My parents say I’ve still got a lot to learn about civics and government, but it seems to me that the people running for President like to talk a lot more about education than they can actually do to help fix education. A major reason Presidential candidates talk about education as much as they do is all the money and political clout of the National Education Association (NEA) teachers union.

As NEA has done every time, the union recently endorsed the Democratic candidate for President. Last week, Barack Obama gave an official acceptance speech to NEA’s big annual meeting via satellite. Obama said a lot of things the union delegates wanted to hear, but at one point he was loudly booed: Why? He suggested changing the way most teachers are paid, including more money given out based on performance. He also spoke highly of charter schools.

Not too surprising, NEA officials edited out Barack Obama’s comments about merit pay and charter schools. Wow, this union really goes out of its way to block sensible reforms that benefit students, parents, and professional teachers!

When you think about it, maybe it would be better if the Presidential candidates didn’t talk so much about education. Policies for our schools are best created and enacted closest to the child and the classroom, and not done so well from the White House or the U.S. Department of Education.

A lot of people like to talk about local control, but let’s take it a step further. What could be more local than giving more control to parents to choose the best school for their child? That’s the idea behind our School Choice for Kids website.