Authored by Larry Sand via American Greatness,

Students attending American public schools are struggling. Test scores from the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), released this year, indicate that 33% of 8th graders—a greater percentage than ever before—are reading at the “below basic” level.

Additionally, only 22% of high school seniors are proficient or above in math, down from 24% in 2019, and only 35% are proficient in reading—the lowest score since NAEP began in 1969—down from 37% in 2019. Also, a record-high percentage scored at “below basic” levels in both math and reading compared to all previous assessments.

Parents across the country, especially in big cities, have become aware of the problem and are removing their children.

In Chicago, public school enrollment has decreased significantly over the past 15 years, from nearly 403,000 students in 2010-11 to just over 316,000 in 2025-26, according to the Illinois Policy Institute. Most recently, the district reported a decline of 9,081 students between 2024-25 and 2025-26. IPI states that more than one in three desks in the district are empty.

For the 2025–26 school year, the New York City Department of Education discloses that 793,300 students are enrolled in K-12 grades. That’s a 2.3% decrease from the previous year and a nearly 10% drop since 2020. The data also show that 112 of the city’s public schools have fewer than 150 students, up from 80 schools just two years ago.

Twenty years ago, the Los Angeles Unified School District had 737,000 students, but that number has now fallen to approximately 408,000, reflecting a decline of over 40%.

Among students who haven’t withdrawn, many are chronically absent. Using data from 44 states and Washington, DC, Nat Malkus, the director of education policy at the American Enterprise Institute, writes that the alarming rate of chronic absenteeism—students missing more than 10% of school days annually—was 23.5% in 2024.

This problem, too, is especially serious in our large urban areas. In Los Angeles, over 32% of students were chronically absent in the 2023-2024 school year, 34 elementary schools have fewer than 200 students, and 29 use less than half of the building. Even worse, Chicago’s chronic absentee rate is 41%.

As government-run schools are shrinking, private schools are expanding substantially.

Participation in private school choice—when students use public funds for private school tuition—has risen 25%, from just over one million students in 2024 to 1.3 million this year, according to a new analysis by EdChoice, a school choice advocacy group.

This has been the largest year-to-year increase since EdChoice started tracking the data in 2000, said Robert Enlow, president and CEO of EdChoice. He noted that it took about 24 years for private school choice participation to reach one million students, and this year it hit 1.3 million.

Florida educates over 500,000 students through its universal voucher and scholarship programs. Utah’s Fits All Scholarship launched in 2024 with about 10,000 seats and was immediately oversubscribed. Iowa’s Students First Educational Savings Account program enrolled nearly 28,000 students in its second year, surpassing projections.

Additionally, many parents have chosen to homeschool. In fact, homeschooling has reached an all-time high.

Angela Watson of the Johns Hopkins University School of Education’s Homeschool Hub wrote earlier this month, “In the 2024-2025 school year, homeschooling continued to grow across the United States, increasing at an average rate of 5.4%. This is nearly three times the pre-pandemic homeschooling growth rate of around 2%. Notably, 36% of reporting states recorded their highest homeschool enrollment numbers ever—exceeding even the peaks reached during the pandemic.”

It’s not just parents who are dissatisfied with public schools; only 26% of teachers believe K-12 education is heading in the right direction nationwide, a 5-point drop from the spring, when 31% felt optimistic.

Of course, the public school monopolists, especially the teachers’ unions, are upset about the advancement of school choice, but their reasons are baseless. One argument they use is that choice increases segregation. American Federation of Teachers’ president Randi Weingarten nonsensically claims school choice was designed to keep schools segregated.

Wrong.

Researcher Greg Forster states that ten empirical studies have examined private school choice programs and their effect on segregation. Nine of these studies found that the programs reduced segregation, while one found no noticeable impact. None of the studies indicated that choice encourages racial discrimination.

No matter. The teachers’ unions, realizing they are losing in the court of public opinion, have resorted to litigation in various state courts. Wyoming, Missouri, Utah, South Carolina, and Montana have faced legal action from the unions, which are desperately afraid that parental choice will severely impact their bottom line.

So far, the unions’ efforts have been successful in two states.

In Wyoming, lawmakers launched the state’s first K-12 education savings account (ESA) program last year, beginning with the 2025-2026 school year. The $7,000 accounts can be used for private school tuition, tutors, homeschooling, or other education-related expenses. Nearly 4,000 students applied for them this fall.

However, the Wyoming Education Association, representing about 6,000 public school teachers, opposes using taxpayer dollars for a private option. In a lawsuit filed in June, the union and nine parents sued the state, arguing that the Steamboat Legacy Scholarship Act is unconstitutional because it violates a state regulation requiring a “complete and uniform system of public instruction.” The union was successful when a District Court judge issued a preliminary injunction against the voucher program in July.

In Utah, the state affiliate of the National Education Association successfully sued the state last year, arguing that the Utah Fits All Scholarship Program violates the state constitution by diverting tax revenue to private schools that aren’t free, accessible to all students, and supervised by the state board of education. The Utah Supreme Court is scheduled to review an appeal later this year.

In summary, we are engaged in a turf war. Parents, whose primary concern is their children’s education, are battling the establishment, particularly the teachers’ unions, whose aim is to protect their profits and maintain their toxic influence over K-12 education.

Axios reported some new details this week related to the recent meeting between US President Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the White House.

There were more tensions in the private dialogue between the two leaders than previously known, and some significant disagreements centered on policy toward Israel.

While the two leaders exchanged compliments in front of the cameras, aspects of the private discussion were strained, Axios noted. Officials described Trump as being frustrated by the resistance he encountered from the crown prince on joining the Abraham Accords.

Bin Salman presented his stance that a firm commitment toward a two-state solution involving the Palestinians must be made for Saudi Arabia to join the accords.

Behind closed doors the crown prince reportedly pushed back when Trump pressed him to formally join the Abraham Accords which establishes normalization with Israel.

via Al Jazeera

MbS reportedly argued that he has to represent his people at a moment Saudi public sentiment has turned sharply against Israel in the aftermath the Gaza war.

But Trump had “pressed hard” on the issue in the November 18 meeting, Axios underscored. One unnamed admin official explained in the meeting’s aftermath, “The best way to say it is disappointment and irritation. The president really wants them to join the Abraham Accord. He tried very hard to talk him. It was an honest discussion. But MBS is a strong man. He stood his ground.”

The Saudis are insisting that Israel must agree to “an irreversible, credible and time-bound path” for a Palestinian state, but the Netanyahu government has firmly rejected this possibility, especially in the wake of the Oct.7, 2023 terror attack.

Another US official said, “MBS never said no to normalization. The door is open for doing it later. But the two-state solution is an issue.”

In relation to the Hamas Oct.7 attack, there’s long been speculation that the terror raids on southern Israel were launched precisely because the militant group was worried that as more and more regional countries join the Abraham Accords, the question of Palestinian statehood would be permanently abandoned.

According to this theory, the brazen and history-altering attack was meant once again to sow deep division among the ‘Arab world’ and Israel. To some degree, this may have succeeded as a broader geopolitical goal, given the Abraham Accords have indeed been stalled. But it also backfired, given Iran and Hezbollah are more weakened than ever, and the Syrian government was overthrown a year ago. These were all key, well-armed and historic resisters of Israeli expansion and Zionist hegemony. 

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

They were the hardest years of our lives, marked by the dissolution of rights, liberties, and hope. Sadness swept the land, as forced physical isolation and shattered civic life mutated toward mandates to wear masks and eventually to accept a new injection product.

The liturgy of life fundamentally disrupted, we lost track of the passage of time and saw our social and community networks decimated. Government spending and money printing exploded as never before. For many the whole period feels like a blur, one that resulted in a dramatic devaluation in the value of income and savings.

I speak of course of the COVID years, 2020–2023. Agencies at all levels cancelled religious holidays, closed small businesses and schools, imposed limits on house parties, and overturned traditional election protocols. It went on for three years. It was in the name of health but health collapsed during this period. It all feels like madness in retrospect.

People these days barely want to speak about the subject, because it is still somewhat divisive but mainly because it is deeply painful. It was this way following the Great War, a trauma on a similar scale. Most people just wanted it to go away, and to put it all in the rearview mirror.

That said, when people do open up about what happened, they share shocking stories of personal tragedy and loss. Only this past week, a man told me about his dream business he had started 10 years ago and then built into a growing wholesale machine with 200-plus employees and bright prospects ahead. With the lockdowns, all orders for his project stopped. The company collapsed in two weeks. All employees lost their jobs and he and his wife lost their dreams. They divorced soon after.

Today his idea and a version of his project is in most major stories, as manufactured by huge corporate enterprises. He changed professions and is still digging out from a financial hole.

It’s just one story but something replicated in some form millions of times over. Kids who experienced this will never forget it, and parents have few choices but to describe the whole thing as a time when adults lost their minds.

Remember that all of this happened not just in the United States but in 194 countries around the world. The policies were strikingly similar everywhere. It was a time in which human interaction was described as disease spreading and therefore to be avoided in the interest of “slowing the spread.”

Only a few nations resisted: Sweden, Tanzania, Nicaragua, and Belarus. Sweden in particular experienced far better outcomes even from the targeted pathogen, the best in Europe. The population in general avoided trauma.

After all this time, one might suppose that the world would be awash in apologies along with pledges never to do anything like this again. One possible path to making this happen might be a COVID Commission. The United States has never formed one. Early on, there was talk about such a thing but it never came to fruition. Even now, there are no plans for such a thing.

This is for a reason. An honest report, one informed and written by independent researchers, would implicate both political parties, most universities, many government agencies, the Big Tech and pharmaceutical sectors, churches and schools that went along, in addition to a massive swath of incumbent elites in foundations.

Sadly, that is just not going to happen. I wish it were otherwise. Any official commission report written as a coverup would be dead on arrival. Not even the establishment is that dumb.

I would like to live in a society in which mistakes are admitted, brutality is repudiated, institutions adapt in light of failure, and leadership is mature enough to seek forgiveness for wrongdoing. We hope for a narrative of history that is self-correcting in real time: error followed by pledges to improve and sin by repentance and propitiation.

Sadly none of that is to be.

Somehow it came to be that the United Kingdom did put together an official commission.

It has spent upwards of 500 million pounds and taken years in testimony. The second part of the report just appeared. It features a helpful summary of its conclusions for those who do not want to slog through the entire thing. It is one that could have been predicted from the start. It comes down to four words:

“Too little, too late.”

Translation: The commission has decided that the UK waited too long to issue stay-at-home orders and shut businesses, churches, and schools. If it had acted in February rather than March 2020 and with greater ferocity, they have declared, somehow the outcomes would have been better. In short, there is no regret at all except for one point: it should have been more and sooner.

They know this because computer models tell them so.

Sure, the report admits, there were all sorts of mistakes in coordination, communication, and costing. This is bureaucratic speak for: we need more money next time. The report takes no issue with the disease modeling that gave rise to the lockdowns in the first place. The ineffective shot is not addressed in this particular report but we can anticipate what later reports will say: its only failure traces to slow uptake and vaccine resistance.

The huge lesson: “Governments must act swiftly and decisively to stand any chance of stopping the spread of a virus.”

In other words, they are going to do it again, more quickly and harder.

There is a feature of this report that simply breaks my heart. This is because I seriously doubt that anyone really believes in the truth of it. The claim is utterly unsustainable in light of any and all evidence. The Swedish experience is not discussed in any depth. It cannot because the Swedish experience disproves everything in this report.

I’ve been writing about this topic for five going on six years. My first piece was from January 2020, and it warned that if governments try to take on the microbial kingdom it will lose and utterly discredit themselves. I said this before we even knew of the thousand-fold differential in medically significant impact between the young and elderly and infirm. Even if the virus had been more serious, the result would have been the same.

Another reason that this report is demoralizing: tens and hundreds of thousands of actual experts the world over have debunked the pandemic response in countless numbers of papers, articles, and books. Have these protests made no difference at all? Are officials at all levels going to pretend forever as if these do not exist?

I don’t know the answer but this much I know: We cannot look to official statements of these sorts to codify truth. Instead, we can only count on them to be self-serving, a means of protecting the reputations and jobs of the very people who made such dreadful errors.

Just as no one should look to government to stop a fast-spreading and fast-mutating respiratory virus, we should not be looking to government commissions to admit error and pledge to do better next time. Just as the pandemic response discredited so many institutions, kicking off a new age of widespread distrust of everything and everyone, so too will more such reports entrench our culture of incredulity.

Given these conditions, the United States is better off with no commission at all. That said, it would be good for at least one legislative body to speak clearly and plainly about all that went wrong. My choice would be the U.S. Senate.

Maybe there is some chance of that with enough push from the grassroots. So long as there are no admissions of wrongdoing, there will be no healing from the anger and distrust that characterizes our times. This problem is not going away. As time has rolled on, the reality of what happened is ever more present in our lives.