The Absence of Ethics in No Child Left Behind

Introduction When a government passes legislation is ethically responsible to legislate a law that is for the good of the whole, or will protect a selected class that has historically been discriminated against. Dennis Thompson writing in The Ethics Edge (1998) contends that government ethics provides the precondition for the making of good public policy it is more important than any single policy because all other policies are dependent on it. (page 48) Good public policy framed around sound ethical tenets will build confidence in government. It will allow citizens to view decision (laws) that the government makes to be in the best interest of all citizens. Consequently, ethics does not become an issue. Moreover, citizens are most likely not going to challenge the motives of government officials. Lon Fuller (1964) identifies eight routes of failure to any legal system and is a way to test the premises as outlined by Thompson. These eight routes will lead to the question of the morality of a law and consequently the ethics of a law. These eight routes are; 1) The lack of rules or law which lead to ad-hoc and inconsistent adjudication, 2) failure to publicize or make known the rules of law, 3) unclear or obscure legislation that is impossible to understand, 4) failure to make rules understandable, 5) enactment of contradictory rules, 6) demands that are beyond the power of the subjects and the ruled, 7) unstable legislation (constant revision of the law or re-interpretation of the law, and 8) divergence between adjudication/administration and legislation. Ethical decision of government officials is also tested by the presumption that laws passed and imposed will create a better society. There will be no harm caused to individuals or groups. Foundations that laws should be grounded on include (a) serve a justice to correct a wrong, (b) remove barriers to the advancement of citizens, and (c) maintain individual freedoms. If the government enacts laws that are founded on one or more of the above three conditions they are often not challenged and citizens will come to believe the government acted in an ethical way. For example, laws passed to protect individuals against arbitrary discrimination and protection of personal rights is passed for the good of the whole. If people understand the ethical foundations of a law there is also the likelihood that the laws will be accepted with limited challenges. Another premise of an ethical law is a sense of social justice. If for example, citizens see the law as addressing justice, or social justice, the law is also accepted with limited challenge. Social justice has been treated in much of the historical studies of ethical theorists. Immual Kant and John Rawls and others have propositioned the sense of justice and how is applied to the acts of government. Kant's categorical imperative requires people to act toward all mankind as if they are an end and not just a means. We need to act as a society and as individuals to treat humanity never as a means only. This is applied to ourselves and any other persons. Kant's premise of his categorical imperative is that we must seek an end that is void of any desires. He does not see any rational being as existing to be arbitrarily used by this will or that will. This is social justice and constitutes ethical behavior. Rawls postulate is that each person should operate under a of That is, where each person and perhaps each institution should operate as free and rational with all factors of inequality eliminated in their thinking. This is, according to Rawls, social justice. It can be concluded that laws may also be subject to Rawl's veil of ignorance. Laws need to be void of all inequity in order to achieve social justice. Laws must be positioned so that all people are treated equally. In order to achieve the premise of social justice laws need to originate a covenant with the people. …