No Child Left Behind and Proposal A are the twin financial cornerstones of Michigan education. But these two pieces of legislation seem to be strangling, instead of advancing, education in this state.

Proposal A was passed by Michigan voters in 1994. At the time, Michigan property taxes were about 35 percent higher than the national average and school districts depended heavily on those taxes. Midland and other districts that were rich in property received more money than districts with less property.

Many districts didn't have enough to operate on. Kalkaska Public Schools ended up closing due to lack of money; its students were forced to find other schools to attend.

Proposal A was presented as a way to equalize funding in all schools. The state established a per pupil foundation allowance for each district based in part on - you guessed it - the district's past property taxes.

Midland and other property-rich districts received a higher per-pupil allowance. The per-pupil allowance was not increased for several years, and now an estimated $224 per pupil could be taken away because of state budget problems. Meanwhile, the gap is so wide one district can be getting about $12,000 per pupil and another district getting $8,000 per pupil.

And Proposal A has one fatal flaw - districts are not allowed to go to the taxpayers for more money, i.e. an educational millage. A district still can seek a millage for building improvements, so the schools can have great facilities but not enough teachers to teach.

Midland Public Schools is actually a good example of this. Its sinking fund has paid for numerous facility updates, including a fitness and weight training area and music classroom addition at H.H. Dow High School. But the district needs to reduce next year's spending by about $5 million, and could outsource custodial and food services and make other cuts.

Next came NCLB. President George W. Bush signed this into law Jan. 8, 2002. This was supposed to bring stronger accountability, more flexibility and local control, more options for parents and an emphasis on proven teaching methods.

As the Daily News education reporter, I don't see this happening.

Instead, I've seen children only going out to play so their social, tactile, fill-in-the-blank, skills can be monitored and tested. I've heard about one child who got so upset about one test she had to drink chamomile tea the night before. I've been in schools that had chemistry books from 1998 and computers from the mid-1980s. I've talked to teachers who work far into the night because they spend many days trying to teach their students and prepare them for one of many tests that measure their progress against NCLB.

Finally, the Coleman Community Schools superintendent recently retired because of the state's ongoing money problems and the impact on his district. There is little taxable property in that area and the district is considering a number of cuts, including closing auto shop, cutting athletics and freezing wages for all staff.

Are these the twin legacies of NCLB and Proposal A? Ancient books and stressed-out children? Overworked teachers and no room for spontaneity?

This is government intrusion at its worst and it should be left behind.