Why Dept. of Education Must Go

[tmg19103]

And this is what we waste our tax dollars on....

School 1967 vs. School 2007

Scenario: Jack goes quail hunting before school, pulls into school parking lot with shotgun in gun rack.

1967 - Vice principal comes over, looks at Jack's shotgun, goes to his car and gets his own shotgun to show Jack.
2007 - School goes into lockdown, the FBI is called, and Jack is hauled off to jail and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors are called in to assist traumatized students and teachers.

Scenario: Johnny and Mark get into a fistfight after school.
1967 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up buddies.
2007 - Police are called; SWAT team arrives and arrests Johnny and Mark. They are charged with assault and both are expelled even though Johnny started it.

Scenario: Jeffrey won't sit still in class, disrupts other students.
1967 - Jeffrey is sent to the principal's office and given a good paddling. Returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again.
2007 - Jeffrey is given huge doses of Ritalin. Becomes a zombie. Tested for ADD. School gets extra state funding because Jeffrey has a disability.

Scenario: Billy breaks a window in his neighbor's car and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt.
1967 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college, and becomes a successful businessman.
2007 - Billy's dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy is removed to foster care and joins a gang. State psychologist tells Billy's sister that she remembers being abused herself and their dad goes to prison. Billy's mom has an affair with the psychologist.

Scenario: Mark gets a headache and takes some Aspirin to school.
1967 - Mark takes Aspirin and headache goes away.
2007 - Police are called and Mark is expelled from School for drug violations. His car is searched for drugs and weapons.

Scenario: Pedro fails high-school English.
1967 - Pedro goes to summer school, passes English, and goes to college.
2007 - Pedro's cause is taken up by local human rights group. Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that making English a requirement for graduation is racist. US Civil Liberties Association files class action lawsuit against state school system and Pedro's English teacher. English is banned from core curriculum. Pedro is given his diploma anyway but ends up mowing lawns for a living because he cannot speak English.

Scenario: Johnny takes apart leftover Independence Day firecrackers, puts them in a model airplane paint bottle and blows up an anthill.
1967 - Ants die.
2007 - Homeland Security and the FBI are called and Johnny is charged with domestic terrorism. Teams investigate parents, siblings are removed from the home, computers are confiscated, and Johnny's dad goes on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.

Scenario: Johnny falls during recess and scrapes his knee. His teacher, Mary, finds him crying, and gives him a hug to comfort him.
1967 - Johnny soon feels better and goes back to playing.
2007 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces three years in a federal prison. Johnny undergoes five years of therapy.

[greves]

Cool list.

Also: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6488468587715702384

[FreedomLover]

It's sad how much our sensiblities have changed.

[gpickett00]

hahahahaha

[noxagol]

It would be funnier if it weren't true.

[VoteRonPaul2008]

good, thank you, does anyone know if he plans to replace it with anything, or will it just be up to the states?

[noxagol]

good, thank you, does anyone know if he plans to replace it with anything, or will it just be up to the states?

Up to the states.

[greves]

He has talked about implementing a voucher system, while gradually phasing out public schooling and replacing it with private schooling across the board.

[Alien11]

It is with great regret I have to tell this story but here it goes.

I was a math teacher for 3 years as a grad student and was tutoring in the Help Room for College Algebra (a little above Algebra 2). Now occasionally we would get people from the lower course, Intermediate Algebra (Algerbra 2 about) come in and ask for help on their homework. I was helping this one student from Intermediate Algebra and we reached the end of the problem which was just to divide 1 by -1. How hard is that? First he stared at me for a minute looking for an answer. Then he finally took out a calculator and typed it in to find the answer. I just buried my hands in my face and walked out afte I was finished in total disgust. Is this what the system has come to, where college students are too stupid to do easy math in a COLLEGE setting. Even telling this story makes me pissed. I love teaching, but I refuse to teach zombies for students or stupidity.

[noxagol]

It is with great regret I have to tell this story but here it goes.

I was a math teacher for 3 years as a grad student and was tutoring in the Help Room for College Algebra (a little above Algebra 2). Now occasionally we would get people from the lower course, Intermediate Algebra (Algerbra 2 about) come in and ask for help on their homework. I was helping this one student from Intermediate Algebra and we reached the end of the problem which was just to divide 1 by -1. How hard is that? First he stared at me for a minute looking for an answer. Then he finally took out a calculator and typed it in to find the answer. I just buried my hands in my face and walked out afte I was finished in total disgust. Is this what the system has come to, where college students are too stupid to do easy math in a COLLEGE setting. Even telling this story makes me pissed. I love teaching, but I refuse to teach zombies for students or stupidity.

Yeah, when I got into college and was taking calculus, I was lost. Half the stuff the professor was doing I had never seen before, even though I got an A in pre-calc. It is disturbingly sad.

[Alien11]

Yeah, when I got into college and was taking calculus, I was lost. Half the stuff the professor was doing I had never seen before, even though I got an A in pre-calc. It is disturbingly sad.

Yeah it was comments like that that got me really pissed off at the Department of Education for letting high schools debase the entire structure of education. Students were so lost or so dumbed down that when they entered every subject seemed foreign. When I heard Ron say would abolish the DoE, I was sold from that moment on.

[noxagol]

Yeah it was comments like that that got me really pissed off at the Department of Education for letting high schools debase the entire structure of education. Students were so lost or so dumbed down that when they entered every subject seemed foreign. When I heard Ron say would abolish the DoE, I was sold from that moment on.

Yeah, I'm offering to home school my niece for my brother.

[ladyliberty]

I am a former Special Ed Teacher - the DoE is very corrupt - from the top to the bottom and every level in between - rotten to the core! Here is what ontheissues.org report as Ron Paul's stance on education:

Guarantee parity for home school diplomas

My commitment is to ensure that home schooling remains a practical alternative for American families. As President I will advance tax credits through the Family Education Freedom Act, which reduces taxes to make it easier for parents to home school by allowing them to devote more of their own funds to their children's education. I am committed to guaranteeing parity for home school diplomas and advancing equal scholarship consideration for students entering college from a home school environment.

Source: Campaign website, www.ronpaul2008.com, "Issues" Sep 1, 2007

Voted NO on allowing Courts to decide on "God" in Pledge of Allegiance.

Amendment to preserve the authority of the US Supreme Court to decide any question pertaining to the Pledge of Allegiance. The bill underlying this amendment would disallow any federal courts from hearing cases concerning the Pledge of Allegiance. This amendment would make an exception for the Supreme Court.

Proponents support voting YES because:

I believe that our Pledge of Allegiance with its use of the phrase "under God" is entirely consistent with our Nation's cultural and historic traditions. I also believe that the Court holding that use of this phrase is unconstitutional is wrong. But this court-stripping bill is not necessary. This legislation would bar a Federal court, including the Supreme Court, from reviewing any claim that challenges the recitation of the Pledge on first amendment grounds.

If we are a Nation of laws, we must be committed to allowing courts to decide what the law is. This bill is unnecessary and probably unconstitutional. It would contradict the principle of Marbury v. Madison, intrude on the principles of separation of powers, and degrade our independent Federal judiciary.

Opponents support voting NO because:

I was disappointed 4 years ago when two judges of the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that our Pledge, our statement of shared national values, was somehow unconstitutional. I do not take legislation that removes an issue from the jurisdiction of this court system lightly. This legislation is appropriate, however, because of the egregious conduct of the courts in dealing with the Pledge of Allegiance.

By striking "under God" from the Pledge, the Court has shown contempt for the Congress which approved the language, and, more importantly, shows a complete disregard for the millions of Americans who proudly recite the Pledge as a statement of our shared national values and aspirations. No one is required to recite the Pledge if they disagree with its message.

Reference: Watt amendment to Pledge Protection Act; Bill H R 2389 ; vote number 2006-384 on Jul 19, 2006

Voted NO on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges.

This vote is on a substitute bill (which means an amendment which replaces the entire text of the original bill). Voting YES means support for the key differences from the original bill: lowering student loan interest rates; $59 million for a new Predominantly Black Serving Institution program; $25 million for a new graduate Hispanic Serving Institution program; provide for year- round Pell grants; and repeal the Single Lender rule. The substitute's proponents say:

The original bill has some critical shortcomings. First and foremost, this substitute will cut the new Pell Grant fixed interest rate in half from 6.8% to 3.4%, to reduce college costs to those students most in need.

It would also establish a new predominantly black-serving institutions programs to boost college participation rates for low-income black students, and a new graduate Hispanic-serving institution program.

As we saw from 1995 to 2000, the questions employers were asking was not your race, not your ethnicity, not your religion, they wanted to know if you had the skills and talents to do the job. Most often today, those skills and that talent requires a higher education. A college education is going to have to become as common as a high school education.

The substitute's opponents say:

I feel it is not totally the Federal Government's responsibility to provide for all of higher education. The substitute has three critical flaws.

1.The name itself, "Reverse the Raid on Student Aid." Don't believe the hype. Not one student in America will receive less financial aid under our bill. Not one.

2. This amendment does not retain the $6,000 maximum Pell Grant award that our legislation has. In fact, they stay with the same old $5,800 maximum award.

3. It says that we are going to have a 3.4% interest rate for 1 year that is going to cost $2.7 billion, but it has no offsets whatsoever. How do they pay for it? They don't tell us.

Reference: Reverse the Raid on Student Aid Act; Bill HR 609 Amendment 772 ; vote number 2006-080 on Mar 30, 2006

Voted NO on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror.

Children's Prayers Resolution: Expressing the sense of Congress that schools should allow children time to pray for, or silently reflect upon, the country during the war against terrorism.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Isakson, R-GA; Bill H.Con.Res.239 ; vote number 2001-445 on Nov 15, 2001

Voted NO on requiring states to test students.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001: Vote to pass a bill that would authorize $22.8 billion in education funding, a 29 percent increase from fiscal 2001. The bill would require states to test students to track progress.

Reference: Bill sponsored by Boehner R-OH; Bill HR 1 ; vote number 2001-145 on May 23, 2001

Voted NO on allowing vouchers in DC schools.

Vote to create a non-profit corporation to administer federally-funded vouchers for low-income children in the District of Columbia.

Reference: Amendment introduced by Armey, R-TX; Bill HR 4380 ; vote number 1998-411 on Aug 6, 1998

Voted YES on vouchers for private & parochial schools.

Vote to pass a bill to allow states to use certain federal funds designated for elementary and secondary education to provide scholarships, or vouchers, to low-income families to send their children to private schools, including religious schools.

Reference: Bill sponsored by Riggs, R-CA; Bill HR 2746 ; vote number 1997-569 on Nov 4, 1997
Abolish the federal Department of Education.

Paul adopted the Republican Liberty Caucus Position Statement:

As adopted by the General Membership of the Republican Liberty Caucus at its Biannual Meeting held December 8, 2000.

WHEREAS libertarian Republicans believe in limited government, individual freedom and personal responsibility;
WHEREAS we believe that government has no money nor power not derived from the consent of the people;
WHEREAS we believe that people have the right to keep the fruits of their labor; and
WHEREAS we believe in upholding the US Constitution as the supreme law of the land;

BE IT RESOLVED that the Republican Liberty Caucus endorses the following [among its] principles:

The US Department of Education should be abolished, leaving education decision making at the state, local or personal level.

Parents have the right to spend their money on the school or method of schooling they deem appropriate for their children.

Source: Republican Liberty Caucus Position Statement 00-RLC2 on Dec 8, 2000

Rated 67% by the NEA, indicating a mixed record on public education.

Paul scores 67% by the NEA on public education issues

The National Education Association has a long, proud history as the nation's leading organization committed to advancing the cause of public education. Founded in 1857 "to elevate the character and advance the interests of the profession of teaching and to promote the cause of popular education in the United States," the NEA has remained constant in its commitment to its original mission as evidenced by the current mission statement:

To fulfill the promise of a democratic society, the National Education Association shall promote the cause of quality public education and advance the profession of education; expand the rights and further the interest of educational employees; and advocate human, civil, and economic rights for all.

In pursuing its mission, the NEA has determined that it will focus the energy and resources of its 2.7 million members toward the "promotion of public confidence in public education." The ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.
Source: NEA website 03n-NEA on Dec 31, 2003

Supports a Constitutional Amendment for school prayer.

Paul sponsored a resolution for a School Prayer Amendment:
H.J.RES.52 (2001), H.J.RES.66 (1999), S.J.RES. 1, H.J.RES.12, H. J. RES. 108, & H. J. RES. 55:

Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to prohibit individual or group prayer in public schools or other public institutions. No person shall be required by the United States or by any State to participate in prayer . Neither the United States nor any State shall compose the words of any prayer to be said in public schools.

H. J. RES. 78 (1997):
To secure the people's right to acknowledge God according to the dictates of conscience: Neither the United States nor any State shall establish any official religion, but the people's right to pray and to recognize their religious beliefs, heritage, or traditions on public property, including schools, shall not be infringed. Neither the United States nor any State shall require any person to join in prayer or other religious activity, prescribe school prayers, discriminate against religion, or deny equal access to a benefit on account of religion.

Proposed Legislation:
H.J.RES.52, School Prayer Amendment, 6/13/2001 (Murtha)
H.J.RES.12, School Prayer Amendment, 2/7/2001 (Emerson)
S.J.RES.1, School Prayer Amendment, 1/22/2001 (Thurmond)
H.J.RES.108, Voluntary School Prayer Amendment, 9/21/2000 (Graham)
H.J.RES.55, Voluntary School Prayer Amendment, 2/13/1997 (Stearnes, Hall, Watts)
H.J.RES.78, Amendment Restoring Religious Freedom, 5/8/1997 (Istook, et. al.)
Source: H.J.Res.78 97-HJR78 on May 8, 1997

[Alien11]

Yeah, I'm offering to home school my niece for my brother.

I agree. If I get married and move back to the states, then my kids are getting homeschooled for sure if things don't change.