I agree, but we are not discussing the running of public education by
federal officers or the funding of same. The Federal government may
indeed be reimbursing states in some amount, but it is the states that
do the taxation and the dispensing of public funds to pay for public
services, including education.
The federal government should make certain Constitutional rights
are upheld inside those public establishments [as well as all others]
and I sincerely doubt Mr. Madison was considering otherwise when
he made those comments.
There is a vast difference between demanding that federal [Constitutional]
guidelines are followed and the actual operation of services. Ie: Any
state may offer a public service of any nature, provided by tariffs, fees,
taxation or contribution, but those services cannot be denied to any
specific group prejudicially, or granted to any group prejudicially. To
do so would be unconstitutional and reason for federal intervention.
I am against this new federal marshal plan regarding airport/airline
security, as well as federal subsidy to airlines for their decline in business.
But I am not against any federal guidelines regarding the type and
quality of security needed to keep our skies safe and our terrestrial
citizenry safe from falling aircraft.
I believe anything that crosses a state line falls to federal jurisdiction,
as well as anything that arrives from or departs for, foreign soil. That
does not mean the federal government should run the business, but only
set the guidelines. Would Madison argue otherwise?
I agree, but we are not discussing the running of public education by federal officers or the funding of same. The Federal government may indeed be reimbursing states in some amount, but it is the states that do the taxation and the dispensing of public funds to pay for public services, including education.
I don't see the difference in the federal government "reimbursing states in some amount" for education and the federal government "funding" education. The funding of things is a power of Congress, and the funding of education is not a power enumerated in Article 1, Section 8. You also seem to think that if federal officers aren't "running education", and that if the federal involvement in education is only a matter of money, then it has not breached its prescribed limits. But again, look at what Madison said:
If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.
There is a consistent theme in Mr. Madison's statements. It is that our government must operate within defined limits. The power of the federal government to fund state education (and other public establishments of the states) lies outside of those limits.