Originally Posted by TheBig3

You're touching on a topic I read up on frequently, so I'll try to answer the question without ranting.

The Federal Government is least poised to resolve this very real problem. And since the Federal Government increasingly gets more attention from Americans and less attention is devoted to local issues, it's unlikely to change.

You need to change zoning laws and education laws in a given state and the corresponding municipalities in order to effect change. In smaller, less powerful towns and cities, this might be easier, but it's also less of a demand. The lower the population, the more likely it is to have a regional school system, which is (imo) the fairest option, and it's what high pop. towns should be made to adopt by the State.

High population cities with good schools punish poor children like this:
1. Low housing production due to zoning laws spikes home prices
2. Education, which is strongly budgeted by the State, overemphasizes budget allocation to rich towns through "fairness" arguments. Since the state budget goes first (before #3) all municipalities get in the same ballpark. Budgets for kids are generally measured on a per-head dollar amount, so lets say Town A is known to be rich, so OK we'll only give $40 per head to that town from the State. Town B isn't rich and the State wants to do the right thing so it allocated $60 per-head in Town B.
3. This is where the bait-and-switch happens. After the State has allocated funding, then the locals get to pitch in. The rich town dumps tons of cash in the form of municipal taxes into their schools - something Town B can't afford to do - and this local contribution comes after the State funding so it's not accounted for in the state budget (which I consider theft).

#3 is doubly nefarious because those local taxes do a lot to keep people out. Can't afford the city bills then you don't live in the city.

Here in Massachusetts, we've attempted to resolve the issue through Busing (one of the major reasons Boston is considered a racist city). And while the goal was noble, the execution was miserable, and all these years later, the consensus is that busing students from neighborhoods to poor schools might give those individual children a better education, but it's deprived inner-city schools from adequate funding, and is a bandaid on bad schools in major metros.