federally funded school program will not interfere with education.
I had a high school teacher who grew up in a tribal village in Nigeria and had the privilege of attending a school taught by missionaries in a thatched roof hut. He loved geography and learned his lessons well enough to emigrate to the USA and become a fully credentialed high school teacher. This teacher spoke in a crisp British accent with perfect grammar.
We don't need more money for schools, just better teachers and more motivated students.
It is a crying shame that a pro basketball player earns 1,000 times more money than a medical researcher or a rocket scientist.

While I agree that student motivation is important, it does worry me that California's spending per student is 47th in the nation, and that we are in 50th place for number of students per teacher. In the 1960s California spent 5.6% of personal income on schools. We now spend 3.5%. At some point we have to stop mortgaging our future.

(Statistics taken from a recent article in The Economist: Web Link

Martin - Thanks for the (excellent) link to Economist article.

Not sure how some of the under-funding arguments apply to the local school high school district, which has 1 employee for every 10 students. Clearly, not all of these employees are teachers. Perhaps more of them should be.