Examples in which federal legislation appears to have stepped beyond constitutional bounds in seeking to affect integral governmental functions and operations of the states. (Author/MLF)

Presents excerpts from an interview with Robert C. Andringa, minority staff director of the House Education and Labor Committee. Andringa argues the need for increased participation in the federal legislative process by state and local officials concerned with educational matters, and offers a number of recommendations for achieving that end. (JG)

An idea long recongnized as "good business" by national special-interest groups has been embraced by the State of California, with an office and full time representation in Washington, D. C. Describes how the service was established and how it works. (Author/MLF)

It appears to be impossible for the federal government to describe by legislation or regulations standards that are of general applicability among the states. State legislative processes offer the best available means for meshing federal aid with state and local resources. (Author/MLF)

Discusses the competition between state education agencies and locally oriented educational groups for influence on federal education legislation and for discretionary authority over the expenditure of federal education funds. Also examines the difficulty of reaching agreement on a single "state point of view" on educational matters. (JG)

Already allocated educational funds will continue and, given the slim amount of flexible federal resources, only programs high on the administration's list of priorities will be initiated. (Author/MLF)

Kansas and the Federal Government are debating whether or not federal impact aid for a school district should be deducted in some way from the formula that determines how much State aid that district properly should receive. (Author/DN)

By challenging the security of bureaucratic fiefdoms, the functionalists are put on the defensive. (Author/JN)

While revenue sharing is a unique and masterful windfall to local districts over the nation, if proposed cuts in current education programs are made and a special education revenue sharing bill not funded, the Wisconsin State Department of Public Instruction will be unable to guarantee the State's fundamental interest in education. (Author/JN)

From the proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Education Commission of the States (3rd, Denver, Colorado, July 7-9, 1969).

From the proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Education Commission of the States (3rd, Denver, Colorado, July 7-9, 1969).

Findings of a study undertaken to discover conflicts that may exist between state consitutional and statutory provisions governing education, and federal laws and regulations in three areas: education of the handicapped, education of the disadvantaged (including migrant and bilingual) and vocational education. (Author/MLF)

Describes probable provisions of the 1976 amendments to the federal Vocational Education Act of 1963 and discusses what effect the amendments will have on federal requirements for state planning and management of vocational education programs. (JG)

Argues that the best defense against increasing federal inroads on state educational policy-making is a strong showing of state and local initiative on educational issues and in increased effort by state governments to influence educational legislation at the federal level. (JG)

Revenue sharing is not a matter of the States asking the federal government to solve their problems. (Author/JN)