Compare the Reading First fiasco with its contemporary scandal over at the Department of Defense  – Boeing’s efforts to lease tanker aircraft to the Air Force. Investigations and the heat brought to bear from national reporting put a Boeing sales representative and an Air Force procurement official in jail, and cost the Secretary of the Air Force and Boeing’s CEO their jobs. No doubt the deal would have met Air Force requirements for in-flight refueling, but thankfully the Department’s Inspector General understood his job. At least as important, no one in the Air Force or Department of Defense would have considered responding to charges of inside dealing by issuing a press release demonstrating that the program worked. See Here.

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Students in the Bush administration's embattled $1 billion-a-year reading program have improved an average of about 15 percent on tests measuring fluency over the past five years, according to an analysis of data by the Education Department.

The Reading First program, a central part of the No Child Left Behind law, has been criticized by congressional Democrats who say it has been riddled with conflicts of interests and mismanagement. The House education committee is holding an oversight hearing on the matter Friday.... The data, scheduled to be released today, indicate that students have benefited from the program, which provides grants to improve reading in kindergarten through third grade….

A department official said the data show that the number of students in Reading First programs who were proficient on fluency tests increased on average over the past five years by 16 percent for first-graders, 14 percent for second-graders and 15 percent for third-graders. On comprehension tests, it increased 15 percent for first-graders, 6 percent for second-graders and 12 percent for third-graders. The official said the analysis is based on results from 16 states that have the most complete data.

"The results show that Reading First is an extremely effective program that is helping our nation's neediest students get the skills they need to read," said Amanda Farris, a deputy assistant education secretary who oversees the program.

Critics said the results were not so impressive, considering how much money has been spent on the program. They said the test scores are meaningless because they are not compared with the performance of other students, who nationwide are doing better in reading.

Amit R. Paley, Washington Post, April 19.

Reading First was launched in 2002, giving schools $1 billion a year to improve reading in early elementary grades. Five years later, early evidence suggests that it may be helping. But investigators say a handful of advisers have railroaded schools into buying textbooks and other materials that they and associates developed.

The result: a conflict-of-interest case that took two years to jell as investigators in the Education Department connected the dots. To date, no criminal charges have been filed, but Democrats, now in control of Congress, promise to give the case a full airing….

Education Secretary Margaret Spellings, who until 2005 was a White House domestic policy adviser, says the troubles occurred before her move to the Education Department. But Mike Petrilli, a former associate deputy secretary under Spellings' predecessor, Rod Paige, says Spellings "micromanaged the implementation of Reading First from her West Wing office."…

Cindy Cupp, a Savannah, Ga., educator, was among the first to complain in 2005, after Reading First schools in Georgia passed over her homegrown phonics program. Cupp compiled a huge dossier outlining the links between publishers, federal advisers, universities and the Bush administration. In findings issued last January, Higgins largely upheld her complaint…. She says it's irrelevant whether Reading First works: "To rationalize breaking the law by saying the program has been effective is just that — a rationalization."

Greg Toppo, USA Today, April 15.
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

If this story were in Defense, Treasury, or Justice, there would be no stopping reporters.  It involves a President’s pet program, a senior White House advisor who managed the program from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and is now Secretary of the Department responsible for its implementation,  a President’s science advisor, an Assistant Secretary, the Commissioner of an independent affiliated agency, a bevy of consultants with an economic self-interest in the use of their advice, huge multinational corporations represented by a close and long-time Presidential political advisor, the gross and completely open abuse of discretion by at least one government official sworn to faithfully execute the law, a pile of incriminating emails, six incriminating Inspector General reports, and still a long list of unanswered questions still to be asked and interesting leads still to be followed.

Forget this as a “education” story – why haven’t Washington bureau chiefs seen it as a great political story and a real humdinger of a tale?  Why are they not outraged at the abuse of our government for personal and ideological ends? Your editor just doesn’t get it, and would appreciate someone in journalism setting him straight.