A central theme of the Bernie Sanders Presidential campaign was growing income inequality. Credit Suisse Global Wealth Databook published data that supports Senator Sanders’ claim. They recently reported that at the end of 2013 the United States was the most unequal in terms of wealth distribution among the top twenty developed nations. Seventy-five percent of all wealth in this country is held by the top ten percent of its people. Comparative figures for Canada, 57%; Australia, 50%; Japan, 49%; the United Kingdom, 53%; and Germany 61%.The United States also ranks lowest for economic mobility among the twenty wealthiest nations. It is almost impossible for those living in the bottom 20% to move into the middle class.

Such a situation is not supposed to happen in America, the land of equal opportunity for all. Sadly this land of equal opportunity is a myth. Public education is trumpeted to be the great equalizer, but it is not delivering. Children born into poverty attend substandard schools. They are the victims of significant inequality when it comes to education.

While the quality of public schools (K-12) differs greatly among states and even within specific school districts, the overall picture is clear. Most schools in urban settings and many in rural areas receive significantly lower per student funding than their counterparts in wealthier suburban locations. The result is poor facilities (buildings and grounds), lower teacher salaries leading to a less experienced faculty, larger class sizes, less lab and computer equipment, smaller libraries. These impoverished schools are less likely to have a nurse, a school psychologist, a music or an art teacher. Four and five year olds are far less likely to have preschool opportunities.

In addition to these problems, public schools in America are resegregating at a rapid rate. While significant progress integrating schools was made in the 1970s and 1980s, the Supreme Court changed its tune in 1991 and began chipping away at desegregation enforcement mechanisms. While there are exceptions, few school districts today see desegregated schools as an important priority. White, middle class parents are opting for private and religious schools as a way to avoid sending their child to a public school with a significant minority population.

This trend has important consequences for impoverished children attending segregated schools. They come to see themselves as inferior, a psychological disposition which weakens their ability to excel in school. Parents who pay private school tuitions often lobby for lower public school budgets in an effort to pay less taxes. The biggest problem, however, is the future of democratic government in America. Democratic institutions will not work well in a multi-racial society unless people from different ethnic and religious backgrounds learn about and are comfortable with each other.

The federal government recognized these problems and passed the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act in January of 2002. The bill was a collaborative effort of President George W. Bush and Senator Ted Kennedy. The bill led to a significant increase in federal spending for public education. It also gave poor children the right to transfer to better schools, an effort to help them succeed educationally and to reverse the trend toward resegregation of the schools. Federal money was conditional, based on strict accountability which led to tests, tests, and more tests.

The bill limped to a conclusion six years later with minimal positive results. No money was appropriated to improve buildings or to reduce class size. Many of the funds to improve teaching were never provided. The enforcement mechanisms for student transfers were weak, allowing only 1% of eligible students to change schools. Finally, the intense pressure for accountability led to teaching for tests, rote learning, and significant cheating by teachers and principals to show results.

The Obama administration replaced NCLB with Every Student Succeeds which was passed in the Congress with bipartisan support and signed by the President on December 10, 2015. The bill appropriated 124 billion dollars for the 2016-2020 fiscal years with most funds targeted for poverty schools. The bill was far more flexible on accountability in an attempt to lessen the onerous testing requirements of NCLB.

While it is too early to evaluate this program, there are two important warning signs that it may not live up to its potential to make significant changes. The first problem is that local and state governments must increase their spending to receive federal funds. These funds are targeted to reform “consistently underperforming schools.” The catch is that states determine what constitutes a “consistently underperforming school.” The evidence to date is that many states have set the bar very low in defining a “consistently underperforming school” in order to identify as few schools as possible. The reason is obvious. These states want to keep their funding requirements to a minimum.

The second problem is Trump. His budget for the Department of Education proposes dramatic reductions. While Congress may restore some of that money, his initial proposal demonstrates quite clearly that funding poverty schools is not a high priority.

One cannot escape the conclusion that public schools for low income children are a disgrace in this country. They are significantly underfunded. While improving academic performance in low income schools is a complex problem involving a wide range of factors, studies consistently show that increased funding makes a significant difference.

There is a related problem that needs to be addressed. The Digital Revolution is sweeping away the old industrial economy producing economic transformation and social stress. The dramatic gains in computing power, communications, and transportation are creating large disruption from job loss along with significant gains in the standard of living. Economists predict that in the next twenty years drones, robots, driverless cars, artificial intelligence, and 3-D manufacturing will replace 47% of jobs within the economy.

We are not just talking about manufacturing jobs. Uber and taxi drivers along with truckers will soon be a thing of the past. IBM’s Watson will replace many primary care doctors, pediatricians, and OBGYNs. Accountants, many lawyers, and middle managers will soon discover they are no longer needed.

The good news is that this revolution will produce dramatic increases in the standard of living which will create plenty of new tax dollars. To minimize the social disruption created by these changes we will need to make massive investments in public education, continuing education, higher education, and job training.

An important question for Christians to consider is why they should be involved in these matters. Go and visit a poverty school in a low income urban district. As you enter the building, note the broken windows, the cracks in the wall on the way to the principal’s office, the chipped paint. As you enter a third grade classroom in a trailer with no air conditioning, thirty-five students in the class, one white student of Russian descent, and learn that the teacher is the fourth full-time substitute in the last six months, pay attention to the messages bubbling through your head. Every fiber of your body will be sensing that this is not fair. When a little black girl with two missing front teeth smiles at you and says in a soft voice, “welcome to our class,” your heart will swell with compassion. These messages are God speaking. (See Rick Herrick, “Joining With God to Create a Better World”). God is asking that you join her in helping to improve these precious lives.

With regard to the consequences of job destruction, take an imaginary journey to a small mountain town in West Virginia where residents have been negatively impacted by the collapse of the coal industry. You will find massive unemployment, desperate looks on faces, and many deaths due to the opioid crisis. Again, open your heart to these people and notice what happens. Your heart will fill with compassion, a request from God to work to find solutions for these people so that they can rebuild their lives.

To generate the funds to establish the Education State will require a dedicated movement to cajole politicians at the local, state, and national levels to come up with the necessary funding. My heart tells me that God is asking me to participate in this effort. It is my hope that Christian churches will come to provide leadership on this issue.

Author’s note: In preparing this essay, I consulted the following sources: 50 Myths and Lies that Threaten America’s Public Schools, by David C. Berliner and Gene V. Glass; Reaching and Teaching Students in Poverty, by Paul C. Gorski; The Shame of the Nation, by Jonathan Kozol; and several articles from the Education Trust.

Read Part 1 Here