I agree 100%, I stated above that I don't think anyone should be able to fault the teachers for not teaching if the kids won't show up. Thats why I think the "No child left behind" thing is, well... silly.
Not to stray too far off topic - but actually, I disagree. The concept behind the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (also known as No Child Left Behind) is sound - that all students should achieve as much as possible. It's the method used to determine who has achieved what (annual high stakes testing), and the assumptions that all students are capable of the same level of achievement, regardless of outside influences (or lack thereof) that makes the law such a problem. Absences from school are one of those influences, along with socioeconomic status (which tends to be correlated with both attendance and achievement), culture, aptitude, ability (as measured both by cognitive [IQ] tests and achievement tests), language, and many other factors affect a student's achievement on a given day regardless of the quality of the instruction.
So while I understand the motivation behind this - to increase both attendance and income - I still have to disagree. If the parents are teaching the kids, by their actions, that missing school is okay, there's only so much the school can do - and I don't think fining the parents is really the solution. Funding in Colorado is based on attendance, yes, but it's based on the average attendance at each school during the last 2 weeks of October - not a daily count.
It seems to me that, rather than a stop-gap measure (and fining the parents is, IMHO, a stop-gap at best, especially with a "requested" rather than mandatory fine), they need to band together and convince the legislature that created this law to change it. There are all sorts of reasons kids stay home, some the parents' fault, and some not - where do you draw the line? It can't be a number of consecutive days, because what if the child is seriously ill or injured? And you can't really mandate a doctor's note in all cases, because a child may be sick enough to stay home and still not need a doctor - especially in middle and high school. And then, the way the article is written, there's no fine if the parent tells the school the child is sick - so that just means parents are more likely to lie, and not get their kids' work ahead of time. As much as I would encourage school attendance, I have a problem with the whole concept, the way it is set up here.