School Board Meeting Debrief

I didn’t get to speak at the Cy-Fair ISD* school board meeting last night. That’s OK. It’s still an experience worth a debrief. (My sample speech was my last post.)

 

GATHERING FORCES

There was a crowd of us there by the time I arrived around 5:00, an hour before the meeting started. The citizen group who had notified people to come had a petition for people to sign if they couldn’t stay but wanted to offer support for our anti-CRT position. And we had a group prayer shortly after 5:15.

At 5:30 officials provided signups for public comment and citizen participation. Public comment is limited to items on the agenda, which was related mainly to showing honors earned by students, installing a new elementary school principal, and handling the budget. So we were signing up to speak during the citizen participation portion.

Only ten two-minute testimonies were allowed. When more than ten want to speak, they do a lottery. They do not tell you ahead of time who gets to speak. If they say your name, you go to the microphone.

It was not the dramatic event you’re seeing in Loudoun County, Virginia. But it also wasn’t the blasé meeting our board is used to. Since word got out about our plan to speak out against Critical Race Theory, there was quite a crowd joining us. Also, when you get the word out, the opposition hears about it. It was hard for me to tell how many of those there were against us, but there were people outside the building calling us racists. When we all settled inside for the meeting, nearly all audience chairs were filled.

 

PUBLIC COMMENTS

the first public comment speaker, Ms. Endomeo (?)
screenshot from here**

There was one anti-CRT speaker, A. C. (or something that sounded like possibly Aishane) Endomeo (I have no idea if I’m spelling her name right) during the public comment section, and that is when the room got a little unruly. This was a woman who addressed the board last month, which meant her comments were in the minutes and therefore an agenda item. She was interrupted by General Counsel Marney Collins Sims, who was asking whether this testimony should be moved to Citizen Participation. People yelled out, “Let her speak!” The woman explained why she should be allowed to speak now, and then was able to go ahead.

She had two issues. One was a video related to skin color that had been shown at her children’s school; she had gone through many sources to find out who recommended this video, and got told either Superintendent Henry or silence. She also talked about a discipline her child went through—because he didn’t physically distance himself from a disrupting child. She thought this was an odd thing to call a parent on, which means it was considered serious enough to go in her child’s permanent record. She asked if this was part of social/emotional learning—which is a CRT approach to socializing children. She was told it was just a teachable moment. Then why make such a big deal about it?

I think she’s giving evidence of harm to children by the infiltration of CRT. The board did not respond to her at that time.

 

BOARD COMMENTS

Before Citizen Participation was a segment where board members could speak on anything they chose without it having to be on the agenda. Several of them used this time to try to quell the furor over CRT in our schools.

CFISD board member Don Ryan
screenshot from here

First of these was Don Ryan, who said CRT should not be a concern. We’ve been misinformed. I’ve transcribed part of his comments, so you can see the Board’s position, which he wanted on record:

Let me start by saying that we teach the required curriculum from the state, and this does not include Critical Race Theory, and it never has.

Since this contradicted the testimony of Ms. Endomeo, it caused an outburst, followed by threats to remove her, and threats to clear the room, and calls for respect, since they had been respectful to us, etc.—failing to note that they had previously interrupted her speech and are at this point calling her a liar in front of all of us. So, yes, it took a bit of doing to settle down for the rest of his comments. I’m uncomfortable with the calling out and yelling in public gatherings, but I can see why people reacted. Mr. Ryan continues:

The state requires teaching social studies and history, and that is obviously going to include learning about historic examples of racism and the impact. But our teachers know how to teach this. And in fact we have a board policy that addresses how to cover this and other topics objectively. There’s been some confusion and misinformation out there about this issue.

Bridgeland [high school]’s No Place for Hate committee, which is led by students, recommended several different activities, including a video for other students to watch on implicit bias. The campus wanted parents to see the suggested video first and sent it out to the parents to watch and provide feedback. After hearing concern from parents, the principal did not include the video in the No Place for Hate activities, so the video was never shown to students.

And I think there’s confusion about No Place for Hate as well. This has been a popular program in schools for years, especially the past ten years or so as part of our anti-bullying education at many of our campuses. The committees are led by students and promote a positive school climate. It is not a program about Critical Race Theory.

Critical Race Theory, as far as I know, is something taught at some colleges. But it has never, ever been a part of the school district curriculum. In the school district, ever since I started on the Board in 2000, we’ve talked about educational equity as part of the requirements of No Child Left Behind. As part of No Child Left Behind, and now, whatever the law is called now, as a Board we are required to look at our test scores and other achievement data that is broken down by race and create plans to close any achievement gaps between groups.

This is part of what the Board is asking administration to do as part of the equity audit, to help create plans to address the gaps. Our anti-bullying programs and the educational equity plans are things we have responsibility to create—and are not Critical Race Theory programs.

And I just want to take a minute and clear up that confusion. If any parent or patron has a question or concern about our curriculum, I want to encourage you to contact our administration. And if you can take one thing away from my comments, I hope it would be that we are not teaching Critical Race Theory. It is on the record. I’ve made the statement. So now you’ve got me.

I’m afraid he didn’t allay any fears. Let’s look a little closer. The prior testimony had asked who provided that video as an option for the students; she couldn’t get an answer, unless we assume the Superintendent personally recommended it to them. No one wants to say, because they’d be the target of blame—because clearly that video was CRT, and the parents were against it. We hear later testimony about an offensive video shown in a third-grade class; Ryan’s statement asserts that this cannot have happened, regardless of what parents are testifying.

I personally have problems with the educational equity effort he mentions. Remember, equity, as opposed to equality, is about equal outcome, not equal opportunity to achieve potential. Equal outcome is a Critical Race Theory concept. You might have heard it called social justice rather than CRT.

The failure of this district to provide for the special needs of my three gifted children (all tested into GT in this district, as well as the district we’d moved from) led us to our decade of homeschooling. Mr. Ryan says they want to close achievement gaps between groups; improving opportunities for gifted students would interfere with that goal, so they ignore high-performing students and concentrate on low-performing students. Equity—not equality. I’d also note that students perform individually, not as groups. So, when he’s talking about groups, he’s talking about race. That means they will especially provide opportunities for black and Hispanic low-performing students while especially ignoring white and possibly Asian high-performing students.

So that equity audit they’re doing? Don’t worry. It’s not called a Critical Race Theory program; it’s just educational equity to get rid of those pesky performance gaps between racial groups.

I’m sure he thought he cleared things up. I’m sure he doesn’t know he verified our fears.

Board Member Gilbert Sarabia was brief but echoed agreement with Mr. Ryan. And we got plenty of scolding and being put in our place by President Bob Covey when he took his turn later. But next we heard a rather long lecture from Board Member Dr. John Ogletree. He went through some statistics about racial percentages of students. He told us that, of the more than 9,000 graduates from the district this year, “not a one has been taught Critical Race Theory.”

CFISD Board Member John Ogletree
screenshot from here

The equity audit, he says, is just to unify, to meet the needs of all children regardless of race. And he says that’s quantifiable. And this board is not political. That got a gasp and a laugh from the audience, because this board member, beyond all, is profoundly political. If there’s ever an issue where parents and taxpayers disagree with a direction the schools are taking, Dr. Ogletree will be on the side of teacher’s unions, against the parents and students. And he gets teacher union support for that. And, while school board trustee is a nonpartisan position, there is no doubt how Dr. Ogletree votes.

Then he lectured this room full of people who carry a pocket Constitution around with us by quoting from the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble to the Constitution, as if we were ignorant of those documents. He emphasized particular phrases: “establish justice” and “blessings of liberty.” The way he said them told me he doesn’t mean the same thing our founders meant. He means social justice—equal outcome—and government “blessing” us with those equal outcomes.

He accused us of coming for political reasons, while they on the board are here for education. Yes, that got an uproar. But I’m surprised it didn’t cause a greater uproar than it did; it was disrespectful, and intended to stab. His lack of self-awareness is staggering.

He followed up by quoting Mark 12:31 (he’s a pastor) on caring for your fellowman, further insulting us by implying that’s not what we are doing when we come to a meeting to express concern about our schools.

One of my biggest frustrations with this district is the inability to remove this man from our school board. He has been there since 2004. He’s up for reelection this November, along with Don Ryan and Board President Bob Covey. These three pioneered running as a slate supported by PAC money, a first in this district. It’s an unpaid nonpartisan position; so why does some PAC put so much money into them, unless it’s about power and control?

 

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION

Of the ten speakers during Citizen Participation, seven were testifying against Critical Race Theory. Three were saying it doesn’t exist in our schools—followed by statements about how racist we are. Not a way to persuade. One of them said he’d looked up the data, and it showed black and Hispanics in this district earn $.65 for every dollar earned by whites—and the only possible reason is systemic racism. He failed to notice all other possible reasons and factors, the most prevalent being lack of father in the home.

I was generally pleased with our speakers. The first, a man named Richard Feiden (no guarantees I’ve heard and spelled names accurately), said,

Richard Feiden speaks at CFISD
board meeting; screenshot from here

Though we’re often told that CRT is not being taught in schools, maybe, maybe not, but we want to be sure that it is not added to the curriculum in Cy-Fair School District. Obama said, “You can put lipstick on a pig, but it still is a pig.” CRT has been around for a while, and it’s covered in lipstick.

There was a 15-year-old girl, Danielle Browning, who gave a very powerful testimony. It was destroyed immediately afterward by Board Counsel Sims, who made sure the audience knew Browning was a student in Tomball ISD, just to the north, not Cy-Fair. Browning responded from her seat that her family does pay taxes in Cy-Fair ISD, and she has many friends in Cy-Fair with the same experiences she has had. Someone in the audience yelled out, “Don’t cross-examine her,” but damage was done.

15-year-old student Danielle Browning speaks at CFISD board meeting
screenshot from here

I’d nevertheless like to repeat a good chunk of her testimony, because my concerns are not limited to this one school district. And I suspect she’s right, that similar things are happening here and elsewhere:

End of October last year I was sitting in my freshman English class, and we were about to receive the selection of books we got to choose from for our end-of-semester reading project. I was expecting the classics, such as To Kill a Mockingbird or The Great Gatsby. However, to my surprise, the only books we had to choose from focused on Black Lives Matter and police brutality stories.

Of course, having been fully educated on the current events preceding the election, I immediately knew what this was all about. I was overcome with rage as I flipped through one of the novels about a black girl whose best friend was killed by a white cop—a story that seems to be copied and pasted on the news every week. What I noticed was that the author emphasized the fact that the cop was white, but failed to highlight the part of the story where the boy resisted arrest.

It soon became crystal clear to me what the intentions behind this reading assignment were, as I saw every student in my class marvel at the girl’s bravery for yelling, “F*** the police!” at a protest.

Critical Race Theory in schools is a mission designed to brainwash vulnerable children into adopting the Marxist or CRT ideology that all whites are racist and all other races are oppressed…. It is being put into action by infiltrating the developing minds of our precious youth. I have experienced this myself, and refuse to succumb to these diabolical ideas. I am 15 years old, and I am ridiculed at school every day for my political beliefs and skin color. This is the 1960s all over again, but flipped inside out. History repeats itself, and it’s our job to save this country we call our home. It starts here with the next generation.

Tom Nobis speaks at CFISD board meeting
screenshot from here

My friend Tom Nobis, our SREC Chairman, who was sitting next to me, got called on to speak. He started out bluntly, stating, “There is Critical Race Theory, even though people say there’s not. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be having all these people here to talk about it.”

He talked about MLK’s vision, based on character instead of color, and about the purpose of education, which is to “get knowledge useful for future endeavors”; and the role of parents in teaching their children how to live, which “is not a function of the school.”

I appreciated that he added a point for school choice:

If education is for children, then you should support school choice and the opportunity for those economically disadvantaged to better the education for their children. You should have supported Senate Bill 1968 by our State Senator Bettencourt.

The minutes from the May meeting show a fair amount of antipathy for our effective state senator, by the way.

Judy DeHaan, one of the community leaders bringing the CRT issue to our attention, got to speak. She asked a good question about the district’s Resolution Condemning Racism, which is at issue, and then adds more good info, so I’m including much her testimony:

Judy DeHaan speaks at CFISD board meeting
screenshot from here

It [the resolution] also states you want to eliminate systemic oppression and racism. What are your examples inside Cy-Fair ISD?

One of your staff indicated in Monday’s meeting that social and emotional learning was to be imbedded through a new program. Please note: this is known as CRT and social justice learning, whether you want to believe that or not. Is this the result of the equity audit?

Treating white children differently today to make up for past discrimination is still discrimination—and racist. That is the framework for CRT, looking at everything through the prism of race and identity, regardless of someone’s character or abilities.

Ladies and gentlemen, I don’t know your story, and you don’t know mine. What I can tell you is these constructs have caused hurt and despair in my own family, when seeing my loved ones’ pain over these racial issues. I have sat across from parents who are intimidated to speak for themselves tonight, telling me about this Brain Pop BLM protest video that was shown to a Cy-Fair ISD third-grade class, that guilts white children for structural racism. And others tell me their concerns about these activities associated with, yes, the Anti-Defamation League No Place for Hate program. And you were putting this back off on the children for making those decisions, when you’re giving the activities to choose from….

All we’re asking, in summary, is a public policy be implemented to prohibit CRT and the tenets thereof in Cy-Fair ISD.

Michael Godsy speaks at CFISD 
board meeting; screenshot from here

The final speaker, Michael Godsy, was a father of four sons in CFISD schools. His wife is black; his sons are mixed race. They attend a school that is, he estimates, 90% white (unlike my neighborhood which is pretty nearly majority minority). He sees no racism there. He asks his kids, are they experiencing racist comments or behaviors, getting left out, hearing slurs? No. Always they say no. He ended with this, and got cheers:

I’ve come to the conclusion that all of this stuff is being taught to us through the media. We’re not racist towards one another; we’re being taught to hate each other through liberal propaganda that we see on TV. And if everyone would just stop for a minute and look at one another, and appreciate each other for who we are, instead of what other people tell us that we are, we could do a lot better.

 

SUMMARY

The school board says there’s no Critical Race Theory in our schools—just educational justice, social/emotional learning, and whatever else an equity audit tells them they should implement to get rid of performance gaps between racial groups. So, no CRT by that name, but plenty of CRT that they refuse to recognize as such.

But parents and students are experiencing CRT education in our schools.

So, what to do? The next step is to report every single instance we can find—to each member of this board, with a warning that, if they don’t deal with it, they’ll be facing a lawsuit that forces them to. And we could use a good lawyer for those lawsuits.

And, once again I say, yet another reason to homeschool. This school board isn’t going to do anything but ignore us, because they think we’re just ill-informed “political” complainers who are coming out to annoy them.

We don’t have the money, power, and people to run against them and replace them. Yet. 

Whatever we can do, we should probably keep doing. But, as I recognized when I pulled my kids out, nothing I did as a volunteer could make changes that would come soon enough to get my kids what I needed, let alone other kids like them. But by pulling them out, I’d at least take care of their education, which was my first priority.

If enough families escaped, they’d have to take notice and change. But don’t wait for the others to join you; save your own kids.

____________________

* The name comes from the Cypress-Fairbanks area; ISD stands for independent school district.

** I've taken screenshots from the "Formal Board Meeting 6/24/21" YouTube video, but video is also available on the CFISD website.

Informing and Persuading

Back in early January I wrote a how-to piece for citizen lobbying. This was what I’d been thinking about, because I’d done a presentation on the topic at our first-of-the-year local Cypress Texas Tea Party meeting.

Every two years, during the legislative session, we get together and visit the local offices of our state representatives and senators.

Rep. Tom Oliverson (left), me (right),
and most of the rest of our team today

Today was our first visit of this session. We had a good turnout--enough that we had trouble squeezing into the office. We visited Representative Tom Oliverson, or Texas House District 130. Fortunately, he happened to be back in town from Austin, and available to meet with us in person. Usually we meet with a district director or other staff.

Rep. Oliverson mentioned that the definition of lobbying is informing and persuading—which I thought was a good description of what we try to do as citizen (unpaid) lobbyists.

He’s one of the good guys, so it’s more about informing than persuading. And he’s so good that on most issues he was already aware. So it was just about giving him further information to back up our positions.

I’ve been busy since that January presentation building our bill list—the list of actual bills we’re either supporting or opposing, so we can keep track of them. There are about 40 on the list so far. And last night, after I printed the list to hand out today, I found several that had been recommended to me that I’d missed, and one that was just filed yesterday and hadn’t known about until late at night.

The general categories aren’t really different from last session, but the specifics change. At our state convention, we came up with five legislative priorities, so we covered all of those, plus additional issues, many of which are mentioned in the party platform.

If you’re in Texas, you might be interested in the bill numbers; you can look them up to follow them at the Texas Legislature Online website. Anyway, here are several we’re looking at. Note: SB = senate bill; HB = house bill; R = resolution; JR = joint resolution; CR = continuing resolution; companion = the same bill filed in both house and senate at the same time:

·         Hardening the electric grid: SB 76, HB 400 (companion bills)

·         Lobbying reform: HB 498, SB 490 (similar companion bills)—no lobbying by former legislators; HB 281—no public (taxpayer) money spent for lobbying

·         Constitutional carry: HB 357—open carry by person not otherwise prohibited

·         No unfunded mandates: HJR 30, SJR 10 (companion bills)

·         Property tax reform SB2, HB 2 (companion bills)

·         “Free to Believe Act” protecting freedom of conscience from government discrimination: HB 1035

·         Public prayers and religious displays: HCR 17; HB 307; SB 227

·         Conscience protection: SB 85 (and more to come)

·         SOGI laws we’re AGAINST (sexual orientation and gender issues): HB 244, SB 151, HB 254; HB 850; HB 188; HB 517, HB 1190; SB 154

·         Schools distributing contraceptives--AGAINST: HB 513

·         Dual-credit expansion (more junior college/school district courses offered jointly): SB 251

·         UIL participation for private/homeschoolers: no bill yet

·         Data on college costs and outcomes: HB 277

·         Amend constitution to define life at conception: SJR 3

·         Defund all abortion providers: SB 389

·         Abolish abortion: HB 1500

·         Verification of citizenship for voting: HB 378, SB 482 (companion bills)

·         Closed primary: HB 377

There are several more issues we’re interested in that either don’t have bills yet, or I haven’t become aware of them yet. It’s a work in progress, and I often feel a bit like a student behind in her studies. But with the help of others, I think we’re doing some good informing and persuading. And that feels a lot more empowering than feeling frustration or outrage but taking no positive action. Those of us who seriously take on the responsibility of citizenship are doing what we can.

I don’t show myself here very often, but the Tea Party posts videos of our speakers now, and that included me. I’m not happy in front of a camera, but I think I’m not embarrassed by the presentation and discussion, which is about how to be a citizen lobbyist, from January 5th.

Citizen Lobbying

Tomorrow is the day legislators take their oaths of office, and then the biannual legislative session can get underway here in Texas. It seems early to me. I was aiming to think about that later in the month. But I’ve gotten underway.

I was asked to speak at our local Tea Party meeting this past Saturday on how to do citizen lobbying, and specifically how to follow bills during the legislative session. So I thought maybe I’d share some of that here. Even though the specifics apply to us here in Texas, the ideas can be true anywhere.

There are essentially four ways citizens can participate in government:

·         Voting

·         Political parties

·         Campaigning

·         Legislative lobbying

If you’re reading this, chances are you’ve been voting ever since you had the chance. Another step up is to participate with a party—by voting in a primary, attending a precinct meeting (usually on the day of a primary election, held afterward), becoming a delegate at a convention, or maybe even becoming a precinct chair. I’ve done all these. Campaigning is fairly new to me. But you may have done that if you knew a good candidate, or if you got inspired by one. Maybe you’ve just put out yard signs, or put a bumper sticker on your car; that’s part of campaigning.

Today we’ll mostly talk about lobbying our representatives. Lobbying simply means seeking to influence or persuade. You’re entitled to do that with your elected officials; they represent you, and they can only do that effectively if they know what your views are.

Citizen lobbying is different from paid lobbying. You don’t have to do any reporting to government about what you do. You’re just doing your civic duty by expressing your opinions to your elected lawmakers.

As they say, “When the legislature is in session, your freedoms are at risk.” You’d better let them know you’re watching, and you have certain expectations of them.

Even though it’s your right—and obligation—not everybody does it. There’s sort of a formula for figuring out how many constituents hold a view, based on how many express their opinion. It used to be that a letter had a greater impact than a phonecall, but after the powdered poison in the mail scare of the early 2000s, they’d prefer something other than a letter, although you’re still entitled to send one. Anyway, a letter, phonecall, or email is estimated to represent somewhere between four and ten constituents with that opinion.

If you do a phone, email, or letter contact, you’ll want it to be brief and focused:

·         Cover a single specific issue (with bill number, if there is one).

·         Make a specific request (support this bill or issue, oppose this bill, amend this bill).

·         Give 1-3 brief, clear reasons supporting your opinion.

Your request and opinion will be logged in a system and counted, so the elected official will have it as a reference.

There’s one more way to make contact, and that’s what we’re mostly talking about today: an in-person visit.

An in-person visit represents about a hundred constituents with that opinion. If you are willing to show up at your legislator’s office, he’s going to assume you take the issue seriously. And if you feel that strongly about it, so will many others who didn’t have the time or resources to make the trip to the legislator’s office.

There’s going to be an office at the capitol, and also in the local area. That’s true for US Congressman and Senators as well as for state representatives and senators (or whatever those positions are in your state). A capitol visit is bolder—and therefore maybe more persuasive—than a local office visit. But if you can’t make that trip, the local office visit still has about a ten-fold impact over an email. Also, you can visit about just a single issue, or about multiple bills or issues at the same time, since it’s obvious you’ll want to make the most of your time during the visit.

About four legislative sessions ago (Texas legislature is in session for about half a year every odd year), I was talking at a Tea Party meeting about contacting legislators with your opinions, mostly referring to what to do if you visit the capitol. And someone said, “But couldn’t we visit their local offices?” And then somehow I got assigned to set up those visits, and have a bill list we were following. And I’ve been the de facto legislative liaison for our Tea Party group ever since.

I was surprised that interest in these visits is even bigger this year than in the past. I feel anxious to do my part well. So far I’ve listed what I think will be our legislative priorities—based on what we’ve worked for in the past, and what we settled on last year at the district and state conventions. Platforms are a good source of possible legislation, which is why they tend to be longer and more detailed than most of us would prefer. But legislators do actually refer to them.

We’ve had a couple of innovations in the Republican Party of Texas. One is that we hold an up or down vote on each plank of the platform. (After discussion and acceptance of the platform language, we fill out a scantron sheet saying yes or no to each plank. Pretty much no plank gets removed at this point, but you can see varied strength of support.) We’ve done this for two conventions now.

This year another innovation was to organize the platform according to the state senate committees, making it easier to identify legislative possibilities. Also, we had a new committee for Legislative Priorities. They went through the platform and the ideas from the various local conventions around the state, and then determined what they thought were the top priorities for the upcoming legislative session, which the whole body at the convention discussed and approved. So we’ve got those to go by as well.

I’m looking at the priorities, and then identifying bill numbers. Many bills have already been filed, but it’s a matter of identifying the ones we think will do the job we hope for—or are at least a good starting point from which amendments can be added. So I’m building our bill list.

I expect to start scheduling visits with legislative offices by late January or early February. And then we’ll be making a visit about every other week. For most of those we’ll meet with the local staffer, rather than the legislator. But occasionally a legislator will be in town. Even visits to the capitol, unless you’ve made a specific appointment, you will probably meet with staffers rather than legislators.

Staffers are trained to take note of what we say, and our reasons, and put the information into the system. They do not, as a rule, express the representative’s opinion—unless that opinion is widely known and very clear, such as if the representative authored the bill. So don’t expect agreement when you make your visit. But that also means, if they’re not of your party or not in agreement with you, they will still listen respectfully and log your views.

Here in Texas we have a pretty good online system for tracking bills, and for finding other information about the legislators and legislative session. So, at our Tea Party meeting on Saturday I shared some of that.

The Texas Legislature Online home page.
Notice the My TLO tab, for following your bill list.

You can go to the Texas Legislature Online (https://capitol.texas.gov/) and set up an account (My TLO), and then set up bill lists and alerts, so you can follow the bills you’re interested in throughout the session. That means you can know when a bill is moving, or when a committee is hearing testimony on a bill, or when a vote has been taken and how that turned out.

You can follow a bill through all the stages—which includes several stages in the House or Senate, wherever it originated, followed by similar stages in the other house when it gets there, and then sometimes reconciliation when changes were made in the second house. The final stage is the governor’s signature.

Most bills die somewhere along the way. (Watch Schoolhouse Rock’s “I’m Just a Bill” for a refresher on that.) Last session there were a few of the bills we watched that made it through. Many more didn’t, so we’ll be working on those issues again this session. We have better leadership in the House this session, so that could help, although the majorities are smaller.

The point is, there is something you as a citizen can do to make a difference. I’m just a regular citizen. Any knowledge I have is just what I’ve gotten along the way, by giving it a try and learning as I go.

A citizen has a role to play in the government. A subject does not. I much prefer being a citizen, rather than a subject. That’s why I do what I do.

This has been a "how to" informational post. Another day (or several separate days) I may cover what the actual issues are this legislative session.

Being Capable of Self-Rule

I don’t like the idea of elite vs. the great unwashed, or the proletariat, or the uneducated masses. I’m with Martin Luther King, Jr., willing to look at the content of a person’s character, rather than where they come from or some other arbitrary detail.

But the purpose of politics is to persuade large numbers of people—people who may or may not be educated or clear thinking enough to understand the issues on their own and be capable of recognizing solutions.

The difficulty is that, in a democratic society, the persuaded masses rule, whether they’re right or not.

Our founding fathers tried to prevent the damage that could happen from a straight-up democracy—which is essentially mob rule. They gave us a Constitution, which limited government to certain enumerated powers. And within those constraints, they set up a representative government, with a bicameral legislative body, with the House of Representatives based on population, and the Senate based on the separate states equally. The House would respond more directly to the people, but the Senate would be a more deliberative body, thinking more of state interests than individual interests.

"Scene at the Signing of the Constitution"
painting by Howard Chandler Christy
image from Wikipedia

They separated the legislative, judicial, and executive branches, with more or less equal powers that would be a check and balance on each other. All of this was to prevent any branch from usurping powers it was not granted.

The founders took great care to set up government to do only what it was intended to do: protect life, liberty, and property.

But a self-ruling people—that is, a people who set up their own government, rather than become subjects of a ruler—must be capable of ruling themselves.

Usually I have a lot of faith in people in general to think things through and try to do the right things. That’s what I do. So sometimes I believe any normal person does that.

But there’s a lot of evidence that large portions of the populace do not think things through. And that leaves them subject to being swayed by propaganda rather than truth.

There was an example this week. Steven Crowder did one of his “Change My Mind” sessions at a college campus. This one was “White Privilege Is a Myth: Change My Mind (2nd Edition)” on the campus of Texas Christian University. It’s rather long, most of an hour. But I’ve included it in full below.

Most of the conversation is between Crowder and a young black woman who defers mostly to her white friend (Crowder points out that the white girl is “white-splaining” for the black girl). The white woman claims that America was set up by white men for the sole benefit of white men, and has been corrupt and oppressive from its inception.

While she is right that women didn’t originally have the right to vote (and, depending on the state, neither did white or any other race of men if they didn’t own property), she fails to understand that all of the Bill of Rights pertained to women every bit as much as men. Slaves were originally excluded in slave states—but of course we suffered a Civil War to correct that.

When Crowder asks what evidence she has of men having privilege today, she claims it is really white male privilege; there’s no privilege for black men, who get sent to jail for having a quarter ounce of weed while white men would get away with it. Crowder asks for statistics; she has none. He uses his handy phone and looks up data on the NAACP website, which shows that black men are incarcerated at higher rates, but that site has no mention of behavior. The girl insists that of course black men don’t commit crimes at higher rates, because it’s all about the racist system. She knows that is so, but she doesn’t have data. Crowder provides some for his side, but she cannot. But she’s sure it’s just a matter of doing a little online search, and then her views would be proven.

Except they’re not.

After Crowder talks with her, he has a young black man and his Asian friend, neither of whom believe they’re oppressed in America. Their conversation is more uplifting.

The earlier white girl was absolutely certain that she was right. And she was absolutely certain that what she was saying was common knowledge and common sense. Even though it was either unsupported opinion or provably false.

She was a college student, and made it clear she had gotten a scholarship for being top of her class. So she knew what she knew—accusing Crowder of enjoying privileges that were unrelated to his life growing up in a French Canadian culture with a fair amount of oppression and difficulty, not coming to the US until adulthood.

As Reagan used to say,

“It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.”

On Tuesday, working at the polls—primary elections where Republicans and Democrats had to awkwardly share a room for their separate polling places—I was gratefully aware that voters were trying to do their civic duty. But I was also aware that not very many spend as much time as I do researching and figuring out who to vote for, especially for the many smaller judicial races. I do believe if everybody studied as hard before voting as I do, we would have better outcomes, even though they wouldn’t always agree with me. 

In order to be an informed—instead of a propaganda-manipulated—people, we need to know the criteria to look for. A nice candidate who seems articulate isn’t enough. And it certainly isn’t enough for a candidate to try to sway voters by appealing to their tribal issues (race, gender, etc.) We need voters who understand how our government is set up.

When you’re looking at candidates, there are questions that help gauge just how likely a person is to pursue freedom, prosperity, and civilization for all. These are Spherical Model questions, rather than right/left questions. I laid them out in 2015, here.

If you—or your representative—need to decide on an issue, you can ask these freedom-leading questions: 

·         Is the policy being debated something that an individual has the right to do, and therefore has the right to delegate to his/her government?  For example, a person has the right to protect his own life and property. He can, therefore, combine resources with his neighbors and hire a government entity, such as a sheriff, to do that job for him. Similarly, the several states can combine to delegate the power of defending the nation to a national government entity. Conversely, a person does not have the right to take his neighbor’s excess grain production, for example, and bestow it on himself, because his neighbor was more prosperous in a particular season. He can, of course, ask his neighbor for charity, but he cannot coerce the neighbor to give. That would rightfully be considered theft. Therefore, the person cannot delegate the redistribution of wealth to the government to do for him. 

·         Does the policy infringe in any way on the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights? Does the policy infringe on the free exercise of religion or try to establish a particular sect as a state religion? Is political speech hindered? Does the policy infringe on the right of citizens to bear arms? Does the policy constitute an illegal search or seizure? Does the policy deprive a person of life, liberty, or property when the person has not committed a crime for which that deprivation is the just sentence? Does the policy try to claim for government a power that was not specifically granted in the Constitution? etc. If the policy infringes on the God-given rights, then government cannot take that power without usurping power from the people.

·         Is the idea being debated a proper role of government, some aspect of protection (including defense, protection from interstate crime, enabling international and interstate commerce, standardized weights and measures and currency, the judiciary that guarantees the protective laws), as enumerated in the Constitution? If not, then accepting the idea is outside the Constitution and below the northern 45th parallel.

Two years ago I listed the Five Essential Attributes of Active Citizens, as outlined in a speech on Citizenship by Lawrence C. Walters.

1. Accept responsibility.

2. Do their homework.

3. Engage with others.

4. Take action.

5. Learn from their experiences.

If we’re going to remain a self-governing people, rather than slip downward into being ruled by power mongers, then we need a critical mass of educated populace, willing to do their part. If you’re reading this, that’s a start. You’re probably doing your part. So share it with anyone who has a sense of civic responsibility. If enough of us do that, then we can trust it will be enough.

Congressman Ted Poe Speaks

My Congressman, since redistricting a couple of years ago, is Ted Poe. He spoke Monday evening at King Street Patriots, and I thought there were enough things worth repeating.

Catherine Engelbrecht, head of King Street, gave quite an introduction. She said, “Of all of the politicians I have ever met, Congressman Ted Poe is my favorite.”

Congressman Ted Poe
at King Street Patriots, 6-2-2014

If you’ll recall, Catherine Engelbrecht testified before Congress not long ago, during hearings about the IRS targeting of conservative groups. Her testimony was powerful. So, anyway, she has met more than the typical number of politicians. And she mentioned how comforting it was to see Ted Poe's friendly face when she testified.

Ted Poe’s father was on the row in front of me. Here’s what the Congressman told us about his father. Ted Poe was listed as the seventh most conservative member of Congress (out of 435, so if you do the math, he’s at the 98^th percentile, which isn’t too shabby). Early in the morning that the news appeared, there was his dad on the phone, “Why are you only number seven?”

Ted Poe talks straightforward, Texas style. Words like this come naturally: “The Constitution is not a mere suggestion. It is the law of the land.”

This was partly, but not totally, in relation to the news over the weekend about the president unilaterally (and illegally) exchanging five dangerous terrorists being held at GITMO for a prisoner of war (or possibly a defector—still to be determined, in a court martial, I’m assuming). The Congressman offered us a three-page handout, “Fact Sheet on Guantanamo Transfers,” which was a House Armed Services Committee Press Release, June 2, 2014. You’ve probably heard the essence of this elsewhere by now. Here’s what the law requires (this law was signed by the president some six months ago):

·        The Secretary of Defense must determine that the risk posed by the detainee will be substantially mitigated and that the transfer is in the national security interests of the United States.

·        The Secretary of Defense must notify the appropriate committees of Congress at least 30 days before the transfer or release of a Guantanamo detainee

·        The Secretary of Defense must provide detailed information regarding the circumstances of the transfer or release along with the notification, including how the risk posed by the detainee will be substantially mitigated, the security arrangements in the receiving country, and an assessment of the capacity, willingness, and past practices of the receiving country.

So, clearly the law has been broken.

The Q&A portion of the evening was heavy with questions about what can be done in response to the president’s lawless behavior. I don’t know that there is a good answer. However, Congressman Poe is an optimist. He’s seeing protests of the president’s behavior from both sides of the aisle. He thinks the House will pick up 10 seats, and that Republicans will take the Senate as well. Then we have to have a presidential candidate that can win the 7 states that must be won. He thinks that, because most Americans are conservative, we need to appeal to conservative values. We need to be able to talk to our neighbors and speak persuasively, and get them engaged. Incidentally, he pointed out that only 5% of eligible voters participated in the runoff election held last week.

Much of the speech portion of the evening concerned the First Amendment. We’re in agreement that the very first words, “Congress shall make no law” means that, concerning those things, Congress really can’t violate our rights.

I enjoyed a story he told, of a time when he was in the midst of raising his four kids. He had a daughter who was 8, on a girls’ soccer team. The coach moved away. And somehow Ted Poe got “volunteered to coach. He knew nothing about soccer. He said the first game he ever saw was the first one he coach—rule book in hand. But he did what he could.

At one point he took a girl out of the game and replaced her with another player. She pouted and cried. He found, eventually, that this was not an uncommon reaction among young girls. But he was perplexed. There’s no crying in sports!

But eventually he figured it out, and sees this as a metaphor for us concerned citizens. The girl wanted to be in the game. She wanted to participate.

“Most Americans,” he said, “aren’t participating; they’re in the stands. But you want to play because you think you can make a difference.”

I think he’s right about that. That meeting, on a Monday night, held I’m guessing a full room of 200 people, maybe more. Our regular local tea party meetings have 30-50 people meeting on Saturday afternoons. Everyone is asking, “What can we do?”

I hope there are answers. The other day, along with the Edmund Burke quote, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing,” a friend sent some suggestions:

·         Support a strong party platform.

·         Contact Congress often, and instruct Congress and Senators to elect leadership who oppose tyranny.

·         Donate to true conservative candidates.

·         Stay informed.

·         Network with other patriots.

I’m doing some of these very things this weekend, at the Texas GOP Convention, where I’m a delegate. I expect to hear a lot of conservative language—nothing else would be acceptable. I pray that all of us will be able to discern between those who mean it—because we need them—and those who are just saying it because they have to. So many thousands of people will be there—because we want to do whatever good we can. I hope we can use this combined energy for the good of all.