This was a column I wrote for an online newspaper, and have submitted to several others but have yet to see it show up. Though I have seen it pop up on a few blogs. Feel free to take anything from it, or even the whole thing, and submit it or give it to someone. Anything to get the word out! Take heart my friends, Hunter’s day is fast approaching!

—–
Conservatives Need To Rally Behind Duncan Hunter
posted July 30, 2007

It doesn’t take much to see that conservative, Republican voters are still having a little trouble deciding which way to turn in the 2008 presidential election. If you listen closely to the American people, you will hear people talking about the concept of an ideal candidate. Sean Hannity described him as someone with the optimism and the ability to speak to the public like Ronald Reagan, and with the intellectual backbone of Newt Gingrich. Let me make a proposal to you about Congressman Duncan Hunter.

Congressman Hunter is not just another politician. If you look at his list of accomplishments, you will see that he has supported many issues that conservatives hold dear, and actually did something about them with passion and intense commitment. He wrote the bill to build the border fence, he wrote the bill to define person-hood at conception, he has stood up to government over-spending, he has supported enlarging our national defense, and he is a lone voice speaking out for bringing manufacturing jobs to our country. He has perfect ratings from the NRA, the National Right to Life, the Eagle Forum, The Campaign for Working Families, and Americans for Better Immigration. He has been a leader to strengthen our national defense in the style of Ronald Reagan as chairman of the Armed Services committee. He has been a leader for strong borders, he built the fence in San Diego that cut drug and human trafficking by 90%. He has never stopped lobbying the president to finish the job. He has never voted for amnesty, he has never voted pro-choice, he was a Vietnam veteran, he has 26 years of experience, and he has never backed down on his Reagan-conservative principles.

But don’t take my word for it, I encourage you to investigate congressman Hunter and see that this is just the tip of the iceberg of his strong conservative ideals and corresponding accomplishments. Join the countless others that have encountered Congressman Hunter, his policies, his record, and left with their jaws dropped.

The reaction to the McCain-Kennedy bill earlier this summer said something very important about our country. It proved that the people can still have the power in this country when they stand up for what they believe in. Some have said that Duncan Hunter could never rally enough support to win. I highly disagree. Selectsmart.com created a poll in which people were asked to define the perfect candidate. When the answers were compared to current candidates, 69% had describe Duncan Hunter. Furthermore, according to the Washington Post, 74% of Americans agree with Mr. Hunter’s Iraq policy (focus on training the Iraqi military so we can leave, but leave safely). His success is dependent on people like you or me.

In this country, anything can happen. In fact, I have never heard a conservative disagree with Hunter on policy. I have merely heard the excuse that we should settle for someone more moderate. When a moderate runs, the Republicans lose portions of the conservative base, the Libertarians, and the conservative Democrats. History has proven that moderates do not win for the Republican party. In fact, if the GOP could rally every conservative vote, they would win by a landslide unprecedented in American history. If the people decide that they want a president who will actually enforce their borders, stand up for their jobs, protect their economy, end government over spending, and strengthen our national security, I strongly suggest that we rally behind Congessman Duncan Hunter. We can do it.

In an election with a pro-choice and pro-amnesty mayor, a former liberal governor, and a senator from Tennessee who has an immigration voting record very similar to that of John McCain and who has hired a strong open-border advocate to his campaign, I hope we can give a close look at Duncan Hunter. He could be that elusive, ideal candidate that everyone has been whispering about and keeps hoping will show up. I strongly encourage you to join me in supporting Congressman Duncan Hunter. I will leave you with Mr. Hunter’s vision for this country, and if it sounds anything like yours, please pay him the attention a candidate like this deserves. He said, “I would like to see a country where the day I walk out of the White House, after a couple of terms, the American people are more independent of government than the day that I walked in.”

Just like fighting for our borders, his success is dependent on you, the American people. But it’s up to you.

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_110780.asp

Today is a day to sit down and reflect on all the blessings that we have. One thing I know that we all have in common, is the blessing of a free country. A safe country. Men and women risking their lives on the other side of the world to protect us. We have these and many more blessings in common.

Yet these blessings are under attack. We can sit here today and merely appreciate them, or we can resolve to do something to protect them.

We have an open, unprotected border. We have millions of illegals taking jobs Americans want, and living off of our tax dollars without paying taxes themselves. In the upcoming election, we have a Senator from Tennessee that spent much of his career making it easy for illegals to work here. We have a Senator and Vietnam veteran who led the charge to give amnesty to illegals and put off building the fence. We have a mayor of NYC who stood up for sanctuary city policies. We have a governor from one of the most liberal states in the union.

Duncan Hunter is the one to stand up for a secure border. He built a border fence in San Diego, and has a perfect rating from Americans for Better Immigration because he has NEVER voted for amnesty, and has stood up for increased penalties on companies that hire illegals.

Many of us are thankful today for the blessing of having families that love us. Today, two border patrol agents sit in prison while their familes gather for Thanksgiving Day. The crime of these agents? They were doing their job, protecting our country from a dangerous, illegal alien trying to cross the border. The other day, President Bush pardoned two turkeys for Thanksgiving…while two of our patriots remain imprisoned away from their families.

Duncan Hunter promises to pardon Ramos and Compean when he is elected president. No other candidate has made such a promise. And while all the other candidates have been sitting with their consultants figuring out how to appear conservative, Duncan Hunter was writing a letter urging President Bush to pardon Ramos and Compean for Thanksgiving.

Right now, we have a trade deficit that is growing by 20 billion dollars a year. We are losing jobs by the truckload. We have nearly no manufacturers, which provide high-paying jobs and American quality equipment for our troops. The reason for this catastrophe? Most Favored Nation trade status with China, where we are being cheated by millions of trade dollars… trade dollars that are being used by China to build missiles, ships, rockets, guns, and selling a lot of them to insurgents that are killing our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Duncan Hunter is the ONLY candidate to have voted against Most Favored Nation trade status, predicting all the problems it would create. Fred Thompson voted yes. John McCain voted yes. Ron Paul voted yes and said he would do it again. Tom Tancredo voted yes (but in his defense, he admits that it was a mistake). Mike Huckabee is extremely happy that China is now becoming part of the mainstream
Duncan Hunter tried to pass a bill that would force China to play by the rules, and as president promises to fix these bad trade deals.

Government spending is out of control, while we continue to exhibit less stewardship in our defense spending.

Duncan Hunter is a stickler for making sure we have the weapons and equipment our military needs, and for cutting spending elsewhere. Duncan will support an amendment to require a balanced budget, and for drastically cutting all other spending so we may increase defense spending.

1/3 of my generation has been killed. 1/3 of my generation is missing right now. 1/3 of my generation was aborted. Right now, more children have been aborted in the United States than the numbers of deaths under Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini combined.

Fred Thompson does not support a constitutional amendment to protect the unborn, saying that it should be left up to the states. In other words, the rights of the state usurp the rights of human beings. Or maybe Fred doesn’t believe they’re human beings. Rudy Giuliani is adamantly pro-choice. Mitt Romney used to be very pro-choice, and who knows if he will “change his mind” again. Duncan Hunter wrote a bill to define life at conception, which would make the 14th amendment of the Constitution apply to protect the unborn. Duncan Hunter will continue work for that bill, or a Constitutional amendment to protect life, and will not elect a judge unless they can see a sonagram and see a valuable, precious, human life.

Duncan Hunter supports school vouchers which places education back into the hands of the parents.

Duncan Hunter supports a constitutional amendment to protect marriage.

Duncan Hunter supports, and was an original co-sponsor of the Fair Tax

Duncan Hunter supports low taxes.

Duncan Hunter supports our troops.

Duncan Hunter was labeled an enemy by a Soviet Union newspaper, during the Cold War.

Duncan Hunter worked alongside Ronald Reagan.

Yes, we have many great blessings to be grateful for… but take a moment today not just to reflect upon what we have, but what we’re losing and what we must do to protect it.

Duncan Hunter is wrapping up a big fund-raiser this month to give him that last big push so the people can find out who Duncan Hunter is. Instead of going out and shopping tomorrow (and buying hundreds of dollars in Chinese-made products), give some money to Duncan’s campaign. Give a little to the only candidate standing up for the strength and prosperity of this country and for ending the things in the way.

<embed>< src=”http://lads.myspace.com/flash/Donation/DonationBadge_Blue_Hunter.swf” quality=”high” bgcolor=”#ffffff” width=”290″ height=”153″ name=”DonationBadge” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” pluginspage=”http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer”/></embed>

(If you can’t see the embeded donation link, go here: https://contribute.gohunter08.com/contribute.asp )

Some say that Duncan can’t win. By saying that, however, you’re only becoming part of the problem you’re complaining of. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. Stop being a part of the problem you’re complaining about. Stand up for what’s RIGHT, and what’s RIGHT can win.

Keep on Hunting, and may the Lord bless you and yours, and our great country, on this Thanksgiving day;

SK Johnson

I highly recommend this article

The GOP: A House Divided

November 18th, 2007 by Darvin Dowdy
The GOP has divided like some amoeba on a glass slide under a microscope.

There are the Globalists that continue to warn the various GOP candidates and politicians that they will damage their political careers if they take the side of those wanting to seal the border and strictly enforce existing immigration laws.  They blame the discontent by GOP voters on the Iraq War, run-away federal spending and scandalous behavior by elected GOP politicians.  They delight in pointing to the downfall of those who have taken strong enforcement first stances.    J.D. Hayworth lost his congressional seat in Arizona after taking a tough stance on the border.  George Allen of Virginia lost his senate seat, some say for the same reason.  Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania. And in the current presidential race the campaigns of both  hard line border enforcement candidates, Hunter and Tancredo appear to be sinking like a rock.  Their fundraising efforts a total joke.  Or so these geopolitical elitists would want us to believe.

And then there’s our side of the divided amoeba.  We don’t really have “advisers” and “strategists” telling us what our next move should be.  We live every day with the reality of illegal immigration and its negative, downward pull on our social structure.  We’ve observed the illegals banding together, marching in the streets of America.  Streets that we as taxpayers have paid to build.  We saw them waving Mexican flags and burning American flags.  Their monumental ingratitude.  We’ve watched our politicians allow these illegal hordes to invade our nation and enjoy rights and privileges that actually accede our own.   And when we dared to raise complaints regarding this dangerous and worsening situation these same politicians, that we elected,  presented us with disrespect, insults and intimidation.  Yet we fight on to maintain and protect our nations sovereignty.

Sadly, we are losing.  The globalists controlling our party seem to be gaining the upper hand.  Both  Hunter and Tancredo are nearly out of cash ( link ).  The other candidates , good men all, will simply not remain on our side in the long term, in my view.  They are making all the correct noises now because they want our votes.  But when the battle gets intense they’ll fall back on they’re long proven expertise – the art of compromise.

So the question begs to be answered – why?  Why have the campaigns of Hunter and Tancredo faltered?   Certainly its not lack of support.  Duncan Hunter recently left the entire GOP pack in the dust in the Texas Straw Poll.  No one was even close.  He’s also won other straw polls. Tancredo did well in the recent Iowa straw.  Why are they so upside down in the fundraising department?  Would it be fair to say that their followers are a bunch of  dunces who go about waving their flags and emotions in the air?  Who are so stupid that they can’t figure out that it takes money to run a campaign?  God forbid as I count myself among them.   Well the jury is not yet in on that verdict yet.  But honestly, something simply doesn’t add up.  About 60% of Americans support tougher enforcement of immigration laws.  Hunter and Tancredo both have large followings.  So where are the donors?

Where the heck are these so called Border Watch groups, I ask?  Groups like the Minutemen Project?  And U.S. Border Watch?  Jim Gilchrist’s  Wake Up America?  And U.S. Border Control?  And these are just a few.  There are many more org’s of this nature.  But when you visit these sites you see no open support for Hunter or Tancredo.  No ads, banners or anything.   You can’t tell me that there isn’t a way to, legally, get the word out to their members regarding the fundraising woe’s of these 2 candidates.   My gosh the entire Borders/Illegals issue is at stake!  Certainly the decision makers within these organizations must have enough snap to know that without enlightened politicians and originalist judges on the bench our cause of U.S. sovereignty is doomed!  Many of the org’s have become bogged down in the details and have lost sight of the mission.  I ask all who read this to begin some kind of email campaign or other correspondence to these org’s immediately.  Especially those who might be members of such  groups.  Put pressure on them to more aggressively work for our 2 valiant candidates Hunter and/or Tancredo.  Withhold your donations to these groups until they regain the correct priorities.  Inform them, if they don’t know, of the dire fundraising situation that our 2 candidates face and encourage them to formulate an action plan to help keep these campaigns effective financially.  These candidates can not be effective without TV/Radio campaigns and that takes money.

And one might ask, where is corporate America?  Why no help for the Hunter and Tancredo campaigns from large U.S. companies?   One of the main thrusts of the Hunter campaign is to bring manufacturing back to the U.S.   You’d think large companies would be all over that and the donations would be pouring in.  Not so.  You see the corporate fat cats see the blood in the water.  Republican blood.  So the corporate cowards are shifting over to the dem’s thinking that the GOP will be devoured by the sharks.  The CEO’s like the idea of Hillary Care.  A huge chunk of their annual budget goes toward medical insurance benefits for their employees.  They like the idea of that massive expenditure instead being diverted into their quarterly bonus’.   Additionally, they love the continued flow of cheap labor coming from across the border.   This is why both Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo are persona non grata in the eyes of the corporate fat cats.  And the dem’s are wallowing in money.

So while the fundraising efforts of our valiant candidates Hunter and Tancredo continue to sink into the quagmire, the globalists that have hijacked “our” GOP are standing around in the shadows having a good laugh at our expense.  Snickering at us. Also sinking into the quagmire is our cause of sealing the borders and insisting that our elected officials see to it that immigration laws are strictly enforced.  Why should they listen to us?  We can’t even keep our own candidates in a liquid financial state.    So to all of you who still believe that the notion of national sovereign borders is not an antiquated, obsolete concept,  I ask you, do you enjoy the sting of defeat?  How do you like being laughed at, rebuked and put back into your place by the elitists?

I also put forth the question – is it too late to reverse this negative trend?  Is there still time? I believe there is time but none to waste.   I welcome your comments.  And who is your least-favorite GOP open borders globalist? Leave a link.   DD

Please pass along.

OPEN LETTER TO DR. MICHAEL FARRIS AND THE HOME SCHOOL LEGAL DEFENSE ASSOCIATION

Dear Dr. Farris, Michael Smith, and the HSLDA,

My name is *SK Johnson and I am an 18 year old home educated student from *************.  I have been home schooled my entire educational career, and am preparing to graduate this coming May.  During my time as a home schooler I have been impressed with your organization and its tireless work to defend home schooling.  I know your organization to be a true friend to families who want to have the ability to raise their children in their own homes.

I am a very politically aware and involved individual, and was interested to read your letter endorsing Governor Mike Huckabee for President in 2008.  I was excited that the HSLDA was taking an early interest in the upcoming election.  At the time I received your letter I had been supporting a different candidate, but your letter did encourage me to take a closer look at Governor Huckabee.  I liked a lot of what I saw in his positions and rhetoric.  Yet, and I say this with the utmost of respect for you and your organization, the more I investigated the more baffled I became by your endorsement.

The first thing I noted was Governor Huckabee’s own words from his book, From Hope to Higher Ground. He states in this book, “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?….Although the teachers’ union in Arkansas never supported me (mainly because they have so long been controlled by the machinery of the Democratic Party) improving education in the public schools has understandably been a priority for me.”  I was somewhat bothered by this statement, especially because of the point that he makes that the reason the teachers’ unions never supported him was because of politics, but not because of differing policies.  So I decided to dig a little deeper.

At Governor Huckabee’s State of the State address to the Arkansas legislature of January 9, 2001, Governor Huckabee said these words about teachers’ salaries:  “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.”

In defense of Mr. Huckabee, some have argued that he was forced by the Arkansas judicial system, and by the State constitution to raise taxes to go towards the public educational system.  On this issue I am not an authority, and have no strong opinion.  I however find it telling that regardless of the circumstances surrounding these decisions, Governor Huckabee took the liberty to ‘brag’ about these decisions and actions.  The quote in the last paragraph is one example, as is Governor Huckabee’s speech to the National Educational Association (an organization, as you know, that is vehemently against home education, and many of the HSLDA’s main positions).  A clip of the speech can be found here: ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hO4_5XOSzKk ).  Whether he was forced to do it or not, he was proud of it.

I have subsequently been made aware that Governor Huckabee has been specifically against many of the HSLDA’s positions on education.  The HSLDA website says the following, “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.”  This is in complete contradiction with the quotes stated above, in addition to Huckabee’s initiation of the Smart Start program in Arkansas that increased funding to the public schools.  He also has supported mandated testing, which the HSLDA has been against.  Governor Huckabee said, “You wouldn’t go to the football game or the basketball game or the baseball game and say, ‘Just turn the scoreboard off,’ 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.”

At this point in my research into Governor Huckabee’s history on education I came to the conclusion that although his support of public education goes against my personal views and the views of the HSLDA, perhaps his support of homeschooling was what matters.  I read with keen interest the news stories about Huckabee’s home school legislation, and when he appointed a home school mom to the school board.  I have immense respect for those actions.  Yet, once again, some more frustrating information came to my attention.  There is an article on the HSLDA website from around the year 1999 when Arkansas gained the “unique distinction of becoming the first state in the nation to add restrictions to its existing home school law….The new law, among other things, establishes notification deadlines and imposes a 14-day waiting period before parents are allowed to withdraw their children from public school to begin home schooling mid-semester.” *   The article commends Mike Huckabee’s original work to support home schooling, but clearly points out his support of Act 1117 (the legislation mentioned above), which he signed on April 5th, 1999.  Even Mike Huckbee’s true commitment to home schooling is questionable.

I think it is also noteworthy, though possibly grasping at straws and/or coincidental, that before your organization’s endorsement, Mike Huckabee’s position paper on his website stated that “I believe that every child in America has the right to a quality public education”

You are correct when you make the point that a moderate nominee can not win the 2008 election.  The Republican party MUST elect a consistently conservative candidate if they are to have any chance to win the 2008 election.  In my investigation into Mike Huckabee’s prior actions and positions, I continue to be convinced that Mike Huckabee could be more easily exposed as a moderate liberal than even Rudy Giuliani.  Could Hilary Clinton be just waiting for Huckabee to get the nomination, knowing how easy it would be to beat up on him?

For one thing, while Governor in Arkansas, Huckabee initiated and supported the ARKids First program.  This program was a child healthcare initiative that has been compared to the S-CHIP.  Similarly, when the candidates were asked if they supported President Bush’s veto of the S-CHIP, Governor Huckabee kept his hand down.  Once, in Arkansas, Governor Huckabee stood side by side with John Tyson of Tyson foods applauding our government’s ‘open door policy’ and joking about the fact english speaking, white men would soon become a minority because of all the hispanic workers we NEED.  He also believes that there is not a problem with mexican workers taking our jobs.  He was against legislation in Arkansas that would deny public benefits and the right to vote to illegal immigrants, saying it “inflames those who are racist and bigots and makes them think there’s a real problem. But there’s not.” He also made it clear that he did not think the Bush-McCain-Kennedy immigration bill was amnesty.  He has also supported allowing homosexuals to serve in the military, smoking bans, food content regulations,  and public funding for alternative fuel sources.

Although Mr. Huckabee has been relatively steadfast on social issues, I was surprised to find the following quote about abortion made by Governor Huckabee in January of 2001, “I’m pro life, but I know not everyone agrees with me on that particular topic, and I respect that.”   He also said on a more recent occasion, “You know, I’ve never hated the Clintons.  I still don’t, I have great respect for them.”

The loss of jobs, the discovery of dangerous materials in Chinese products, and the current trade debt because of increased trade status with China is quickly becoming a hot button conservative issue.  More and more conservatives are against our current free trade policies and are advocating more Reagan-like trade policies.  Governor Huckabee said this about trade with China in April of 2007, “The good news is that China is becoming much more a part of the mainstream.  In its economic development and even in giving greater liberties to its people.”  Ironically, it was announced just yesterday (at the time of this writing) that China would not allow Beijing Olympic attendees to bring in more than 1 Bible into the country.  Christian persecution has not ended in China, and neither has countless other human right violations that occur in that country.  Beyond that, China is sending our trade dollars to make weapons going to Iran, which is ending up in the hands of Hezbollah, Afghani insurgents, and Iraqi insurgents.  Some of the weapons, however, came directly from China and not through Iran.  These statements by Governor Huckabee are naive and dangerous to say the least.

Although the bulk of my letter has been in opposition to Mike Huckabee, I would like to take a moment and discuss the candidate I am supporting: Congressman Duncan Hunter.

Duncan Hunter has spent his career standing up for families, freedom, and for a strong and secure country.  He is considered the ‘father of the border fence,’ as he has been the leader for immigration reform and border security.  He was Chairman of the Armed services committee, where he worked hard to make sure our troops got the support and equipment they have needed to keep us safe.  He accurately predicted the dangers that would ensue with increased trade with China, and has been against our current trade deals with them from the beginning, himself advocating Reagnesque mirror-trade.  He authored the bill to define life at conception over 5 times, and once stood up the ACLU’s attempts to take down a cross at a veteran memorial.  Focus on the Family commended Congressman Hunter on his creation of the Parents’ Empowerment Act which gave parents the right to sue organizations over pornographic material that is too accessible to children.  He was also an original co-sponsor of the Fair Tax.

Duncan Hunter has perfect ratings from Americans for Better Immigration, the Eagle Forum, the NRA, the National Right to Life, and Concerned Women for America.  He has been labeled the most conservative member of Congress in the race.  Ann Coulter has already announced her support of him, and Michael Reagan said Congressman Hunter is “everything conservatives want.”  According to trusted friends of mine, Michael Reagan even compared Duncan Hunter to his father, Ronald Reagan, in a conversation with him after a particular debate.

When it comes to home schooling and education, Hunter has always supported school choice endeavors, decreased federal involvement in public education, and the rights of home schoolers.   He is rated 17% by the NEA, indicating anti-public education votes and he said the following about home education, “Taking into consideration that approximately 2 million children are taught at home, it is important that we make every effort to ensure these students have the same access and opportunities to federal benefits, such as financial aid, as those who attend public school.”

It is not too late for Duncan Hunter to gain massive support.  Ronald Reagan himself was at a similar position at this point in his campaign for the 1980 presidency.  Congressman Hunter won the Texas straw poll by a landslide with only a few days of campaigning, beating Fred Thompson (the runner up) 2-1.  According to selectsmart.com, Duncan Hunter is the candidate most consistent with the general public’s positions 69% of the time.  Congressman Hunter can still win, and it is up to us to put him in the White House.

I have no doubt that your endorsement was made with integrity, and I have great respect for your reasoning and your desire to become involved in this election.  The upcoming election could be a very defining one for our country, and it deserves our utmost attention and involvement.  I do not wish this letter to come as an embarrassment or a ridicule against you or your decision.  I merely hope that you can consider either taking back your endorsement, making a second additional endorsement, or at least help promote the positions and viability of Congressman Duncan Hunter.  He is a true friend of the family, of freedom, and of home schooling.

You and your organization are in my prayers, as is our country.

God bless,

**** *******

To find out more about Congressman Hunter, visit www.gohunter08.com or my own website, www.dhgrassrevolt.wordpress.com

*http://www.hslda.org/courtreport/v15n3/V15N3AR.asp?PrinterFriendly=True

Pat Robertson has endorsed the most socially liberal candidate on the Republican side.

The Homeschool Legal Defense Association has endorsed the most pro-public education candidate who goes to the NEA conventions to brag about it.

And now, the National Right to Life is endorsing a man who places the rights of states over the rights of the unborn.

If ever there were a time for Americans to stand up and take back our country, the time is now.

<object width=”425″ height=”355″><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.youtube.com/v/d4rDBqAoMV8&rel=1″></param><param name=”wmode” value=”transparent”></param><embed src=”http://www.youtube.com/v/d4rDBqAoMV8&rel=1″ type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” wmode=”transparent” width=”425″ height=”355″></embed></object>

“I had no problem with the state getting involved because it’s one of their citizens. but I wasn’t sure how the federal government had a role in all that.”’ -Mike Huckabee

Note:  I have been under scrutiny, and some could even say attack, for my recent focus on bringing out information about other candidates.  Namely, Mike Huckabee.  I have made it clear in the past and will state again that I do not believe in personal attacks on other candidates, but I do believe in giving information about candidates so that whoever may read what I try to communicate will best understand the differences between the candidates and why I support Duncan Hunter.  Please note, that I do not speak for the campaign but only as an individual.  I believe in assisting the common good by providing information that I believe to be important to all readers, and to specifically help inform Duncan Hunter supporters so that they may affectively advertise our candidate.

Although I am a fan of the Homeschool Legal Defense Association, I once again bring my complaint against them for endorsing Mike Huckabee.  My complaint this time uses information from the HSLDA’s own website.  This article about a new law passed in Arkansas in 1999 discusses prior legislation Mike Huckabee signed that supported homeschooling (this piece of legislation is the main reason homeschoolers have been drawn to Mike Huckabee because this legislation helped a lot of homeschoolers who had been beaten down by prior laws).  However, most importantly, this articles deals with legislation in 1999 that helped bring Arkansas back where it came from in regard to homeschooling.  This legislation was signed by Mike Huckabee, and to my knowledge nothing else was done in his administration in this regard, positively or negatively.  Please correct me if I am wrong.

http://www.hslda.org/courtreport/v15n3/V15N3AR.asp?PrinterFriendly=True

Arkansas

Home Schoolers Lose Ground
with New Law
The enactment of House Bill 1724 on April 5, 1999, gives Arkansas the unique distinction of becoming the first state in the nation to add restrictions to its existing home school law. Sponsored by Representative Jim Magnus (R-55), a home schooling father from Little Rock, the new law, among other things, establishes notification deadlines and imposes a 14-day waiting period before parents are allowed to withdraw their children from public school to begin home schooling mid-semester.

Why Was H.B. 1724 Introduced?
The public school lobby had been working overtime to convince the Arkansas legislature that the home school law was too permissive. Their efforts paid off and home schoolers were informed by unfriendly legislators that the home school law was going to be changed. In an effort to forestall unbearably hostile and restrictive legislation, the home school leaders decided to introduce their own bill.
Home School Legal Defense Association opposes any effort to increase state regulation of home education and did not support H.B. 1724.
However, not satisfied with the restrictions imposed by H.B. 1724, some legislators introduced two other freedom-grabbing plans—H.B. 2037 and Senate Bill 631.
Introduced by Representatives Jerry Allison (D-86), Jimmy Jeffress (D-83), and Mike Hathorn (D-24), H.B. 2037 would have required parents to provide notice to the superintendent at least 14 days prior to the beginning of the semester for which they intended to begin home schooling. After the start of a semester, parents could begin home schooling only if their child was failing, he had a serious medical condition, or they had documented safety concerns. The superintendent or school board could waive the notice requirements.
In addition, no public school student under disciplinary action could begin home schooling unless the superintendent or school board permitted it, the semester ended, or the student was expelled.
Home school parents would have had to provide an annual report to the public school superintendent by June 30 evidencing compliance with a laundry list of new requirements: parent possession of a high school diploma or GED certificate; 180-day minimum instructional year; instruction provided in required subjects; educational records of subjects and activities; and a portfolio of the student’s work.
S. B. 631, introduced by Senator Jodie Mahony (D-2) of El Dorado, required parents to provide two notices of intent to home school each year to the local superintendent—the first by August 15 for the upcoming fall semester and the second by December 15 for the upcoming spring semester. Exceptions would only be allowed for academic failure, serious medical conditions, documented safety concerns, or a decision to home school within the first 14 calendar days of a semester. The superintendent or the school board could waive the 14-day notification requirement.
Clearly oppressive and unreasonable, H.B. 2037 and S.B. 631 were stopped at the committee level because of the outspoken opposition of those attending the legislative hearings.

What Did the Previous Law Require?
Originally enacted in 1985 under then-Governor Bill Clinton, Arkansas’ home school law recognized the right of parents to teach their children at home, but imposed considerable restrictions, especially for special education. In 1997, due largely to the efforts of Governor Mike Huckabee, Arkansas revised the law creating a much more favorable environment for home educators.
The 1997 law required parents to provide written notice to the local superintendent of their intent to provide a home school at the beginning of each school year or at the time during the school year that the parent withdrew the child from public school.
Now, just two years later, home school freedom in Arkansas has taken a step backwards and parents find themselves burdened by some of the same restrictions as before.

What Are the Requirements Under the New Law?
Now known as Act 1117, the H.B. 1724 law becomes effective 90 days after it was signed by Governor Huckabee on April 5, 1999. Therefore, it will begin to apply to home schooling families at the beginning of the 1999–2000 school year. The new restrictions placed on home schooling families under Act 1117 are as follows:

(1) Notice of intent must be given no later than August 15 by parents beginning home schooling in the fall semester or by December 15 for those beginning in the spring semester.

(2) Parents deciding to begin home schooling after the start of a semester are permitted to do so by providing the notice of intent 14 days prior to withdrawing the child from public school and each year thereafter at the beginning of the school year. The superintendent or the local school board may waive the 14-day waiting period.

(3) A public school student who is currently under disciplinary action for violation of any school policy is not eligible to begin home schooling unless (a) the superintendent or local school board chooses to allow the student to enroll in a home school, (b) the disciplinary action against the student has been completed or the school semester ends, whichever occurs first, or (c) the student has been expelled from public school.

    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. No such restriction exists for parents who decide to immediately remove their children to attend a private or parochial school in Arkansas. This raises serious issues regarding the right of parents to direct the education of their children and equal protection of the law as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
In addition, Arkansas is now the only state in the nation with a law prohibiting a student from beginning home schooling if the student is in the midst of disciplinary proceedings at the public school. Legislators enacted this change despite the fact that legal tools for dealing with disciplinary problems were already available to public school officials in the form of the Arkansas School Discipline Act, the Dismissal Act, and truancy provisions for students with unexcused absences. No public school student could escape disciplinary action by beginning to home school under prior law, yet legislators were willing to grant additional control to public school officials over the time when parents are permitted to begin home instruction. No such restriction exists for parents who decide to transfer their children to a private or parochial school, again raising serious constitutional questions.
Another discriminatory provision in H.B. 1724 states that any home schooling student who refuses to participate in the state testing program shall be subject to prosecution for truancy. Public school students refusing to participate in state testing would not be subject to truancy prosecution.
Prior law required parents moving into the state mid-school year to provide a written notice of intent to the local superintendent within 30 days. The new law requires parents to provide a written notice upon moving into a different school district during the school year, even though notice was given in their former district.
The new law also makes a minor change in the previous requirement that a parent sign a waiver releasing the State of Arkansas from any future liability for education of a child in a home school. It now provides that the waiver signed by the parent must acknowledge that the State of Arkansas “is not liable for the education of their child during the time that parent chooses to home school.” State officials apparently believe that the state is liable for the education of children during the time they are enrolled in public school. Presumably, any child not receiving an adequate education as a public school student could seek redress from the state.

Compulsory Attendance Age Change Enacted
Signed into law by Governor Huckabee on March 15, 1999, H.B. 1197 makes any child who is five years of age on or before September 15 subject to the compulsory attendance law. However, parents may opt their children out of kindergarten if (1) the child will not be six years old by September 15 and (2) the parent files a signed kindergarten waiver form with the local school district. Prior law applied compulsory attendance requirements to children who were five years old by September 1.

——-

Thank you to Spunky of the Spunky Homeschooler for bringing this to my attention.  Further information will follow in the near future.

http://www.spunkyhomeschool.blogspot.com/

—-

From Quin Hillyer at Human Events:  (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22774)

[F]ormer Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is about as economically conservative as was liberal New York Republican Governor Nelson Rockefeller — which means that on substance at least, Huckabee absolutely stunk up the stage, especially when he refused to back President George W. Bush’s veto of the crazily socialistic expansion of the SCHIP children’s health program. (Huckabee was so liberal overall that Clinton’s lefty former Labor Secretary positively gushed over him in post-debate analysis on CNBC.)