Utterly Meaningless » Blog Archive » NOT QUITE AS BAD AS HSLDA

    Filed at 6:33 pm under by dcobranchi

    I just have never seen eye-to-eye with NHELD. Their legislative bulletins almost always are alarmist. The latest is a fine example.

    6 Responses to “NOT QUITE AS BAD AS HSLDA”

    Comment by
    October 19th, 2006
    at 1:28 pm

    From Judy’s article:

    “…a constitutional amendment delegating the power of education to the federal government would eviscerate the tenth amendment protection under state law that parents and state legislatures currently enjoy. They could no longer say “no” to the federal government.”

    From our HEM archives:



    “First, homeschoolers may be swept along with the rest of the population into a net of government control of education in general. The power structure in our society is giving too much support to new programs like Goals 2000 and outcome-based education (OBE) for us to be able to stop them on the federal level. Such programs are basically an indication that the U.S. system of conventional education is in decline. They are an attempt to salvage a failing system by directing and forcing it from the top.

    “However, the federal government does not have the authority to control education directly. It is limited to influencing education indirectly by appropriating money largely for grants to be given to schools on the condition that they comply with requirements in federal laws and regulations. Therefore, federal programs cannot be effective unless states and local school districts decide to initiate them and unless people are willing to participate in them. People who object to federal programs can effectively resist them on the state and local level by trying to block the adoption of programs to which they are opposed and by refusing to participate in objectionable programs which are adopted.”

    You can read more here:
    HR6 and the Federalization of Homeschooling
    Larry and Susan Kaseman

    So this stuff about the federalization of education doesn’t concern you, Daryl?


    Comment by
    Nance Confer
    October 19th, 2006
    at 4:51 pm

    This, the summary of what the resolution means per Mary Nix’s post: “Did you know that among the many things Congress is considering, it is considering changing the United States Constitution so that the federal government will constitutionally have the power to regulate education and compel an “equal” public education for all persons?” is different from this, what the resolution summary actually says: “Constitutional Amendment – Provides that all persons shall enjoy the right to a public education of equal high quality.”

    Having the right to something is not the same as being compelled to access it.

    And since this has been sitting in committee since March of 2005, even if Daryl is worried about this, I’m not.

    OTOH, if my children were in a public school, I might like the idea of them being in a decent school. . .


    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    October 19th, 2006
    at 5:02 pm

    Forget teacher union muscle and skittish homeschool tunnel vision, anybody just wanna to have some fun with the absurdly oxymoronic “equal high”?? 😉

    Comment by
    Daryl Cobranchi
    October 19th, 2006
    at 5:06 pm

    I am decidely NOT concerned about this proposed amendment, as I thought I made pretty clear. If there were a snowball’s chance that it might even garner a majority in Congress, I might pay attention.

    Each year 50-100 amendments are proposed. How many of them actually get sent to the states?

    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    October 19th, 2006
    at 5:18 pm

    Thanks for that link – I used it to check the successful amendments in my lifetime:
    “. . .you simply need to look at the document itself. The last concerned congressional pay. The next concerns voting age. Before that, clarification of the line of succession to the presidency. Before that, a bar to poll taxes. And the last since 1960, Washington D.C. residents were granted suffrage.”

    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    October 19th, 2006
    at 5:29 pm

    It was my first year lobbying for public schools when the states were embroiled in the Equal Right Amendment (ERA) ratification process, back in 1982. Florida was pivotal as the deadline neared and it blotted out EVERYTHING else in Florida’s capital that year, including education of course. Quite a political baptism by fire for me.

    (Do I need to tell any young whippersnappers reading what finally happened to the ERA? Or they can just check the link.)

    Q48. “Can you tell me why the ERA was not ratified?”

    A. The ERA was not ratified because not enough states approved it before the deadline set in the legislation, nor in the extension given it by subsequent legislation.

    As for the reasons it did not pass in certain state legislatures, you’ll have to refer to the archives in the various states to find out the arguments for and against. The general argument against it, however, was that the ERA would burden government and business too heavily; that men and women are inherently different, and those differences should be celebrated and not suppressed; and that it simply was not needed.