No Child Left Behind question

There is a story in the paper today about how many of the local (Atlanta) schools aren't meeting the requirements of the No Child Left Behind law. Here's a link:

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/0803/15nochild.html

In the course of the article (which I think is poorly written), it seems to say that schools that do not meet the standard AND receive Title 1 money, have to offer students transfers, whereas schools that do not meet the standard but do NOT receive Title 1 money do not have to offer transfers.

Title 1 money is basically subsidized lunches.

So if I am reading this right, schools in poor neighborhoods have extra consequences (and therefore extra costs) compared to schools in wealthier neighborhoods. Can this be right? What on God's green earth can be the justification for this?

We need someone like Dean who strongly spoken against No Child Left Behind. A newspaper writer for the Burlington Free Press said that Howard Dean is someone who is strongly against Unfunded Mandates and he showed that since his early years as Lietuniet Governor.

It rewards schools for pushing less intelligent kids out of school by forcing them to drop out. By doing this, their average test scores go up....

:grr: