Dana Loesch
Dana Radio
May 11, 2010
(*Update below, also information on NEA donations.)
If quantity over quality ensured success, then our school districts would have no problem. As it stands, money is egregiously wasted while bad teachers fail to make a impact in the classroom as the hands of good teachers are tied by the system.
Missouri faces yet another education rights grab from certain lawmakers who view elementary school as little more than daycare. From FHE:
Monday afternoon the “Keaveny Amendment” was added to HB1543 on the Senate floor. There is a strong possibility that the bill will pass the Senate by the time they adjourn tonight, Monday, May 10th. It will then go to the House for final approval. As it advances it will go the Conference Committee (a committee to work out the differences between the House version and the Senate. )
Please call your Senator and Representative. They need to know that we oppose the provision to lower the compulsory attendance age in the “Keaveny Amendment” to HB 1543. The amendment would lower compulsory attendance in St. Louis and Kansas City.
If this provision is not taken out in the Conference Committee, then we will have a Rally.
Instructing children better, not forcing them into school earlier and longer, is what will make an academic difference.
Developing this story further …
(h/t Cathy, Nicky)
*UPDATE:
From HSLDA:
Missouri–Act Immediately to Prevent Expansion of Compulsory School Attendance
Dear HSLDA Members and Friends:
Yesterday the Missouri Senate amended HB 1543 to lower from 7 to 6 the age at which compulsory school attendance starts in St. Louis and Kansas City. This bill is moving very quickly, and we must act promptly to block this expansion of government control over the lives of young children and their parents. This amendment is known as “the Keaveny Amendment.”ACTION REQUESTED
Call both your state senator AND representative. Your message can be as simple as, “Please remove the Keaveny Amendment from HB 1543. Parents–not the government–should decide whether 6-year-olds are ready to start schooling.”Use our legislative toolbox to find the name and contact information for your senator and representative.
It’s bad enough that the Keaveny Amendment would put 6-year-olds under educational compulsion in St. Louis and Kansas City. But if this passes, it would surely eventually be forced on the entire state. This is exactly what happened when “only” St. Louis was authorized to raise the compulsory age a while back. In short order, the age was raised for the entire state. Wherever you live in Missouri, your freedom is threatened. [my emphasis]
Under the Keaveny Amendment, any child parents “intend” to homeschool would not be subject to the lower compulsory age. But allowing the application of law to hinge on something as vague and subjective as a parent’s mere “intention” invites a court challenge. And it invites the public to look on all homeschoolers with a jaundiced eye. Either the exception will be struck down by a court, or it will encourage the public to think less of homeschool families.
Many education experts have concluded that beginning a child’s formal education too early may actually result in burnout and poor scholastic performance later.
Lowering the compulsory attendance age erodes the authority of parents who are in the best position to determine when their child’s formal education should begin. The bill would restrict parents’ freedom to decide if their children are ready for school.
Expanding the compulsory attendance age would bring an inevitable tax increase to pay for more classroom space and teachers to accommodate the additional students compelled to attend public school.
The problem isn’t hours spent in school or money spent on the problem (we spend a greater percentage of our GDP on education, almost more than anything else), it’s that the bureaucratic nightmare that is the NEA prevents impact from having effect in the classroom. That hands of good teachers are tied by a teacher’s union that seemingly spends more time electioneering and promoting the DNC than our students’ best interests:
In 2010 the NEA donated 87% funds to the DNC as opposed to only 14% to the RNC. That was the biggest percentage that the NEA had supported the RNC ever. The NEA office in my former neighborhood proudly displayed Kerry for president and Obama for president signs in the streetfront window during the last two elections. I understand the reasoning behind the teacher’s union which is to support candidates they view as being friendliest to education – but is it about education or the NEA’s bottom line? Vouchers were a Godsend to the disadvantaged youth in Washington D.C., until they were stripped from them. It would have forced schools to compete and competition begets improvement. It also means that those who don’t improve lose out, which leads many to question whether or not that was the stance the NEA was protecting.
Compare the spending:
The NEA also gave money to La Raza, among other groups classified as non-educational entities:
- $7,900 to the National Council of La Raza
La Raza made headlines last week when one of their teachers called for a revolt on America:
And our government and this group wants to increase the amount of decisions they make in our children’s lives?
