<p>I was reviewing my notes from AP History… because that’s what my life has been reduced to nowadays, and I came across something that said Eisenhower opposed education spending. I really just have to ask. Why would ANYONE oppose education spending? In my opinion, that should be one of the most important things to be spending on. I don’t mean just Eisenhower, but any president who opposed it, and people who support low education spending, I guess.</p>
<p>He was, in a lot of ways, pretty devoted to education. I mean, going into his first Presidential campaign he was working at the president of Columbia University. From what I understand, at the time, states were primarily the ones dealing with educational funding.</p>
<p>I mean, back in my home state of Pennsylvania, I know that the school tax is burdened on residents of municipalities. The state also picks your pocket a bit. I’m guessing that this constitutes a huge chunk of school district’s operating budget. So, beyond terribly expensive, poorly thought out programs like No Child Left Behind, I’m afraid I just don’t know what money the Federal government brings to educational spending.</p>
<p>Perhaps, and this would’ve been consistent with his predecessors, Eisenhower was just keeping with the old way of doing things. He did, however, increase funding for science education when Sputnik was launched. It’s a reactionary, and admittedly very specific, but I think this shows a commitment to education. </p>
<p>How was the question/statement phrased?</p>