“Huckabee the Friend of Homeschoolers? “
November 1st, 2007
SK Johnson
As I have said before, as a Homeshooler I don’t believe I can support Mike Huckabee. He did some good things for homeschooling but he also helped build up the public education bureaucracy and pandered to the NEA while Governor of Arkansas. Now that he is out of office, the bureaucracy and NEA-pro educational system is backtracking everything he “did” for homeschooling.
But, what exactly is wrong with the NEA?
Read the following from http://www.heir.org/oldsite/oppwho.htm:
—-
Homeschooling in Georgia has come under concerted attack by those who would reduce the access to homeschooling and control both the content and method of home study instruction. Who are the opponents to homeschooling, and what do they want to accomplish?
The most obvious attack on homeschooling in Georgia at this time is HB586, introduced in the 1997 session of the General Assembly by Rep. Carolyn Hugley (D-133). HB586 was drafted by representatives of SSWAG (School Social Workers Association of Georgia) and GAE (Georgia Association of Educators–a teachers’ union), the local arm of the NEA (National Education Association). What do these organizations have to say about homeschooling?
NEA has a “continuing resolution” on homeschooling that includes the following statements (from the NEA accounts of the national meeting in Atlanta):
- “…home schooling programs cannot provide the student with a comprehensive education experience.”
- “…if parental preference home schooling study occurs, students enrolled must meet all state requirements. Instruction should be by persons who are licensed by the appropriate state education licensure agency, and a curriculum approved by the state department of education should be used.”
According to the NEA, homeschooling “can’t” work, and if it’s permitted, it should be a mirror image of the public schools.
GAE also has an “official” opinion of homeschooling, which includes the following:
“There is insufficient monitoring, both in guidelines/laws and actual practice, to preclude the possibility that children are being kept out of public/private schools for reasons other than differences in educational philosophy, e.g., baby-sitting, parent-sitting, legalized truancy, work, etc.”
“[T]he Association insists that the Georgia Department of Education and the Georgia Legislature strive to provide sufficient funding and support to bring about changes in the home school monitoring procedures that will make home schools valid by state education standards.”
——-
Also see this resolution from the NEA earlier this year:
“B-75. Home Schooling
The National Education Association believes that home schooling programs based on parental choice
cannot provide the student with a comprehensive education experience. When home schooling occurs,
students enrolled must meet all state curricular requirements, including the taking and passing of
assessments to ensure adequate academic progress. Home schooling should be limited to the children of
the immediate family, with all expenses being borne by the parents/guardians. Instruction should be by
persons who are licensed by the appropriate state education licensure agency, and a curriculum approved
by the state department of education should be used.
The Association also believes that home-schooled students should not participate in any
extracurricular activities in the public schools.
The Association further believes that local public school systems should have the authority to
determine grade placement and/or credits earned toward graduation for students entering or re-entering
the public school setting from a home school setting. (1988, 2006)”
And so now, the NEA which is a powerful force in public education has said that Homeschoolers can not engage in any public school activities, but the public schools can decide what the homeschoolers study (they must approve the curriculum), and determines credit and grade placement. This is the organization Huckabee is friends with and he has only hurt homeschooling by helping grow the public educational system, giving them more power to enact those tenets against homeschoolers.
So what did Governor Huckabee have to say to the NEA? Here’s a part of his speech:
<if this article is posted elsewhere, simply insert this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hO4_5XOSzKk .
<embed><object width=”425″ height=”366″><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.youtube.com/v/hO4_5XOSzKk&rel=1&border=0″></param><param name=”wmode”value=”transparent”></param><embed src=”http://www.youtube.com/v/hO4_5XOSzKk&rel=1&border=0″ type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” wmode=”transparent” width=”425″ height=”366″></embed></object>
I have talked to other homeschoolers about Huckabee’s support of a huge educational system, but have always been met by the response that he “had to do it” because of the Arkansas Supreme Court. I am not totally convinced this was the case but let us assume for a moment that it was. Huckabee is here speaking before the NEA proud of what he did, as if it were his policy and his idea. He is either telling the truth that his focus on enlarging the public education system is sincere, or he is pandering. I don’t like either scenario.
A Ron Paul supporter noted this detail about Huckabee’s website and although minute and quite possibly insignificant, it could also be very telling:
“When Mike Huckabee launched an exploratory committee, I visited his website and had a look at his education platform
. Here is the very first item that appeared (notice the tense of the verb) on a pithy enumerated list when I made my visit many months ago:
I believe that every child in America has the right to a quality public education that teaches the fundamental skills needed to compete in a global economy.
As soon as I read this, I forthwith became skeptical about his entire education platform. To the Huckster’s credit, he does mention homeschooling but I was nevertheless mystified concerning the way in which the he might reconcile his position on homeschooling with a seemingly obvious declaration or allusion to a universal right to public education (for those who do not see why there is room for concern, I am currently blogging on this issue at my personal blog). My skepticism has since then multiplied when I recently took a proverbial stroll back to the holy one’s campaign site to find the following, in place of what was written previously:
I believe that every child should have the opportunity for a quality education that teaches the fundamental skills needed to compete in a global economy.
Why, one might reasonably inquire, did he mollify his original statement
by changing his use of language? Some folks might believe that this is just an honest revision and perhaps it really is. But I am slightly more skeptical. Firstly, the remainder of the text in his platform appears to be relatively unaltered from the original. Secondly, he did not make the changes due to grammatical or otherwise syntactical ambiguities. He only changed and removed a few key words. If one considers the changes that were made, it seems reasonable for one to deduce that he is trying to keep himself from sounding too much like a socialist or a Democrat.” (http://www.secessionist.us/blog/2007/10/huckster-and-education.html)
I find this at the very least somewhat suspicious and at the very most very very dangerous and a huge warning to us homeschoolers. Please note that this, if I have my dates correct, occurred before and after the HSLDA’s endorsement.
Consider for a moment Duncan Hunter who is rated only 17% by the NEA, has ALWAYS voted for school choice (while Huckabee avoided the issue and supported enlarging the public schools), and is a strong supporter of homeschooling. The ‘choice’ is yours, though I think Huckabee would rather you didn’t have one. At least that’s what the NEA told him to think.
“While many elected officials pontificate proudly about their deep interest in and commitment to public education, so many put their own children in private schools. If the public schools are so deserving of their (and our) support, why aren’t they deserving of the ultimate support–having confidence enough in them for their own children to be educated there?My three children were the first children of any Arkansas governor in at least 50 years who spent their first through senior high education entirely in the public schools of Arkansas.” – Mike Huckabee
“Our basic constitutional responsibility is to provide for free, equitable and adequate public education for students through the 12th grade. I would recommend that we set for ourselves the task of raising teacher salaries in this state by $3,000, recognizing that’s not enough and it’s not the finish line but it’s a good starting point. If we don’t raise those salaries at least by that kind of money, we are going to be further and further behind. ” -Mike Huckabee
When will the HSLDA take back their endorsement of Governor Huckabee? I’m waiting.
[...] Mike Huckabee the Friend of Homeschoolers? [...]
By: Brilliant Blogs To Boggle Your Mind | Homeschool Reporter on November 2, 2007
at 5:25 am
[...] read more here [...]
By: eskzee » Blog Archive » Mike Huckabee the Friend of Homeschoolers? on November 2, 2007
at 9:21 am
I’ll say up front that I am likely to support Mike Huckabee for President, but I assume that you’re ONLY disparaging Huckabee in relation to Hunter. I would be really impressed to learn that Hunter wasn’t at least as non-confrontational with the NEA, but I would fall off my chair to learn that ANY of the other candidates weren’t equally as flowery in speaking to education issues and the NEA in particular.
And this quote–The ‘choice’ is yours, though I think Huckabee would rather you didn’t have one. At least that’s what the NEA told him to think.–seems over the top, don’t you think?
Perhaps it is inevitable, perhaps it is due to the greatly accelerated campaign schedule, but we Conservatives need to resist the temptation to eviscerate other candidates, especially ones with whom we have so much in common. Wouldn’t you agree?
By: nedwilliams on November 2, 2007
at 2:39 pm
[...] thelastinkling created an interesting post today on Mike Huckabee the Friend of Homeschoolers?Here’s a short outline [...]
By: Repulicans Presidential Election 2008 » Mike Huckabee the Friend of Homeschoolers? on November 5, 2007
at 9:14 pm
You said:
“I have talked to other homeschoolers about Huckabee’s support of a huge educational system, but have always been met by the response that he “had to do it” because of the Arkansas Supreme Court. I am not totally convinced this was the case but let us assume for a moment that it was. Huckabee is here speaking before the NEA proud of what he did, as if it were his policy and his idea. He is either telling the truth that his focus on enlarging the public education system is sincere, or he is pandering. I don’t like either scenario.”
How about a third scenario then. What if…he WAS required to do what he did by the Arkansas supreme Court (And he was…I’m an Arkansan whose school district was affected) and was able to to do it in a way that was SUCCESSFUL?!?!?
Ever think of that?
Just how many voices from Arkansas are you hearing who are conservatives that can’t stand Huckabee?
One…two….who are both activists for the Huckabee’s opp0onents?
C’mon! Wake-up!
Even extreme leftists realize that Huckabee is Reagan without an Astrologist and they are ALL laughing at you folks who don’t recognize it!
Huckabee will win back the Reagan Democrats. Blue-Dogs, though they don’t know it yet, will be pulling the lever for Huckabee next November.
I wager that you will too!
The best candidate we have had since Ronald Reagan is in this race for the nomination. Realize it and let’s get him nominated before we allow a Giuliani, Romney, Thompson, or….(drum-roll please)…Clinton to become POTUS!
Go donate to Huckabee’s campaign today!
By: Al-Ozarka on November 6, 2007
at 3:31 pm
I am a homeschooling mom and a Huckabee supporter. Personally, I was glad that Gov. Huckabee went to the NEA convention (the only Republican to do so). It is not unreasonable to believe that not all teachers in the public schools are liberals. It is also not unreasonable to recognize that for the vast majority of parents in the US, public school education is their only option. Gov. Huckabee believes in improving public education, but he also is unwavering in his position that parents have the right to decide how their child’s education is provided.
In a blogger conference call on August 3rd, 2007, I asked Governor Huckabee about homeschooling and about no child left behind:
Question from One Mom: I’d like to ask you a two part question about education. The first part is about Homeschooling. What would you do as president to guarantee a parent’s right to choose the form of education they deem best for their children? 2nd Part – what will you do with “no child left behind”?
MH: Don’t want to over-centralize education to the federal govt, this must remain in the hands of the states. It should however be the President’s job to be an advocate for a parent’s right to choose …. these are their children, not the government’s children. I would promote that by making it clear that every state needs to accommodate parent’s rights to choose which ever form of education the parent deems appropriate (homeschool, private/parochial school/charter/public).
MH: There are some misconceptions about No child left behind. It did not mandate what state’s had to do other than they had to set benchmarks and to make sure that no child was “lost” or deemed of no value in the system. The plus was that every child was deemed important as an individual. The downside was that schools were being judged in need of improvement because they had students with special needs and challenges. What I don’t want to see is that we go back to where we lose kids, but let’s make sure we don’t penalize a school, but give them the resources they need to be successful. (Arkansas see Smart Start program). There has also been an over-focus on testing and not on overall curriculum and performance.
On another note, I like Duncan Hunter, and with no disrespec to his current run for Presidentt, I truly hope to see him in a major role in Huckabee’s cabinet
By: onemom on November 7, 2007
at 6:59 am
This is an interesting post. I have been doing my own research, and would like to note that Huckabee made it harder to homeschool in Arkansas. This isn’t even disputed by HSLDA.
Here’s the link to the 1997 Court Report,
ARKANSAS
New Law Transforms One of the Worst States into One of the Best
http://www.hslda.org/courtreport/V13N3/V13N3AR.asp?PrinterFriendly=True
And the link to the 1999 report which said,
Arkansas
Home Schoolers Lose Ground
with New Law
http://www.hslda.org/courtreport/v15n3/V15N3AR.asp?PrinterFriendly=True
Huckabee made homeschooling worse in Arkansas in his first 2 years and then did nothing to change it in his remaining years.
This is important for homeschoolers to know so they can make an informed choice as well. Ignoring or excusing his record is a disservice to the homeschool community. He could have vetoed the 1999 bill but he didn’t. He could have let it pass without his signature, but he didn’t. He signed a law that made homeschooling more difficult.
Huckabee seems to want to blame the negative things in Arkansas, (Drummond, education policy, homeschool law, taxes) on the Democrats or the Supreme Court, yet take all the credit for the good. He was governor and he signed a bill that made it more difficult to homeschool. If he wants credit for the good things that he’s done in his state, then he must also take the blame for the bad.
I should also mention that the 1999 law that Huckabee signed imposed a 14-day waiting period on parents who want to withdraw their children from the pubic schools. Quoting from HSLDA’s own analysis,
“Arkansas is now one of only 12 states to impose a deadline for beginning home schooling or requiring parents to provide advance notice to public school officials of their decision to do so. Because of this restriction, parents who encounter intolerable conditions at the public school, such as imminent danger to the safety or welfare of their child, will have to wait at least 14 days before withdrawing the child to begin home schooling or else face truancy charges for unexcused absences during the 14-day waiting period. ”
Further Huckabee has publically endorsed federally mandated testing. A position opposed by HSLDA. So why is HSLDA supporting this man? I think homeschoolers should call them and find out.
By: Spunky on November 10, 2007
at 3:27 pm
Here is the link to the HSLDA article talking about why there should be no federal role for education…
http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000000/00000063.asp
“The federal role in education is a violation of the 10th amendment of the United States Constitution which states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government delegated the power to regulate or fund elementary or secondary education. ”
And here’s Huckabee’s quote where he states that he supports federal mandated standards…
“When asked by a student if he supports federally mandated testing, Huckabee invoked the Red Sox. He asked the students how many had watched the previous night’s game. Hands shot up. Then he asked if they would have minded if nobody kept score.
“You wouldn’t go to the football game or the basketball game or the baseball game and say, ‘Just turn the scoreboard off,’ ” Huckabee said. “And neither could we realistically say we’re really interested in improving the quality of education, but we’re not going to keep score. So do we need tests? Yes.”
http://concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071020/FRONTPAGE/710200315/1217/NEWS98
Federally mandated tests are a problem for homeschoolers. We may be exempt from taking the test, but we will not be exempt from the results of how those tests are used. The credentials that those tests provide will limit the opportunities form homeschoolers who do not take the test. For HSLDA to endorse a candidate who encourages incrementally increasing federal involvment in education does a disservice to homeschoolers and the freedoms all Americans enjoy.
By: Spunky on November 10, 2007
at 3:34 pm
Here is another quote from the HSDLA website,
“It is HSLDA’s firm belief that federal government spending on education is unconstitutional and must be eliminated. While we support the position that the federal government should not be involved in education at any level, we also support measures that incrementally reduce the control of the federal government over education.”
So why are they supporting a candidate who wants to incrementally increase federal involvment in education.
By: Spunky on November 10, 2007
at 3:35 pm
Spunky,
Thanks for the info. Have any of the candidates opposed federal standards (I’m assuming you’re referring to NCLB)?
Now that I’ve read the sites you provided, I’m suspicious of your intent. I hope everyone will read the linked articles as well. Huckabee was credited in both of the articles for the work he did on behalf of home schoolers.
And on the issue of federal intervention on education, NCLB arguably offered incrementally positive reforms. The screwy, Federally-burdened education system in our country didn’t get this way over night and isn’t likely to change overnight.
But I’m still interested to see who you think is a better candidate on these issues.
By: nedwilliams on November 11, 2007
at 8:05 pm
Actually, Ned, you should be suspicious of your reading comprehension ability. Huckabee was credited in both of the articles for the work he did on behalf of homeschoolers…in 1997. The 1999 article was talking about how great he was in 1997.
However, the more relevant issue in the article was that Huckabee helped give “Arkansas the unique distinction of becoming the first state in the nation to add restrictions to its existing home school law.” I’m getting tired of Huckabee supporters trying to gloss over his record.
The fact is, Huckabee flip-flopped on homeschooling. It doesn’t really get me that excited to read about what he did in 1997 when I know what he did in 1999.
By: cobbler on November 24, 2007
at 2:56 am
Mike Huckabee has done worse than flip flopping
on homeschooling. Check what what he says about Stem Research. He believes we should use the existing lines for research. But He claims we should not create life to destroy it. Instead of calling for a funeral for these poor dissected preborn children. Putting an end to using these poor dissected unborn children.
But if you have no intention of using embryonic Stem Cells, then why would you even think of using the lines already existing? These lines are dead dissected babies. These lines never seem to run out either. They have been using these lines for three years. There must be new embryonic lines they are just not telling us. This issue never goes away.
Then if you pick through what Huckabee is saying on immigration, you find he uses a double speak. Huckabee says to deport illegal aliens that have not committed a crime. Coming into America illegally is a crime. He says we need special visas for agriculture to pick fruits and vegetables. Huckabbe can not be trusted
By: Dannygirl on November 24, 2007
at 2:58 pm
It’s not exactly that he flip-flopped on homeschooling… let me try and use a metaphor again that I used in an e-mail the other day. If there were some hypothetical state where all guns were outlawed, gun control was out of control… and one governor came in and aleviated the rules just slightly… that would be a major improvement! But that doesn’t mean he should become president of the NRA. What Huckabee did at first, in comparison to existing homeschool laws in Arkansas at the time, was FANTASTIC… but on a national scale, his policies would be backwards from more parental choice and less centralized public school policies… at least if he keeps up such actions as more funding to the schools, mandated testing for homeschoolers, waiting periods before kids could be taken from public school to homeschool.
By: thelastinkling on November 24, 2007
at 3:02 pm
Yeah, Huckabee was sure a slacker dictator . . . d’oh! he was only a governor!
I guess no one’s going to proffer a GOP candidate with a better record on these issues?
By: nedwilliams on November 24, 2007
at 6:30 pm
Ned,
Let me first address your concern about being suspicious of my intent. Recently I read an article from CNN.news where a young evangelical leader from Iowa named Mark Reisetter threw his support behind Mike Huckabee. He said, “”We don’t question where he’s at, we don’t question what he believes. He’s one of us,”
I’m not quite as naieve as Mr. Resitler, I question where each candidate is at. And an evangelical Baptist pastor who says he is “one of us” Huckabee has the burden of proving to me that this is true. I’m not questioning his salvation, just his political beliefs and his record. That is my intention. If that makes you suspicious of me, oh well?
We should all be critically reviewing the records of each candidate. That’s what the primary season is for. To blindly throw my support to a candidate simply because he is “one of us” isn’t critically thinking but blind following. Christians should be the most critical, but ironically its the Christians who are willing to ask hard questions that are considered suspicious but the candidate asking for our vote is given a free ride. I think that speaks volumes about why the church has lost its influence and respect in the many arenas.
Specifically in regards to my links on Huckabee’s homeschool record, I think you ought to go back and read those links again. HSDLA praised Huckabee for the 1997 law, but was also critical of the passage of the 1999 law. They did not fault Huckabee for this law passing, but it is clear this law was not a step forward for Arkansas homeschoolers. Huckabee could have vetoed the legislation or let the legislation pass without his signature, but he did neither. He signed it.
If we are going to credit Huckabee with 1997 after being in office a very short period of time, certainly he must take some of the blame for making it more difficult to homeshcool two years later.
Let’s not go to the extreme of calling Huckabee a “slacker dictator” but let’s also not go to the other extreme of just giving him a pass on all scrutiny as this young evangelical leader from Iowa has done. There is something in between the two.
A better candidate may or may not be available (although on issues related to education Ron Paul certainly has the upper hand), but that doesn’t negate the record of Mike Huckabee. Honestly assessing his strengths and weaknesses will ensure that those that choose to endorse or support him know exactly who their candidate is and what he’ll do if elected.
Pretending Huckabee was a “friend to homeschoolers” simply because he says that he is or that he appointed a homeschool dad to the school board doesn’t cut it for me. His record is his record. And under his watch he made it harder for parents to homeschool. That’s not even disputed by HSLDA. I called and talked to them directly. So let’s not debate the point. The question before us as homeschoolers should be whether or not Huckabee has the politcal ability to prevent the same thing from happening at the federal level? That’s for each one of us to decide before we vote in our respective primaries.
By: Spunky on November 25, 2007
at 10:40 pm
Spunky,
I’m all for not being “naive” and researching candidates . . . go for it. My “suspicious” comment is related to my question that no one has answered: which candidate is better on these issues?
And I read the two articles rather carefully. What they provide is context on the question. There were some gains and some losses in Arkansas, and the losses must be kept in perspective with the gains . . . . kind of like with the stock market. A 10 pt. loss after a 30 pt. gain is not much of a loss at all; right?
So, which candidate has a better “record” on homeschooling issues? Which candidate is more “with” Evangelicals (the politically conservative type) than Huckabee?
By: nedwilliams on November 26, 2007
at 4:55 pm
I agree that losses and gains must be kept in perspective. If my stock continually went down after making an initial gain, I’d say I picked a loser. Pretending that my stock will go up again after ten years is not what I consider a wise investment.
Huckabee after only being in office a short time made an initital gain, but for the rest of his tenure had a only losses.
His failure to employ the veto is nothing short of troubling. If the bill was a step back why not just veto it or let it pass without his signature. Huckabee seemed to lack the political will to oppose the Democrats and stand on principle that imposing a waiting period would violate the parents right to direct the education of their own children. Something he said he values.
Thus homeschooling went BACKWARDS from its initial gain in 1997.
Not just in homeschooling but in education in general.
Under Huckabee all education took a step away from local control and progressed toward federal control. He praised NCLB which encouraged greater involvement at the federal level. As a presidential candidate he has also said that he supports federal standards in education. But perhaps most troubling is that under his direction he allowed the UN/IBO diploma to enter the Arkansas educational system. This introduced INTERNATIONAL standards in Arkansas. The impact of this cannot be understated.
World Magazine had an article on IBO earlier this year, “The IBO goal is the formation of students “who understand that other people, with their differences, can also be right.” Not just that other people can be right, but that people with differences can “also” be right. At the heart of the IB approach is a view that no actual culture holds truth.
The keystone course for the International Baccalaureate diploma is “Theory of Knowledge.” Not “theories,” but “theory.” While it is fine for high-school students to study epistemology, this is a course in postmodernist epistemology. This theory employs a “hermeneutic of suspicion” that undermines the very possibility of accepting any kind of objective truth.
It does take a certain kind of braininess to convince oneself that it is true that there is no truth, and it is no wonder that major universities—the patrons of postmodernist theory—are impressed with all of the young relativists clutching their IB diplomas.
But this philosophy does not produce a good education; rather, it produces a mindset in which good education is impossible. — Gene Edward Veith” (World Magazine January 13, 2007, Vol. 22, No. 1)
Allowing the International Baccalaureate to begin operating in US schools is a trend that many states are moving toward as a “replacement to AP courses.” Huckabee has not addressed this encroaching global education standard. He is without excuse. Huckabee was head of the ECS from 2004-2006. The international diploma is well known and his involvment as Governor in issues related to education would make it hard to believe that he didn’t know what the IB diploma was all about.
Overall, Huckabee’s educational record is not conservative at all. He allowed homeschooling to take a step backward and the United Nations/IBO to take a step forward in his state. Not a “net gain” for me.
I already answered the question of who is better on educational issues. Ron Paul is by far the best on this issue. He supports the abolishment of the Department of Education (a Reagan belief but never acted upon), and he supports pulling out of the United Nations. The combination of pulling out of the UN and the abolishment of the DofEd would cement in the minds of the American people that education is fundamentally a parent/state issue, without any intrusion by the the Federal Gov’t. or international standards.
This is not an endorsement of Ron Paul just an assessment of where he stands in comparison to the other candidates. Huckabee wants us to believe his is a Federalist/Conservative but he’s not. He supports further imposing the federal governement in the arena of testing.
And in the area of abortion, he can’t seem to decide of that’s a federal or state issue either. He has said both. If a candidate is confused about the powers of the federal government before he gets into office, I don’t think I want to hand him the reigns of power until he figures it out.
By: Spunky on November 26, 2007
at 9:19 pm
For those that would like to know when this was implemented in Arkansas, the IBO curriculum was implemented through a law passed during the 2005 legislative session. It was introduced as SB1054 sponsored by Senator Salmon and is now Act 2152.
The goal of IB is to create a “global citizen.” According to its the President of IBO in 2005, George Walker,
“So, I have learned that to be on the first rung of the ladder of international education is not enough. The best educated workforce is no longer just internationally aware. It has an understanding of the major influences that have consigned the concepts of the independent nation state, national company and national economy to the history books. I have learned that students need to be globally aware. ..
…At the heart of global citizenship is a lively mind but a mind that will be operating within boundaries defined by truth and falsehood. The sky is not the limit when it comes to exercising the intellect: our concept of truth will define the limits and that will need refocusing depending on the particular area of knowledge – scientific, mathematical, artistic, literary, ethical, religious and so on. That is why I have learned to appreciate the value of the Theory of Knowledge course in the education of the global citizens.”
Mike Huckabee allowed the IB schools into Arkansas, it is up to him to explain to conservatives who believe that independent nation states are not consigned to the history books, why he would encourage students in his state to believe that they are.
And make no mistake about it, these global standards which are promoted as “elite” around the globe, will become the standard in education. Tony Blair in one of his final acts as Prime Minister accepted the IB as the elite diploma for students in England. Will Huckabee do the same here? He let them into Arkansas, who would think that he wouldn’t continue this as President of the United States.
If it wasn’t obvious why Huckabee was not the choice for conservative homeschoolers, I hope this clears the fog a bit. Christians across the nation should be opposed to the education reforms that are allowing the United Nations/IB Diploma to become the US standard in our schools. Instead, we have Christians endorsing a candidate who welcomes them into the classroom without a blip.
By: Spunky on November 27, 2007
at 4:39 am
Spunky,
Well, I hadn’t heard you propose Ron Paul, so I’m glad you did. I have other issues with Paul, but he has always had the luxury of being a gadfly House member–so it is easy to declare what he would or wouldn’t do if he ever actually was in the executive’s chair, but he has always known that he could vote against pork bill while sticking his own earmarked pork in a bill with the knowledge that it would pass “over his ‘no’ vote.”
But you’re missing the point about Huckabee and homeschooling–good research on the IB stuff, I’ll have to say. (I’m not sure what to think about that, but I’m interested to see the positions or votes of other credible candidates on the issue first.) The point about homeschooling’s gains and losses in Arkansas (as evidenced in part by the HSLDA PAC’s endorsement) is that the initial gains (even ten years ago) offset some losses (even nine years ago). Context matters. If you read the articles carefully (like you encouraged me to do . . .) the second HS-related bill that was negotiated (seemingly), then passed and signed by Huckabee was better than the one that the Democrat legislature was going to pass. Much of politics is the art of compromise and 10 steps forward with one step back (waiting periods to pull your kids out of gov’t education) isn’t so bad when, as the HSLDA brief stated, Arkansas had gone from worst to first (or something along those lines) with passage of the first bill. Don’t you think?
And NCLB is controversial in many respects, but it at least introduced some accountability into public education. I wouldn’t have opted for that path, but I’m not president, and it wouldn’t have been as simple as me (or anyone) opting for a certain path. The only thing equally as unlikely as Ron Paul getting elected president would be President Ron Paul killing the Dept. of Ed. Paul, if President, wouldn’t be able to serve as a benevolent dictator.
By: nedwilliams on November 27, 2007
at 7:37 am
“Much of politics is the art of compromise and 10 steps forward with one step back (waiting periods to pull your kids out of gov’t education) isn’t so bad when, as the HSLDA brief stated, Arkansas had gone from worst to first (or something along those lines) with passage of the first bill. Don’t you think?”
It’s not just the wwiting period that was the problem. It was the mandatory testing or face truancy charges. That is NOt a step forward. As you can see by the other posts, this creates future problems down the road in regards to homeschool freedoms.
I agree that sometimes in politics compromise is necessary. But this compromise was costly to the homeschool community due to the testing/truancy issue, as testing is the way that they are now going to regulate homeschooling, if not directly then indirectly as an incentive to scholarship and admission, and employability. The ramifications of this compromise are not good. You look at it as minor, I conider it HUGE.
Huckabee was critical of the SCHIP veto by Bush. Saying that as President he would not have let things get that far, where a veto would have been necessary. (paraphrase) Well things did get that far in regards to homeschooling in Arkansas and unlike Bush, Huckabee didn’t employ the veto, nor let the bill pass without his signature (signalling his disapproval) he passed it.
I’m not touting Ron Paul, I only brought him up as a candidate whose policies would be the best in the arena of education which is what you asked. The other candidates are not touting themselves as the “values voters” choice like Huckabee is. He should be the strongest in support of a parents right to direct the education of their children.
Yet, his increased involvment in international schools and his call for MORE testing mandated by the federal government (art and music) are not a good thing for all citizens let alone homeschoolers.
For more information on this, I wrote a post under the OPEN LETTER post in response to One Mom that will help you understand exactly how the Huckabee education policy will hurt homeshcoolers.
By: Spunky on November 27, 2007
at 1:31 pm
Just to bolster how significant this is, here’s a story from a few weeks ago calling for the implementation of international benchmarks in education.
“International benchmarking is perhaps a natural extension of the work many states are already doing to improve high school students’ preparation for college or the US job market. Thirty states have joined the American Diploma Project Network, organized by Achieve Inc., a nonprofit in Washington. Achieve president Michael Cohen says that in Ohio, Arizona, Delaware, and several other states, “governors and chief state school officers … basically have said, ‘Well, it’s great that you want us to align our expectations with the real world kids will face domestically … but that’s not enough; we need to know what our expectations ought to be in order for our kids to succeed [globally].’ ” (World’s Schools Teach US a Lesson, The Christian Science Monitor 11/14/2007)
Acieve is the organization pushing for an “American Diploma.” Here’s the description from their website,
“The American Diploma Project Network is a coalition of 30 states dedicated to aligning K–12 curriculum, standards, assessments and accountability policies with the demands of college and work.”
Arkansas is one of the states that has signed on to the American Diploma Project.
Huckabee, I believe, signed on as part of the Next Step program while Governor. Needless to a “national diploma” is the next step and in my opinion a step backward for education and more specifically homeshcoolers.
Can you begin to understand why a President who understands what these reforms mean and how they impact homeschooling is important?
By: Spunky on November 27, 2007
at 9:10 pm
Duncan Hunter is a strong social conservative, and I believe, even stronger than Huckabee.
A couple of examples:
Duncan Hunter attended the pro-life march in Washington, D.C.. Huckabee did not. Maybe Huckabee had something he couldn’t get out of, but Hunter made it a point to attend the march.
Hunter said that Congress SHOULD HAVE intervened to try to save Terri Schiavo (first debate), but Huckabee when asked by a reporter said he wasn’t sure.
It is the government’s DUTY to protect innocent life.
Hunter has been the most effective candidate on securing our borders, and is against raising taxes (unlike Huckabee).
By: Bev DeCarlo on November 28, 2007
at 3:17 am
Duncan Hunter attended the pro-life march in Washington, D.C.. Huckabee did not. Maybe Huckabee had something he couldn’t get out of, but Hunter made it a point to attend the march.
That’s cool, but I don’t think you should read too much into that. Hunter is a congressman–he’s not a serious candidate for president and he lives in D.C.
Spunky,
Sure those are “steps backward” for homeschoolers, noone is denying that, but based on the HSLDA article, the bill signed by Huckabee was a bill intended to head off a much worse bill being forced by HS opponents. I don’t think those things were minor, but they all have to be considered IN CONTEXT.
You said, “I agree that in politics sometimes compromise is necessary, but . . .” But what? I don’t think–given HSLDA’s reports, that the alternative in this situation was better for Homeschoolers.
By: nedwilliams on November 28, 2007
at 4:08 am
Nedwilliams, Has Governor Huckabee given an explanation or an ‘apology’ for choosing the ‘lesser of two evils’ regarding the steps backward legislation?
By: thelastinkling on November 28, 2007
at 4:39 pm
TLI, I haven’t looked into it, frankly. But I can.
I think that HSLDA PAC’s endorsement and materials on it reflect that they are “reconciled” with his past/current stance, but I think it is a good question.
By: nedwilliams on November 28, 2007
at 5:04 pm
“But what? I don’t think–given HSLDA’s reports, that the alternative in this situation was better for Homeschoolers.”
But what? How about a veto or letting it pass without his signature? He has that power as governor and he didn’t use it. The alternatives were much better than what he chose.
If all liberal Democrats have to do is intoduce threatening legislation to get concessions from Huckabee, then what’s going to happen when he gets before the Democrats in Congress?
Remember it was Huckabee who was critical of Bush on the SCHIP veto, saying he wouldn’t have let things get that far. Give me a President not afraid to use the veto, over one who’s willing to compromise simply because the Democrats introduce a bill any day.
Sorry, the idea that Huckabee didn’t have another alternative just doesn’t ring true given his Constitutional power to use the veto which would have created another hurdle to passge; or let the legislation go without his signature, sending a strong signal that this was done without his support. He did neither he signed it.
Add to that record, Huckabee’s education policy which INCREASES federal involvement in education. He is calling for music and art to be added to education standards. He has also endorsed the P-16 model of education which supports federal mandates in higher education.
The core belief of HSLDA is that homeschooling is a natural right of the parent. They believe based on the Tenth Amendment that the Federal government has NO place in education policy.
The fact that HSLDA has endorsed a candidate who did not veto legislation that violates that fundamental freedom and encourages further advances in federal involvement is for them to explain. If it were just a matter of one piece of legislation, they might have a case. But the totality of his education policy is not positive for those who homeschool.
Others may choose to ignore how federal legislation will impact homeschoolers, but that is to our long term detriment. Huckabee is riding on the support of the very homeschoolers who will one day be parents and it will be a sad day when homeschooling is more difficult because of the policies they refused to fight today.
By: Spunky on November 28, 2007
at 6:00 pm
Okay, you’re refining your opposition to Huckabee–it’s good to be succinct.
But I’m not “ignor[ing] how federal legislation will impact homeschoolers.” IF THE DEMOCRATS OR HS OPPONENTS HAVE THE POWER TO PASS SOMETHING OVER YOUR VETO, WORKING OUT AN ALTERNATIVE IS PREFERABLE. Make sense? A veto can be a waste of time, Spunky, under certain circumstances. And if your previous legislation was a BIG gain, then minimal steps (again, in the overall context) backward aren’t tragic.
And, I’m curious what the other candidates’ stances are/were on the Nat’l Diploma. Lastly, short of eradicating the U.S. Dept. of Education (which I think is a good idea), there are some things that a responsible president would/should do to reform our system.
By: nedwilliams on November 28, 2007
at 7:28 pm
Didn’t the first piece of legislations get passed by those same Democrats? How is it that two years into office all of that was lost? I am fully aware that their are those who would like to deny the fundamental rights of the parents, but Huckabee has the Arkansas Constitution on his side.
The Arkansas Constitution says,
“2. Freedom and independence.
All men are created equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights; amongst which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty; of acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and reputation; and of pursuing their own happiness. To
secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. ”
In Arkansas men and women are free and indpendent. That includes their offspring. That means that a parent who believes that the family’s best interest is no longer served by having the child in a state school is FREE to pursue another arrangement. They DO NOT need the state’s permission to educate their child in a manner they see best nor must they wait a period of time to do so. That’s what freedom means. Requiring a parent to wait before they exercise their desire to educate their child in a manner of their choosing is a violation of that right.
If Huckabee lacks the leadership, political skills, or courage to explain to the Arkansas legislature and those he represents why the bill they introduced denies the freedom and independence of of parents, then he should have let it go without his signature and at least he would have expressed token opposition. But he didn’t even do that.
Refusing to sign it would have at least shown that he recognized that the state has no jurisdicition making such a demands upon parents.
He could have vetoed this as well and forced the legislature to overcome one more hurdle, but he didn’t.
He signed it.
You seem to consider such deals good political strategy, but I don’t think denying the natural rights of parents is good political strategy; at least not without explaining his fundamental opposition to such legislation based on the fact that the parent should not have to wait before taking their child out of a situation they believe is harmful to the child.
Huckabee may have been forced into a compromise, however he still had options available to demonstrate that he believed the fundamental rights of the parent had been violated. We don’t see any such recognition. Nor do we see any further attempts to remove such requirements in Huckabees time in office.
I’m not speaking without experience here. A bill was introduced in the Michigan legislature about 6 years ago similar to what was introduced in Arkansas. The legislature was seeking to increase requirements on homeschoolers through testing and other requirements for the same reasons as it appears this bill was introduced. One of the sponsors of the bill is NOT a homeschool proponent at all. He is very atagonistic and would like to see increases to prevent possible abuses.
He and I debated the point for about 45 minutes on a major radio show in the Detroit area. My argument was based on the basic premise that the parent NOT the state has the compelling or highest interest of the child. The legislator was forced into admitting that any regulation denied that fact and gave the state the compelling interest. The very next day this legislator pulled the bill.
The natural rights of the parents to educate their children is a fundamental right. There are those within our government who would like to deny that right through increased regulation and testing.
Huckabee’s compromise in the area of homeschooling was a short term solution to prevent a more strigent bill from passing.
Huckabee’s signature makes him complicit in a compromise that cemented in the minds of the Democrats and the people of Arkansas that the state has the compelling interest and the authority to deny parents their natural right to direct the education of their children. This inspite of a state Constitution which says that men are free and independent to pursue their own happiness.
And in subsequent years, it appears he did nothing to encourage these restrictions to be eased. Add to that his education policies put into motion further hurdles for homeschoolers down the road, and you have a governor that did not help homeschoolers retain their freedoms.
In regard to the national diploma, that was put into motion by the Clinton administration, through Goals 2000 and Outcome Based Education. (EdWatch is a good website for info.)
The educational elites have managed to convince Democrats and Republicans alike that without federal intervention and national standards we are doomed to third world status. Strangely, the Republicans have let these assertions go unchallenged and have accepted the Democrat solutions as their own. There is very little difference between a Republican and a Democrat on this issue.
A true conservative would reject such notions as violating the very freedoms our country was founded upon. Yet, the “crisis” created by those that would like to reform our system have created such a fear in our elected leaders that they are grasping for solutions. In walks an “expert” like Willard Daggett telling them our schools need to be “reinvented” for the 21st century and they buy it hook, line, and sinker. I”ve read the speeches of many governors and their points on education all appear to be written from the same play book. “Rigor with Relevance” to prepare children for the 21st century.
What’s amazing is that those of us that should be holding our elected officials who run as conservatives accountable for such decisions, are the ones propelling them to higher office.
If politics is the art of compromise, the conservative homeschoolers seemed to have squandered their influence without any concessions. HSLDA’s endorsement without some concessions from Huckabee that federal invovlement in education is a step in the wrong direction is unfortunate. The next eight years in education policy will shape the future of our children.
Aristotle said, “The rise and fall of nations rests in the education of our youth.” The elites know this and yet, the conservatives in office seem willing to accept the socialist solutions of the left rather than promote policies which will reduce federal involvement in education. Parents, not politicians, are the guardians of our children’s education and the future of our great nation.
Huckabee can’t have it both ways, he can’t adopt the policies of the left and tell conservatives on the right that “he is one of us.” But alas it appears that those one the right are willing to take a candidate at his word rather than hold him accountable for his record.
By: Spunky on November 28, 2007
at 10:05 pm
P.S. My apologies for any grammar and typos, I’ve lost my glasses and my keyboard is going bad. A very bad combination.
By: Spunky on November 28, 2007
at 10:07 pm
According to a news source at the kickoff to a media campaign to sell the socialist proposal of “rigor with relevance” here’s what Huckabee said,
“Gov. Mike Huckabee said he saw a crisis facing Arkansas high schools. He said several statistics indicate students are not succeeding in the current model for high schools.
For example, he said 20 percent of Arkansas ninth graders do not stay in school until graduation, with the numbers even higher for minorities.
He said the state was not preparing students adequately by allowing them to graduate without basic, fundamental skills needed for success after high school. Huckabee said high schools needed to deliver the three R’s: Rigor, relevance and relationship.
“We have large groups of kids, not just across the country but here in our state, that because of where they live, or because of how much money they have or what color their skin is, they are not enrolled in the same rigorous classes or facing the same high expectations from their teachers,” the governor said. ”
The whole line of “Rigor with Relevance” is the brainchild of an educator, Willard Daggett from New York who believes in state control of our children. Huckabee’s adopting of his terminology further tells me one of two things,
1. He lacks understanding in the very policies he promotes, or
2. He agrees with the policies.
I don’t like to assume ignorance, so I’ll assume that he agrees with the policies.
The policies that he endorsed and promotes are the very policies that will eventually relegate homeschooling to non-existence.
Huckabee must decide if he is the friend of homeschoolers or the friend of centralized control in education. He can’t be both.
By: Spunky on November 28, 2007
at 11:34 pm
For homeschoolers to promote a Huckabee candidacy without questioning how he can promote federal standards is sad.
The endorsement by homeschoolers in the blogopshere has helped propelled Huckabee into the top-tier. Yet, Huckabee’s socialist education policies will drive homeshcooling into virtual obsolesence. And what will homeschoolers think of Huckabee’s rhetorical skills then?
By: Spunky on November 28, 2007
at 11:35 pm
Like I said, succinct is good.
Until homeschooling is mandatory, our elected officials will have to deal with effective ways to educate our children.
I’m impressed with your “spunkyness” and I hope you find a candidate who has the “leadership, political skills, or courage” to win every political battle s/he encounters.
By: nedwilliams on November 29, 2007
at 2:36 am
Homeschooling mandatory? Not sure what that means.
I’m all for effective ways to educate our children within the bounds our Constititution allows. If you prefer succintness to my verbosity, the tenth amemndment will do quite nicely here,
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
It seems have traded the Constitution for compassion” these days. So very sad.
It’s not about “winning” I expect every policitian to lose a few battles, but to learn from those defeats. Huckabee hasn’t learned from the defeat, he just decided to join the opposition to stave off further losses. If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em. A brilliant strategy for winning a few battles, but losing the war.
By: Spunky on November 29, 2007
at 3:40 am
Gee, I’ve “traded the Constitution for compassion” because I agree with HSLDA’s PAC that Mike Huckabee may be the best choice (to include “electability” or viability) in the 2008 election? Give me a break, Spunky.
Well, homeschooling isn’t mandatory, so we need other alternatives, right? A majority of Americans don’t agree with you (and me, believe or not Spunky) that homeschooling is the way they want to educate their children.
I trust you’re not saying that the 10th Amendment is related to any of the homeschooling issues raised here. The “national diploma” issue or the Arts education emphasis may relate to the 10th Amendment, but not homeschooling stuff. I’ve noticed some conflating of all education issues as I’ve researched some of this stuff today. That’s sloppy.
By: nedwilliams on November 29, 2007
at 4:17 am
nedwilliams, Duncan Hunter lives in California, and is a very serious candidate for POTUS!
And the best candidate, as well.
By: Bev DeCarlo on November 29, 2007
at 5:15 am
A caller called Dr. Land’s show about Huckabee recently, and Dr. Land said, out of the blue: Duncan Hunter is just as pro-life as Huckabee, and Huckabee raised taxes.
Duncan Hunter does not want to raise taxes.
By: Bev DeCarlo on November 29, 2007
at 5:17 am
The “compassion” versus the “Consitution” was not in reference to you specifically, but to those seeking office who feel it is the job of the Federal government to do things it was not given the power to do. Such as educate our children, ensure that people don’t smoke, provide health “incentives” to change people’s behavior, provide preschool for those not yet ready for kindergarten.
Whether or not I believe everyone should homeschool isn’t the issue. The issue is it the Federal government’s business to be involved in education. This is tenth amendment issue, and HSLDA sees it that way as well. You can read it right off their website.
“The federal role in education is a violation of the 10th amendment of the United States Constitution
which states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government delegated the power to regulate or fund elementary or secondary education.”
Huckabee’s policies as Governor and his proposals as a Candidate seeks to INCREASE federal involvement in education. HSLDA and I both understand how such increases adversely affect homeschoolers even if the legislation does not mention it directly.
Despite what some would want to believe, there is a very direct link between the legislation passed to improve public education and homeschooling.
It’s not sloppy to understand that the implications to education policy as it relates to homeschooling. Let me give you one example, If an employer or college requires a “credential” in order to be hired or admitted and the only way to get that credential is through state endorsed curricula and testing, those that don’t participate are penalized simply for not participating. That’s the economic reality of these proposals and why the term “School-to-work” and “seamless transistion” are used. Credentialing is a way to force compliance without requiring it outright.
Perhaps a little more research in the area of certificates of mastery and credentialing along with WorkKeys will help you understand exactly what I’m talking about. In Michigan, the ACT test is now the STATE exam, it includes a WorkKeys “employability” portion. This is the credential that will provide their ticket to advancement in college acceptance and employability. WorkKeys is designed to “flag” for beliefs and ideas which do not comform to state ideals. Needless to say most Christian homeschoolers do not fit those ideals.
The issue is how are we going to stem this trend toward a socialist view of education. Where the state not the parent decides what a child should know? An increase in federal involvement is only going to take things away from local control. Improving eductaion should not come at the expense of our Constititution.
The fact that we have public education is not my objection, it is the fact that we have federal involvement in education where they have not Constitutional jurisdiction. The national diploma, national testing, and other things are a direct result of the mandates set by the federal government.
This issue is perhaps one reason why Phyllis Shalfly does not like Mike Huckabee. She is a strong opponent of federal and international involvement in edcuation. Mike Huckabee on the other hand seems to want to expand it.
By: Spunky on November 29, 2007
at 1:27 pm
Here is an article it help get you up to speed, Arkansas has adopted the “Career Readiness Certificate” program to ensure that students are ready for the workforce. The driving force is the WorkKeys test.
“The Arkansas Department of Workforce Services and the Arkansas Workforce Investment Board awarded a contract to Thinking Media, the producers of KeyTrain®, to assist with the statewide implementation of the Career Readiness Certificate program in Arkansas. Workforce and education entities have already started using the KeyTrain curriculum, software, and management system statewide to teach foundational workplace skills as defined by ACT’s WorkKeys® system. Students’ mastery of these applied workplace skills will be measured by three WorkKeys assessments that will comprise Arkansas’ Career Readiness Certificate, allowing successful students to exit the program with a bronze, silver, or gold Certificate to present to employers who demand these skills. ”
How does a homeschooler get the “gold” certificate? By complying with these exams which measure “thought” not just knowledge. This was all put into place by Huckabee’s Smart Schools initiative in 1998.
http://www.keytrain.com/keytrain/ktn_article.asp?article=45
KeyTrain is a product of the ACT testing service. Two of the purposes for the assessments are…
KeyTrain’s Teamwork and Observation curricula build skill in workplace competencies such as attitudes, employability and participation.
WorkKeys provides portable credentials, recognized nationwide.
It is the “portable credentials recognized nationwide” that will pose the difficulty for homeschoolers.
If you think Huckabee won’t carry these same inititatives into the White House your clearly mistaken, he was part of the a Bipartisan Commission that is pushing for these standards nationwide.
I’d encourage anyone reading this to do their homework and ask why are homeschoolers supporting a candidate that seeks to promote such programswhich will render homeschooling obsolete because they will not have the credentials necessary to advance?
By: Spunky on November 29, 2007
at 4:27 pm
I don’t doubt Hunter’s pro-life credentials. I do doubt whether he has the ability to get elected. The amount of support (financial and moral) that someone is able to generate for one’s candidacy is not insignificant.
You’ve raised some fair points, spunky. But it is important to compare apples and apples here. Not every one of these candidates has had the same experiences or opportunities or duties, so comparing words/promises to actions can be slanted. You and others are harping on one throwaway statement from Hunter that he supports school choice as if it is some big, bold, homeschool-related issue and it isn’t. Is there a Republican who isn’t backing school choice?
I don’t despise or even dislike Hunter and I even admire him, but I don’t think he is best positioned to become president. Apparently an overwhelming majority of fellow Republicans share my assessment.
I agree with your premise about credentialing’s potential harm to homeschoolers, but I don’t think that the facts you’ve laid out are particularly troubling, especially as relates to supporting Huckabee. For example, “measuring ‘thought’” versus knowledge is a problem? I guess if you assume (or know?) that it is referring to what one thinks rather than how one thinks. Reasoning and logic are ways to think as opposed to knowledge.
Judging from the evidence, homeschooling took a quantum leap forward (and one point five steps backward) during Huckabee’s time as governor of Arkansas. That’s fine if you perceive that some other candidate is better on this issue (or other issues). You obviously disagree with HSLDA PAC’s assessment of Huckabee (or the other candidates), but I think it is bad form to insinuate that their endorsement is rooted in bad faith or bad motives.
By: nedwilliams on November 29, 2007
at 10:48 pm
I have not insinuated that their endorsement is rooted in bad faith or bad motives. I said…
“The fact that HSLDA has endorsed a candidate who did not veto legislation that violates that fundamental freedom and encourages further advances in federal involvement is for them to explain. If it were just a matter of one piece of legislation, they might have a case. But the totality of his education policy is not positive for those who homeschool.”
I question their endorsement which is exactly what Huckabee and his supporters did of Robertson’s endorsement of Guiliani.
HSLDA has worked tirelessly to establish a reputation for being against federal involvement in education. Their endorsement of a candidate that seeks to INCREASE involvement is a legitimate question to ask. Just as it was legitimate to ask why Robertson after working for years to establish his pro-life, pro-family reputation would endorse a candidate who believes the exact opposite.
It wasn’t bad form when they expressed surprise and questioned that endorsement and neither is mine question of HSLDA.
Further, I have not mentioned statements by Hunter nor have I compared Huckabee to him. You must have me confused with another commenter.
When I mentioned measuring “thought” I was referring to those thoughts which are considered “objectionable” and makes the student appear intolerant of others and not a “team player.” It is exactly WHAT one thinks that is the problem, not HOW they think.
Under Huckabee homeschooling took a step backward not just from the legislation directed passed in 1999, which Huckabee signed. But from the passage of legislation in 1998 which set in motion credentialing in the state. The totality of his record is a negative for homeschoolers. And his endorsement of federal mandates in education as a candidate means we’ll see a continuation of this policy if he makes it to the White House.
By: Spunky on November 30, 2007
at 12:31 am
Huckabee in an interview with HSLDA…
Mike Farris:
International law is becoming a pervasive influence in the United States and a major concern, for our constituency, is the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child. Governor Huckabee, how would you guard Americans’ rights in the face of this international legal threat?
“Governor Huckabee:
It really is of great concern that there are people who believe that the United States should subject itself to treaties in which some international government or international government organization would dictate how a parent raises his or her child, including the disciplining of a child. If we were to adopt the policies of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, we essentially have done something that I personally think is not only unconstitutional but I think is unconscionable. That is, we have sacrificed the rights of mothers and fathers in this country to some international entity that is simply unacceptable and it is of utmost concern to me. ”
Huckabee expressesed concern for international law and an international body dictating how a parent raises a child, yet he let an international body into Arkansas schools to tell children how they should be educated to be a “global citizen.”
I agree that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is not a good idea and I’m glad Huckabee repudiates it, but for him to reject internation influence in that area, but subject US schools to an international government organization associated with the UN is confusing. For HSLDA to endorse a candidate who speaks against such involvement, but legislates the exact opposite is confusing and rightly questioned.
By: Spunky on November 30, 2007
at 1:02 am
Again quoting from the interview
Mike:
What is your position on homeschooling? Including in that, how much involvement, if any, should the government have in a family’s decision to homeschool?
Governor Huckabee:
Well, the government should have no decision role in what a family wishes to do with their children. That’s a family decision. Mothers and fathers make that decision, not the government. And if the family decides that homeschooling is the best environment, then the state should do everything they can to help support that family to carry out that decision.
I ask where is that resolve when legislation was being passed. There is no mention that he signed a bill that gave the state a role in the decision.
For HSLDA to endorse a candidate who speaks against state involvement without explaining the 1999 legislation is confusing and rightly questioned.
By: Spunky on November 30, 2007
at 1:05 am
Have any of the other candidates taken a position, even moreso taken any action, on the specific issue of international credentialing? (Though I’m not sure that Huckabee has done precisely that . . . I think you lean too heavily on the “slippery slope” arguments which can be helpful, but must be evenly applied to all candidates).
And again, because Huckabee conceded a little to gain some concessions from the Democrat majority in his state isn’t necessarily evil. Would allowing the anti-Homeschool forces to stifle homeschooling with an obscene bill preferable to using your influence to get a majority Democrat legislature to pass something with minor setbacks to previous gains?
And is there evidence that this “thought” testing is related to what to think? I got your insinuation, but didn’t see evidence of that.
By: nedwilliams on November 30, 2007
at 4:16 am
It isn’t a slippery slope issue. The call for international credentials is widely known for those that follow education. It may appear to be the “slippery slope” argument but only to those that are unfamiliar with the discussion. Phyllis Shalfly, Gene Edward Veith at World Magazine, and others have written articles expressing concern. Tony Blair in one of his final acts as Prime Minister made the IB Diploma the “elite” diploma in the UK. Blair’s action gave credibility to the diploma and other countries will likely follow in next few years. It’s not a slippery slope argument at all.
Ron Paul endorses a complete pull out of the United Nations, that statement alone would send a strong signal to globalists that education is a national issue not an international issue.
Fred Thompson would be the next strongest, stating that the federal government is too intrusive.
“At a time when America is behind other developed countries in education excellence, the federal role in education is too intrusive and too bureaucratic, and has become part of the problem. State and local governments are closest to the parents, the kids, and the schools, and best situated to implement changes and innovations that best educate children.”
Between 1970 and 2005, federal spending on education increased nearly 150% without results to match. The No Child Left Behind law itself increased federal funding by some 26%, while imposing more than $140 million in compliance time and costs.
“A little more federalist confidence in the wisdom of state and local governments might go a long way toward improving America’s public schools. The most encouraging reforms in education are occurring at the local level, with options like charter schools. And often the best thing Washington can do is let the states, school districts, teachers and parents set their own policies and run their own schools. ”
Further, he has admitted that his vote for NCLB was a mistake and the critics were correct in what they said would happen. His vote for NCLB is not a point in his favor, but his acknowledgement of that error is helpful to see where he is at today. No such concessions have come forth from Huckabee who has praised NCLB and promoted an increase in Federal mandates. And let’s not forget to mention Huckabee’s support of tuition for the children of illegals. Huckabee’s education policy is among the worst out of all the candidates.
To compare him to other candidates is interesting since he chaired the Education Commission of the States and was co-chair of a Bipartisan Commission on Education. His education policies have influenced other states in the same direction he has taken Arkansas.
This is not an endorsement of Paul or Thompson, just an assessment of where they have a stronger standing on the issue of education.
As far as the Homeschool compromise bill, I accept that this was a bill with concessions to prevent greater defeat, I just don’t see Huckabee coming out strongly against it. He signed it when he could have vetoed it, he could have let it pass without his signature, he could have addressed the issue in a speech explaining why it violates the Arkansas Constitution. But it doesn’t appear he did any of those things. Like I said before, he was critical of Bush’s handling of SCHIP saying he wouldn’t let things get that far, but at least Bush had the courage to stand on principle, Huckabee seems to have just accepted the outcome without even token opposition.
As far as evidence to “thought” testing. Unfortunately, they do not allow parents to see actual tests after they are taken. But the children who have taken them have provided evidence that the questions are thought based. I met with a former state senator and presented my information and concern regarding this test. It was all very compelling to him because he had just gotten his own daughter’s score back on the state exam. She had failed the writing portion. She was a 4.0 in high school and writing was her strenght. Her question related to her feelings on abortion.
Another young lady was questioned on whether she would keep the secret of an employer who was doing something unethical. She also did poorly on the writing portion. Which was surprising since she was an accomplished writer and has won many debate and speech tournaments.
Another question related to whether or not as an employee you would choose a family obligation over a work obligation. “If it was 5:00 and your boss had an early morning meeting, but your child had a band concert would you choose to stay late to help your boss, or go home to be with your child.”
This are all compelling questions, but it is not the state’s business what a child will do in such hypothetical situations. The fact that this “credentials” a child is employable is telling.
Also consider that based on these tests and other assessments a child in Florida is now required by law to declare their career major by the tenth grade. The idea that my child has to declare to the government what they want to be when they grow up is socialism, through and through. Yet, it was Republican Governor Jeb Bush that let this pass.
If you consider the educational structure in Germany you will understand exactly what we’re moving toward here. That isn’t my words, but the words of one of my state legislator who follows trends in education.
As conservative homeschoolers, we need and indeed should expect that a candidate we endorse would not move us closer to the educational trends of socialist Europe, but a free America. It’s not a slippery slope at all, and unless we have strong intervention in the next 8 years, the trend toward international standards is all but certain.
By: Spunky on November 30, 2007
at 5:23 pm
I should also note that the push for international standards is the well funded desire of the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. This foundation was instrumental in the Next Step program in Arkansas. (Not implying guilt by association, just stating a fact.)
Bill Gates signed an agreement with UNESCO a few years back that has provided the framework for international reform and standards. (The actual letter can be read on the Eagle Forum website.)
I subscribe to an education news service and this article came in just a week ago, it echoed the call for international standards.
This article was written by Raymond C. Scheppach, Ph.D., he is the executive director of the National Governors Association. He said,
“[E]ducational protectionism is outdated and ignores the realities of the 21st century global economy….
“Over the last two decades, states have provided the leadership to create education standards and assessments. Benchmarking them to international standards is just the next step. ”
Slippery slope? If so, then we’ve begun the slide downhill at a very fast pace. Unless, we have a President with the courage to stand against this trend, international standards accountable to the UN are a near certainty.
By: Spunky on November 30, 2007
at 5:37 pm
At the risk of being cited for verbosity, here is an excellent article that will help you understand exactly why IBO is bad news for our schools, and how a school district in Pensylvania came under fire for eliminating it.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={4A2AE6B4-8354-43AF-83D9-14634B10F4B6}
By: Spunky on November 30, 2007
at 5:53 pm
Quoting from Phyllis Shafly
“The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has helped to finance the National Governors Association plan in Idaho to train students to work in the global economy. Idaho is one of six states selected by the National Governors Association for pilot projects.
The National Governors Report of December 2004 (when Virginia Governor Mark Warner was chairman) makes clear that the purpose is to use the public schools to build a planned economy. The report speaks approvingly of “using schools to feed workers into selected corporations,” “identifying their state’s key industries and needs for skilled workers in order to define a common agenda between their workforce and economic development programs,” “the integration of education, economic development, and workforce development policies,” “seamless connections between the components of the [education] system and with the skill demands of the workplace,” and “connecting workforce development to economic needs.
It’s hard to see any difference between the 2004 National Governors Association plan and the earlier plans floated when Bill Clinton was President. The plan uses a lot of mumbo-jumbo to change America from free enterprise to a planned economy, and to turn public school students into a compliant workforce for multinational corporations. ”
Huckabee’s state of Arkansas was one of the six states. He encouraged the push toward a planned economy encouraged by Bill Clinton in his presidency.
The planned economy is a negative for homeschoolers, but it more importantly it is socialism pure and simple.
Phyllis Shafly said it well,
“It’s hard to see any difference between the 2004 National Governors Association plan and the earlier plans floated when Bill Clinton was President. The plan uses a lot of mumbo-jumbo to change America from free enterprise to a planned economy, and to turn public school students into a compliant workforce for multinational corporations. ”
Huckabee’s plan is a socialist scheme for a planned economy, setting the desires of the state above the dreams of the child. Compliance is rewarded with the credentials to “succeed” as a citizen in the “global economy.” Conservatives who give Huckabee a pass on his involvement will have themselves to thank when they realize exactly what his policiy initiatives mean to American and our freedom to decide our own futures.
By: Spunky on November 30, 2007
at 7:47 pm
Well, my cursory reading of those excerpts kind of leads me to think that it can’t hurt public schools for private corporations to have a say in the standards or subjects that are taught. That sounds like valuable free market principles finding their way into the public school system.
And, of course, it never hurts in a Conservative hit piece to mention the word “Clinton” 4 or 5 times.
I’ve appreciated much of Schlafly’s work in the past, but she is–in my mind, prone to hyperbole at times.
By: nedwilliams on December 1, 2007
at 6:26 am
Your cursory reading of the excerpts is only meant to spur you to further investigation, it would not be prudent to draw any conclusions without further investigation.
Private corporations starting schools and setting standards is a free market principle, but private corporations working with the government to require children in a certain geographic area to be trained in a given way for certain prescribed careers is socialism. Add to that the testing aspect where corporations and the government decide who is “credentialed” as employable based on attitutdes and thought and declaring their careers based upon that criteria and you don’t have free enterprise at work, but a planned economy. The fact that conservatives would fall for such a plan as “free market” is as hilarious as Huckabee telling homeschoolers that they have the freedom to educate their children unhindered by the state, but requiring them to wait 14 days to do it. That’s NOT freedom. It’s government control at the expense of personal freedom.
The Clinton reference demonstrates exactly how little you know of school reform. (Not an insult.) Goals 2000 was passed by Bill Clinton. Outcome Based Education was a real issue with the concerns well founded. I was around for that fight. Conservatives worked hard to defeat it and it was eventually “dead.” But they were mistaken. It just put on a new face and presented itself. To watch it now implemented under different terminology and reference Clinton is not a “hit job” to gain sympathy, but stating facts for understanding.
Do a little more research before asserting that this is a “hit piece.” The only hit is on the American people and their freedom.
School-to-Work the term of the ’90’s was “reinvented” in Florida to become “Ready-to-work” by Jeb Bush. In Arkansas it was Smart Core and Next Step. But it’s the same thing reinvented and promoted by Repubilicans and Democrats both.
Shafly may be given to hyperbole in general but not so in this case. Sadly, the average conservative doesn’t do the research to know exactly what’s taking place right under their very eyes by the people they elected as “conservatives.” They happily accept “reforms” to make schools better without even understanding the long-term ramificiations or the driving force behind them.
I’m not among them. I agree with Aristotle that the rise and fall of nations does depend on the education of our youth. And when someone tells me that they are reinventing high schools for the 21st century, I don’t just applaud and cheer. I do my homework. I’d encourage you to do the same.
By: Spunky on December 1, 2007
at 2:13 pm
Huckabee parades himself as an “authentic” conservative. In the arena of education, he’s not.
A true conservative does not seek to increase in federal involvement in education through standards in music and art.
A true conservative does not support laws to “reinvent” schools according to the demands of the state. Requiring a child to tell the state what they want to be when they grow up is anathema to a free society and locks the child into a decision based on assessments driven by the needs in a “global economy.”
A true conservative realizes that introducing the IBO, UNESCO, and international standards into our schools schools diminishes local control and our national interests in favor of “global citizenship.”
A true conservative does not support giving the ADULT offspring of illegal immigrants free college tuition. College is not a right in this country, creating an entitlement program for college welfare that isn’t even available to citizens of the United States who live in another state.
A true conservative does not sign legislation that denies the parents the freedom to immediately remove their children from government schools if they believe that is in the best interest of the child.
A true conservative does not sign legislation that forces a parent to test their children and submit the results to the state or face truancy charges.
Huckabee cannot have it both ways. He cannot say he believes in a parents right to educate their children unhindered by the state and then at the same time enact policies that undermine their interest and the interests of our nation.
By: Spunky on December 1, 2007
at 3:49 pm
Huckabee supports teacher testing.
HSDLA wrote,
“[M]andatory teacher standards — should send a strong chill down the back of every homeschooler as well as those in private schools and even those in public schools.”
When was this written? In 1999, by Micheal Farris about the CLINTON education proposal. Huckabee’s education proposals as governor and his policy as a candidate shows little difference. And what did Mr. Farris say about the Clinton proposal?
“President Clinton included a sweeping five-point education plan in his recent State of the Nation speech. I didn’t make a mistake—Clinton’s education plan openly defies the idea that the United States is a Union of sovereign states.
For decades there has been a gradual erosion of the principle of local control of schools. Federal control has gradually increased through strings attached to various funding programs.”
He concludes his essay with the following statement about the Clinton initiatives,
“So there you have it. A complete takeover of public schools by federal regulators and a hidden ban on home-schooling.”
It’s ironic that Farris saw a “slippery slope” when Clinton proposed it, but finds a way to endorse the Governor who replaced him but kept his intitiatives in place.
By: Spunky on December 1, 2007
at 4:18 pm
It’s not just I who see the School to Work initiatives as a problem to free markets.
HSLDA said in 1997,
“Informed home schoolers have watched, with concern, as “School-to-Work” (STW) programs have been implemented across America. Like its ideological twin, Outcome-Based Education (OBE), STW is designed to yield a “Certificate of Initial Mastery” (CIM) rather than a diploma. The CIM is supposed to be awarded to those students who demonstrate certain government-defined “outcomes.” Critics of these programs—including HSLDA—believe that STW and OBE programs unconstitutionally burden both free markets and free minds.”
The reforms that are prosposed through “reinventing” high schools and P-16 are the same proposals of School to Work by the same architects who designed them. Homeschoolers who let Huckabee have a pass on his education policy are endorsing a candidate whose policies will eventually leave them wondering how they let it happen.
By: Spunky on December 1, 2007
at 4:40 pm
Another telling quote,
” Many astute observers believe these programs are the result of an unholy alliance between Big Government and Big Business. A number of large corporations, such as Boeing, are spearheading the effort to force the public school system to produce high school graduates who can actually do the kinds of jobs that employers expect. Home schoolers would be the first to agree that government schools are turning out unqualified graduates, and point to the spiritual vacuum, moral relativism, and “politically correct,” dumbed-down curriculum as the cause. But instead of acknowledging these fatal flaws in secular public education, these “reformers” want to transform the schools from their historic mission of “educating children” to a new mission of “training” them.”
And Huckabee has been a champion of those very reforms HSLDA condemns.
By: Spunky on December 1, 2007
at 4:47 pm
“Spunky” is right . . . “indefatigable,” too. And I think you’ve dug up some interesting stuff.
I’m curious what position all the other candidates have taken on OBE and STW. Oh, I forgot, Duncan Hunter once said in an interview that he supports school choice.
Btw, was Clinton the governor of Arkansas when he made those proposals?
By: nedwilliams on December 4, 2007
at 5:06 am
Ned,
Just so you know, I had a blog that was quite popular on education and homeschooling. My nickname has been Spunky since I was a teen, so I went with it for a blog name. The issues I’ve raised here, I’ve researched since the early ’90’s. Most of these posts were written fairly quickly without notes or a lot of extra work because I’ve studied it for so long.
The candidates do not take a position on OBE or STW because they think its dead and gone. When George Bush introduced NCLB, I knew right away what was happening. A “conservative” presdident had now introduced once again federal standards in education and because he was Republican teaming up with Ted Kennedy (doesn’t that give you a clue?) I knew it was a done deal.
OBE was alive and well and this time with Republican support.
Republican Governors jumped on board for the money they received. A genuine bi-partisan move toward socialism. That’s why a Presidential candidate with policies to the left of Bush worry me even more. Huckabee is the most liberal in his policies on education. His endorsement of P-16 and higher education are more federalism when wew need less. He also seemed unclear about whether he would allow federal aid to illegals immigrants children.
With Guiliani and Romney in a muddled mix of privatization and business efforts.
Thompson appears to be far the most conservative of the top-tier. He acknkowledges that NCLB was a mistake and would likely seek to undo a lot of the efforts of Bush and return education back to local governance.
Ron Paul seeks to abolish all federal involvment in education, so his stance on OBE is quite obvious.
In answer to your last question, the proposals were from 1999 while he was president. But these were initiatives that he was fighting for throughout his time in office and began right before he entered the White House.
A Republican president with education policies nearly as liberal as Bill Clinton worries me because like Bush we’ll be lulled into believing he’s a conservative and will not promote policies that we believe harmful to our freedom. We were duped with Bush, will we not learn from our mistake?
The next eight years will cement the policies of socialism or uproot them. Without bold leadership at the presidential level, undoing them will become a lot more difficult as time goes on. Endorsing a candidate who will expand the socialist proposals of OBE is not what we need at this time.
By: Spunky on December 4, 2007
at 2:12 pm
Ned,
I’d also like to point out a few other things for your consideration. The homeschooling bill introducted in 1999 and signed by Huckabee was not just a minor step backward, but a major leap toward pre-1997 days. And in regards to testing made it even worse because the penalty for non-compliance was made criminal and a parent could be charged with a truancy violation. So I’m not as sure that this was just a minor setback as the Huckabee campaign would like us to believe.
Further, it is interesting that just this year a bill in Arkansas was successfully defeated that calls for a homeschool parent to have a high school diploma before they could educate their children at home. This bill was defeated before getting out of the education committee. It’s striking that a democrat proposal with a democrat Governor was defeated, but Huckabee couldn’t get that done while he was in office. I’m not making a strict comparison because obviously circumstances are different, it just is striking that a “friend” to homeschoolers couldn’t do more on their behalf as Governor.
By: Spunky on December 4, 2007
at 2:26 pm
Huckabee is selling himself to conservative Christians as “one of us.” He surmises that if evangelicals don’t get behind his campaign then we will permanently lose our influence in politics. Huckabee is a Christian, but far from conservative on many of the issues that are of importance to us, notabley immigration and education.
Huckebee seeks our support based on the fact that he is a Christian and because he is, most don’t even question his policies. Said one Iowa Christian leader,
“We don’t question what he believes because he is one of us.”
Christian conservatives do themselves a great disservice not to scrutinize the candidate and his policies.
It’s ironic that Christian homeschool conservatives have blindly thrown their support behind a candidate who will likely do the most harm to their own liberty to homeschool. He cannot be both “pro-homeschooling” and pro-federal testing and teacher testing. But I fear that I’m in the minority and most Christians will blindly follow a Christian candidate simply because he’s a Christian without even a sideways glance at the policies that will undo the hardwork of the last 20 years.
By: Spunky on December 4, 2007
at 5:12 pm
To be clear, I don’t speak on behalf of the Huckabee campaign, and I am just making obvious observations on the facts you’re presenting and the stuff that’s readily available online.
As far as “major” vs. “minor” setbacks–again, it’s all relative to the previous gains. And I think that requiring a high school degree to teach your child is (a) not an unreasonable, prophylactic requirement in our day and age, and, frankly (b) much more onerous than requiring parents to provide notice before deciding to home school in the middle of a school year.
I appreciate your depth of knowledge on the issue, but I can only question your comprehension on the policy front when you consider “federalism” to mean “more federal gov’t” . . . it actually means less. And that’s significant because I perceive that Huckabee appreciates that distinction more than you do. Which relates to the Clinton question. If a policy is pushed by a governor (vs. a president) then there are different issues to consider–such as local vs. federal control over policy.
I also appreciate your reply to the question about what the other candidates’ positions are. But I’m intrigued that you are giving the benefit of the doubt to a variety of them that you aren’t giving to Huckabee. What did Romney–similarly situated as a former governor, do in the area of education? Thompson “would likely seek” to do this or that based on his acknowledgment now–as a candidate trying to appeal to the GOP base in a primary, that NCLB was “a mistake.”
I don’t want to defend Bush, but the reality is that ANY advances (in the Conservative direction) on education (federally speaking) will almost definitely require compromises that hopefully will highlight the advantages of a Conservative approach and persuade the public to trust Conservatives more on this issue and allow Conservatives to reform education even more. It is kind of fun, frankly, to see the Leftists on education chafe under the most minimal standards and accountability in exchange for the federal funds they have demanded.
Has Huckabee endorsed mandatory pre-school? What about the other candidates? I’m from Tennessee, so I know that Thompson’s not always been the rock-ribbed Conservative that he is presumed by many to have been (or that he is currently being as).
Paul (and Hunter, to a degree) have had the luxury of being one of 345 legislators (only one of 32 and one of 53 in their own states, respectively), so it is harder to discern what they will or won’t do based on their rhetoric alone.
Spunky, I’m just bothered by over-the-top rhetoric (not yours necessarily, but a comment like “the most liberal candidate on education” is a bit much) from Conservatives. Huckabee isn’t perfect, but none of the candidates is. I’m sorry, but it isn’t a media conspiracy that’s keeping someone like Hunter from getting traction. I’m not working for some sinister one-world body just because I won’t support Ron Paul. etc. etc.
I will assimilate your information about Huckabee into my own decision-making process for sure (I haven’t “endorsed” him but initially wanted him to get a fair hearing and certainly didn’t want elites–media or party, to pick my candidate for me). I just want you and others to be as diligent to provide information and opinions on all the candidates . . . more than “he said he supports school choice” as proof that a candidate will be any less worthy of homeschoolers’ scorn than another candidate. That’s the problem with a “putting a candidate in the cross-hairs” mode of campaigning. One needs to be sure that the decision to eliminate one candidate will not come back to haunt you.
And that “come back to haunt you” danger is relevant for demonizing other candidates in a primary. Disagreement with another candidate is one thing, and we SHOULD draw distinctions between candidates in a primary. But the reality is that there is always a high likelihood that your candidate won’t advance to the general election and then you are faced with a buffet of your own words from the last campaign (the primary). When you throw into the mix that we as Christians have an even higher standard of how we should treat others, the objective of fair and reasonable criticism should be even more of a priority.
By: nedwilliams on December 4, 2007
at 5:17 pm
Ned, if you could provide statements about what I said, I’d be better able to clarify what I’m saying. I understand the distinction that a federalism means less intervention.
If I confused the terms it was a textual error made in haste not a reflection of of my lack of understanding. Sorry for the confusion. Like I said, I write most of this fairly quickly and I often think quicker than I type, which is often leads to such errors. I reread the post, but often not well enough.
“Which relates to the Clinton question. If a policy is pushed by a governor (vs. a president) then there are different issues to consider–such as local vs. federal control over policy.”
Exactly, and I understand that distinction. Huckabee has as a candidate a policies that will INCREASE federal control in edcuation. Not decrease it like HSLDA and I both support. He endorses national testing for arts and music. He endorses teacher testing. He is a proponent of NCLB which is OBE repackaged.
A “conservative” approach will require compromise. We’ve been over that. But I see the exact opposite happening. I watch as Bush joins with the most liberal Senator on education which turns our country in a more liberal/socialist direction rather than the conservative direction claimed. Yes, a “conservative” President signed on, but is federal standards in exchnage for funding a “conservative” position. Not at all. HSLDA rejects such a practice and so do I. As did Ronald Reagan, who endorsed the abolition of the Dept. of Ed. but sadly never accomplished that goal.
Ironically, HSLDA opposed NCLB until a exemption was written in for homeschoolers. They then supported it. While this seems to be a win for homeschoolers, and it is in the short term, in the long-term the integrity of the group is compromsed because it will become difficult to lobby against teacher certification and credentialing, that while still holding homeschoolers exempt will force compliance without needing to include them in the legislation itself.
That is compromise is the wrong direction.
“Has Huckabee endorsed mandatory pre-school?”
Huckabee said, ““Life doesn’t begin at conception and end at birth,” quips pro-life and pro-poor Mike Huckabee. “Every child deserves the opportunity to discover and use his God-given gifts and talents.”
How he applies that as President is still a question. His support for a federal ban on smoking, his tepid rejection of federal scholarships for children of illegals, and his call for federal standards in education along with his endorsement Preschool – 16 education standards lead me to “think” that some federal involvement at the preschool level wouldn’t be out of the question for a President Huckabee. I doubt he will make preschool mandatory at the federal level, but the use of money to force states to comply with “for the children” preschool policies isn’t off the table.
Unfortunately, the Democrats are outfront calling for Universal Preschool, it remains to be seen how the Republicans differentiate themselves and still appear compassionate and conservative.
“Spunky, I’m just bothered by over-the-top rhetoric (not yours necessarily, but a comment like “the most liberal candidate on education” is a bit much) from Conservatives….I just want you and others to be as diligent to provide information and opinions on all the candidates . ”
I don’t have a blog, I commented here simply because the topic was Huckabee and the endorsement by HSDLA. I felt I had information that was worth sharing. My intention was not to be the disseminator on education policy for all the candidates. If I feel I have something to contribute on another candidate I share that as well. I had a post on RedState on Guiliani and homeschooling that caused quite a stir until I removed it because moderating comments became too consuming.
I will likely support whoever the Republican candidate is, but I don’t want to blindly make the mistake that just because someone is a Christian they are conservative either.
By: Spunky on December 4, 2007
at 7:17 pm
Rudy clarified his views on education in a speech yesterday,
“He called the American education system “a massive government monopoly of the worst kind” and suggested government programs like No Child Left Behind were not the solution. “My basic view is this cannot be solved, on high, from a central authority,” Giuliani said, in response to a question about keeping No Child Left Behind. “And that would apply either to the federal government or a state government. The whole dynamic has to change and the power has to be put in the hands of the parents to select the schools.”
While the details are still not availabe, a candidate who encourages parental control, condemns NCLB along with federal and state control over parental definitely has my attention on this issue. This would not be a decider but talk like this will force the other candidates to say why MORE federal involvement is necessary to improve education.
By: Spunky on December 4, 2007
at 8:46 pm
When asked whether creationism should be taught in the schools here was Huckabee’s answer…
“But he expressed frustration that he is asked about it so often, arguing with the questioner that it ultimately doesn’t matter what his personal views are.
“That’s an irrelevant question to ask me – I’m happy to answer what I believe, but what I believe is not what’s going to be taught in 50 different states,” Huckabee said. “Education is a state function. The more state it is, and the less federal it is, the better off we are.”
A true statement, then why does he praise NCLB and advocate for teacher testing, federally mandated tests including in the arts and science, if it is a “state function.” If it’s a state function then make it a state function and call for the abolition of the Dept. of Ed just like he is calling for an elimination of the IRS. But don’t make it a a quasi-state function through federal mandates. Huckabee seems to want it both ways — A state function with federal mandates. Huckabee also opposed a school choice bill to let parents use vouchers for private schools if their school was failing. This from a man who thinks it’s okay to give tax dollars to the children of illegal immigrants for college. So a tax paying parent can’t use the tax money for a school of their choice, but an illegal immigrant can take tax dollars to pay for their child’s college degree. Add to that his tepid remarks about giving federal aid to the children of illegals and you have a candidate who seems confused in his various positions.
By: Spunky on December 5, 2007
at 1:36 am
Just to establish that Huckabee isn’t exactly what we think he is on education, the New Hampshire NEA chapter has decided to endorse both Huckabee and Hillary. It’s telling that Huckabee now has the endorsement of the most liberal education group in the country and the most conservative group in the country. He’s lying to one of them. Do we want to wait until we’re in the White House to find out which one?
By: Spunky on December 5, 2007
at 6:27 pm
[...] Comments Spunky on Mike Huckabee the Friend of Ho…The collision of cap… on Up Close And Personal: Duncan …JoeInArkansas on Why I Don’t Like [...]
By: Dear HSLDA: I Told You So ( New Hampshire NEA, Anti-Homeschool Organization Endorses Huckabee) « The Duncan Hunter Grass-Revolt: Unofficial Grassroot HQ on December 6, 2007
at 2:39 am
[...] of Home Education Magazine has put together quite a few links of note regarding Huckabee. I found Spunky’s quote she linked to particularly insightful: Huckabee is selling himself to conservative Christians as [...]
By: Principled Discovery » If the foundations be destroyed, what shall the righteous do? –Psalm 11:3 on December 17, 2007
at 8:59 am
I’m running a series on Huckabee and education. The first post went up yesterday on his homeschool legislation and I just posted the second on his state education reforms. You can click on my name to read them.
By: Spunky on December 18, 2007
at 6:40 pm