Fist, just because something is not EXPLICITLY enumerated in the constitution does not make that thing unconstitutional.
As for you assumption that kids were MUCH better educated before the Feds got involved with education, I will have to flash back to the 1860"s. Why? This marks the beginning of the Civil War, and the reconstruction that was to follow. During this time the Federal government built schools in the south. Albeit segregated schools. So, one one hand [before the war] you had the states running education and there was none. On the other hand [after the war] you have the Feds building schools. Now I ask you, were the "kids" better off with or without Federal involvement in education?
BTW, just for the record, I favor charter schools and vouchers. I am no fan of our public education system.
You have never read the Bill of Rights or the Federalist Papers, have you?
Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the court: "To uphold the Government's contentions here, we would have to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional authority under the Commerce Clause to a general police power of the sort retained by the States. Admittedly, some of our prior cases have taken long steps down that road, giving great deference to congressional action. The broad language in these opinions has suggested the possibility of additional expansion, but we decline here to proceed any further. To do so would require us to conclude that the Constitution's enumeration of powers does not presuppose something not enumerated, and that there never will be a distinction between what is truly national and what is truly local. This we are unwilling to do."