Real Parental Choice in Education

Whose responsibility is it to educate the children of the rising generation? The parents. That is the most local level—the family, the basic unit of civilization.

It is not the responsibility of the state, and certainly not of the nation. It is not even the responsibility of the school district. Letting those other levels grasp responsibility has caused the problems our schools are in.

Let’s start with making sure we're talking about the same thing. What is the finished product when we educate a child?

Aristotle says we educate a person to produce a great soul. That’s still pretty vague. Joe Harless, in his book The Eden Conspiracy, is a bit more specific. He says we are producing an accomplished citizen. We should teach the knowledge, skills, and information relevant to becoming accomplished members of society. The attributes of such a person include:

•             Being obedient to the law.

•             Making informed voting decisions.

•             Contributing to stability.

•             Resolving interpersonal conflict.

•             Contributing to community improvement.

These are what an accomplished member of society does regardless of how that person makes a living.

Do we need to teach ways to make a living? Yes, but that is incidental. What we’re doing is providing the knowledge, skills, and information a good citizen will need in order to work out their own way to make a living that sustains themselves by making a contribution of worth to someone willing to pay for it.

So producing that civilized person, that contributing member of society, is the mission. That is the mission of the parents.

Back in 2008 a bunch of us homeschoolers put on Shakespeare's
A Midsummer Night's Dream, in a park. We did a Shakespear play annually.

But what options—parent choices—are available to do that? In theory, the choices today are wide open. Information is everywhere. Much of it is free. You could guide your child through a series of elementary through high school-level learning with resources available for free or very low cost. Excellent resources. Better than you got when you were a student.

You could even guide your child through college level learning through online mostly free resources. You can give them great opportunities for learning, if you and the child are willing to put in the effort. You can do everything but give them the college diploma.

In reality, however, there is a monopoly. It is the public school system, controlled by the teachers’ unions, which are about making money for the teachers’ unions, not about improving teaching for teachers, and certainly not for improving the education of students.

There are a couple of basic things in the way of breaking free from the monopoly: availability of the parent, and money. And they are related. If a family can make enough money while allowing at least one of the parents to be with the student, overseeing the education, then total homeschooling is an option. But it is very difficult to homeschool while committing an eight-hour day to an employer—even working from home. You can’t sit down to do math with your child while you’re writing a report for your boss.

And private school is expensive, while public school is “free.” It isn’t really “free,” though. That has always been a trap.

The providers of whatever is “free” always want something. In the case of schools, it is money and control—control of how your children are raised and what kind of citizen—or subject—they are formed into.

If we and those providers of “free” education were of the same mind, this wouldn’t be so bad. But we are not of the same mind. And that has become abundantly more clear in the past few years. Parents are waking up. They’re expressing their disapproval with what has been going on. And they’re being insistent that they are not abdicating their God-given role as decision-maker in the care and upbringing of their children.

We’re seeing that play out in school board meetings, in school board races, and in legislation.

And one big way we’re seeing it is in the debate over school choice.

Stephanie Lambert, speaking at Cypress Texas Tea Party, March 16, 2023
screenshot from here

Last week at our Tea Party meeting we heard from Stephanie Lambert, daughter of Tim Lambert, founder and head of Texas Home School Coalition, talking about their two prongs: educational choice and parental rights. And we got some interesting statistics concerning school choice, particularly Education Savings Accounts, or “the money follows the child”:

·        There are currently 72 such programs in 32 states, some of them with long years of data we can look at.

·        Whether in high-regulation or low-regulation states, these programs have not led to increased regulation.

o      In fact, regulation for homeschooling has plummeted.

o      In no state has regulation of homeschooling increased in the past two decades.

o      Also, here in Texas we saw a three-fold increase in homeschooling since the pandemic shutdown.

·        71% of Texas homeschoolers support ESAs. Only 20% oppose.

So let’s take a look at that opposition. Last year, at the state GOP convention, testimony from these opponents of school choice lined up and took the public comment slots before the Platform Committee. They seemed a much stronger force than they actually are, and very nearly got the Committee to strike the language “money follows the child” from the platform plank. A good speech from a Committee member rescued it at the last moment.

I have noticed a fair amount of pressure from these opponents on social media sites where conservatives communicate. They’re forceful and insistent. I’ve collected some of the arguments to try to understand them and possibly express the choice side better.

One early clue was their accusation, “Look where the money is coming from.” They claim the choice side is funded by people who really want to gain control over homeschooling families. Since I’m one of these pro-choice people, and I know that my voice is independent and absolutely not connected to any money, that does not ring true.

And since I have been a member of THSC while homeschooling, and continue to follow them, particularly during the legislative session, I’m also aware that THSC is very grassroots, not a big money outfit, nor is it controlled by some nefarious higher elites. I have reason to trust them. So that first opponent argument doesn’t fly with me.

They linked to this article in the past week: “School Choice: Are We Willing to Sell Our Children for a Pittance?” by Tiffany Boyd, a Tennessee homeschooler opposed to school choice. This is from the article:

She [Charlotte Thompson Iserbyt, author of The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America] predicted that all types of “school choice” will eventually be tax-supported, with the tax money following each child.

“Each child, regardless of type of ‘choice’ education, will have an individual education plan (IEP). This will be determined by decisions made by the school/business partnerships (for which kind of workforce training they have determined your child’s intelligence/talents are best suited, for their own profit-seeking purposes). This is the failed communist/socialist job quota system from which millions of foreigners escaped. These immigrants, the backbone of our nation, made enormous sacrifices to come to the United States of America in order to enjoy the upward mobility guaranteed by our free (unplanned) economic system.”

I haven’t read the book quoted from, written originally in 1999. But we can look at this quote with some hindsight now—and the data we mentioned above. Do you know where you will have an individual education plan (IEP)? In a public school. Any student with a special need will have one. It isn’t determined by the parents, although the parents may be pressured to comply with the school’s plan.

You know where you don’t have one imposed by any outside entity? A homeschool. You, as a parent, plan or go by the seat of your pants as you see fit, and as seems to fit your particular child. Our family had a moderate amount of structure (I needed it, and so did the kids), but we bristled at anything beyond our plans being messed with by anyone. We got to decide everything—except these particular requirements: we had to teach reading, math, spelling, and good citizenship, all of which we were glad to do. I can attest that we did all of those things—and quite a lot more—better than the public schools we pulled them from when they were failing us.

My experiences are anecdotal. But the data about the various places that have implemented ESAs is telling: regulation of homeschooling plummets, and no increased regulation of homeschooling is even tried.

ESAs, by the way, are similar to a medical savings account. You get to choose the doctor and the service that you want. But the money can only be used for medical purposes. There are some purposes that might be excluded from your account—certain alternative therapies, for example—but you’re free to pay out-of-pocket for those extras. There isn’t a huge amount of oversight; you simply can’t use your HSA for a vacation (for your mental health, you claim) or something most people would see as quite a stretch to call it a medical service.

ESAs would be limited to educational purposes. But that can be a lot broader than tuition or textbooks. This is the point at which people worry, however. Someone makes the decision of whether a service applies or not. But, again, that hasn’t been a big issue with HSAs; they provide greater freedom, not less. And they are similar to a GI bill, which is used for any type of education, at any institution, including religious, that the veteran chooses to use it for.

Did I mention, ESAs can roll over the money to the following year, so there's incentive for the parents to find cost-effective resources. In some programs the leftover upon graduation can be used for college tuition.

Here’s another part of the article—about those evil, selfish parents who resent having to pay taxes for a school system that doesn’t serve them:

I often hear parents say, “It’s my money and I want it back.” My retort to that statement is, “What is more important to you, your freedom or your money? What is more important to you, your child or the money?”

That is usually met with the following: “I want freedom to choose.”

The truth is, parents already have the freedom to choose. They can choose public school, private school or home school. With school choice, you are simply choosing more of the same. It’s still the same system parents insist is failing, funded by government. The teachers are still all trained the same and the state controls the curriculum. So, what would they be choosing that is any different?

This is where the catch is: the choice shouldn’t be between two forms of public school, regular or private; and two forms of private school, high-tuition classrooms or homeschools. What a bogus limitation!

There was a video these opponents on social media linked to of how “school choice” ruined education in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. The hurricane had devasted entire areas, so many schools were literally wiped out. So they created a Recovery School District, which they claimed was completely free choice for all parents. Since there was no local school to choose, it allowed the parents to send their child to any other school they wanted. But the parents had plenty to complain about: the schools they wanted didn’t always have openings; the schools they wanted didn’t always provide transportation; they schools they wanted ended up being whatever they could scramble to get, of whatever quality, at whatever location. Some parents ended up sending each of their kids to a different school, with all the transportation and confusion that would entail. What these parents wanted to choose was a free school down the street that actually educated their child—like the parents had had growing up. But that wasn’t an option.

Let’s just point out that this wasn’t exactly putting the free market to work in education. It was a shoddy approach to dealing with a catastrophe.

image found here

What does real choice look like? How about if that ESA can go to multiple different approaches and places for each child. Maybe the local school has a good drama program—fine, put the student there for those hours. Maybe the local community college is a better fit for math. Maybe a nearby private school has a really good history teacher. Maybe private music lessons are worth using part of the allotment for. There could be online courses for special interests of the student. Part of the allotment could go to that.

Homeschoolers have been finding these sorts of combinations for decades. Before we moved to Texas—so, well before we homeschooled—we had homeschooling neighbors who sent their kids to an hour for one subject in one school district and an hour for another subject in the next school district over, and then did some other subjects at home. While there were more regulations for homeschoolers there than here in Texas, the schools themselves were actually more flexible. Here the public schools are all or nothing.

The image I've painted, with all those options, looks like it would be parent intensive, just providing transportation. Until you’ve got a student who drives and has a spare car, that’s true. But what if the local public school allowed private vendors to use their rooms, perhaps for a fee to cover maintenance costs, etc., and parents could have their child at the same general location all day, but with multiple educational opportunities there?

In an actual free market, where there’s a need, an entrepreneur steps in to fill it. Transportation between educational locations could become a thing. Maybe there could be an educational "mall," a general location with lots of options, and you can easily walk from one to another, like you walk from class to class on a college campus.

There seems to be a fear that, if you allow any money to go beyond the current status quo public school, you’re harming public schools—and by extension putting the education of all children in jeopardy. Gasp! But is maintaining public schools—at the expense of the students they are failing—the ultimate goal?

Public schooling is a relatively new experiment. In 1910, when UIL was established for extracurricular competitions, private schools and homeschools were the norm, the vast majority, while public schools covered only a relatively small percentage of children. By the 1940s, compulsory education laws were put in place, not for improving education, but for controlling thought, using a uniform factory model. 

Since public schools have already failed, I would indeed like to see public schools as we know them done away with. But that does not mean I want there to be no teachers or opportunities for educating our next generation. I want ALL the choices to be available to ALL the children. The only ones stuck in the monopoly then would be those whose parents won’t take responsibility for even the decision-making.

Some of the opportunities, of course, are going to depend on location. In Houston, we can find plenty of resources. In a small town with one public school and no private school, choice might need to include options that homeschoolers do and have done for millennia: teach them yourself; combine with others to pay for a private school, or hire private tutors, which today includes access to the internet, so it’s pretty unlimited, depending on availability of the parents and some common technology.

Educating our children will require a new way of thinking. Public schooling as it is done now has failed to meet the mission and has subjected kids to indoctrination of things parents absolutely oppose. ESAs might not be the final solution. I think a fully free-market education, with scholarships provided by local businesses (and maybe willing taxpayers) could do an even better job. But ESAs would be a step toward injecting actual free market choice into schooling.

And we know what we get from a real free market: better quality at lower cost.

Legislation This Session

 

Texas Senate Committee on Education, March 22, 2023
screenshot from here

This legislative session in Texas, we have a number of bills trying to protect children, regain parental rights, and allow school choice. There are two I’m looking at: SB 8, Bettencourt, Creighton, et al (including Middleton); and SB 176, Middleton (with Bettencourt as a co-author). Both bills are long and attempt to accomplish a lot. I trust both Senators Bettencourt and Middleton; both have a record of being pro-school choice. Bettencourt is my state senator. Both bills do two main things: codify a Parents Bill of Rights and implement an ESA program. They are not, however, considered companion bills.

Friends tell me Senator Middleton and crew have spent 18 months carefully crafting the wording of their bill, SB 176. My friends were disappointed to have Bettencourt’s bill come in and seem to replace all their work. But I didn’t get from my friends any specific problems with SB 8. I’ve only just scanned both of them. SB 8 is 50+ pages, and SB 176 is around 36 pages. There may be very similar sections. The low bill number on SB 8 means it is a high priority and is more likely to see movement.

If you click on the bill numbers above, I’ve linked to the Bill History page for each. From there you can see what movement the bill has had so far, and you can click on Text to get the wording of the bill and any amendments that may come.

Public testimony was heard in committee for both bills on Wednesday, March 22, and both were left pending in committee. That means there will likely be another day of public hearings before they take a vote.

It will take more time for me to determine what to recommend or amend. But I do hope we get a bill passed here in Texas that will do what parents have been calling out for.

Local School-Related Irreconcilable Differences

Cy-Fair ISD school board meeting gets underway, April 11, 2022
screenshot from here

There's an action item at the bottom, so if you're in Texas, please don't miss that.

We have some irreconcilable differences in our school district. This month’s school board meeting was last Monday, April 11th. The public comment is where we see much of the conflict. There is one side that wants more power to the parents, more transparency, and less indoctrination and sexualization of our children. There is another side that wants to limit parent choice and to denigrate parent concerns.

Our school district is not unique in facing these differences. But what I want to emphasize is, this is not a problem seen elsewhere but not here in our backyard. It’s here.

School Board Member Concern

A friend passed along a blog post to me recently about some issues in our district. The blog post is anonymous. You can read it here.  Because I don’t know who wrote it, I can’t vouch for them. But I’ve read it and corroborated much of what is in it, and learned more to clarify a few things. 

A member of our school board recently joined a private group on Facebook of people in our community who have influence on what happens in our district. The group is called Cy-Fair Civic Alliance. Their description of the group says:

Cy-Fair Civic Alliance envisions a Cy-Fair ISD [Independent School District] that embraces the future, prioritizes an inclusive and equitable learning environment, and supports a diverse community where every child can thrive. Cy-Fair Civic Alliance works to engage, inform, and unite Cy-Fair ISD staff, parents, students, and taxpayers.

If you’re aware of the term “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” (sometimes in different word order), then you can see why this is concerning. DEI is against diversity of thought, against equality of opportunity and instead favors equal outcomes, and excludes whoever they disfavor, which tends to be anyone with white skin, or possibly with Christian beliefs. This is an ideology spreading in businesses and institutions, like schools and governments. It’s often associated with ESG scoring, the social scoring system used in China.

The blog writer wanted to know what was going on in this group, so he/she joined, after answering several “progressive” questions. I wasn’t willing to answer those questions against truth, but I wondered what they were, so I went so far as to request membership, see the questions, and then withdraw the membership request. The questions are:

·        Please share your thoughts on diversity, inclusion, and equity in public education.

·        Why is Public Education important?

·        How do you see yourself contributing to this community? (Attending the board meetings, sending emails, sharing on social media, outreach, etc.)

It’s clear there is a certain viewpoint in the group. So when Cy-Fair ISD Board Member Julie Hinaman joined the group, she presumably answered those questions in a way that indicated she was in alignment with the group’s viewpoint.

welcome message for Julie Hinaman, 
posted on Cy-Fair Civic Alliance,
image found here

Hinaman was welcomed to the group with a post on November 9, 2021. The group was created November 4, 2021, immediately after the election in which three long-time school board members were replaced with what we hope are three members more aligned with parent values. It does appear that it was created in response to that school board changeout.

At the school board meeting last week, Hinaman was referred to as a founding member of Cy-fair Civic Alliance, which she denies. That might be a semantic difference; she joined during its first week of existence, but may not be a person involved in creating, or founding, the group.

One controversial issue that has come up with this group is their influence to reinstate in the Bridgeland High School library certain books that had been removed following parent concerns. The blog post includes screenshots of a book called Flamer, which was brought up by several citizens at the board meeting. It appears to be a graphic novel, and the samples shown in that blog post are particularly vile. They are sexually perverted in nature and involve minors. Clearly this violates the anti-pornography laws in place to protect young people.

So, to review, parents reported the content of these books to the school district (I don’t know to which entity), and some schools then removed the books from their libraries. CyFair Civic Alliance proudly announces in its Facebook group its success in getting the books placed back in the library at Bridgeland High School, where they had been removed. This post, by Tana Lam, is shown in the blog post, and was read during public testimony at the school board meeting.

During the meeting, Hinaman was accused of knowing about the content of the books in question, and knowing about Cy-Fair Civic Alliance’s personal contact with the librarian, making that decision to override parent concerns, and doing nothing about it.

CFISD Board Member Julia Hinaman, at the April 11 board meeting
screenshot from here

Later in the meeting Hinaman defends herself. She says,

I would like to correct a false statement made during public comments using my name…. While there is a board policy and a district process for reviewing library books, I have not been a part of the review process for any library book, because it is not part of my role of governance.

Regarding a Facebook group, I am a follower. I follow several different community groups across our community, just to stay in touch and to see what’s going on in our community. I am not involved in the management of that particular group that was mentioned. I am not a founder. And I’m unaware of the post that was referenced.

There’s a difference between “following” a group and being a member of a private group on Facebook. She had to join, and express her allegiance to the ideas of the group, so that’s a bit disingenuous.

Also, I haven’t seen her membership in any of the community groups I’m in, the kind that want to promote parents’ rights and school choice, for example.

About being unaware of the post that was referenced, that may be true, but it was testified to by multiple community members on both sides of the issue, so by this late point in the meeting she is aware of the post and of the involvement of the group for which she is a member. And by her very resistance to the parents calling her out, she is supporting the pornographic material being put back into the library. She could have expressed that she was unaware of the group’s involvement and then have added that she would not approve of such materials in our libraries, but she doesn’t do that.

On April 8, Cy-Fair ISD announced that Julie Hinaman had been elected to the Texas Association of School Boards (TASB), “taking an interim position representing Region 4, Position F.”

During our district platform work, where we took the resolutions from precinct conventions to develop wording to pass along for the state platform, one of the most common education resolutions was a demand to cut ties with various organizations, of which TASB was mentioned specifically. The platform wording we came up with was,

Sever Ties: We insist that local ISDs immediately sever ties with organizations that have opposed parental rights and the voices of parents, particularly concerning CRT-related materials and the sexualization of the child as in the LGBT agenda. These include but are not limited to the HB3 Reading Academies, the Texas Association of School Boards (TASB), the Texas Association of School Administrators (TASA), the Texas Association of Community Schools (TACS), the National School Boards Association (NSBA), the American Library Association (ALA), the Texas Library Association (TLA), and the International Baccalaureate Program (IBP), nor will we accept testing from the Next Generation Assessments and Accountability (NGAA).

Reasoning from the resolutions mentioned that TASB, among others, consistently lobbies against bills for parental rights and transparency, works with the National School Boards Association (NSBA) to label parents concerned with Critical Race Theory as domestic terrorists, and has worked to erode parental authority.

The SREC (State Republican Executive Committee) has also called out TASB for these issues.

In other words, being on TASB is not a reason to trust Julie Hinaman to represent parents in our district; it is a reason to distrust her.

Irreconcilable Differences

We can see that those who oppose parent values in our schools coincidentally favor books like those pornography examples we talked about. But they want, not only for those things to be in our schools; they want parents to have no place to go.

One of the public commenters at last week’s meeting called out the new board members, particularly Natalie Blasingame (not by name, but she’s the only new female board member), for having the audacity to suggest that underutilized campuses could be used for things parents want.

Dr. Tara Cummings, speaking at the April 11 school board meeting
screenshot from here

So, this was the testimony of Dr. Tara Cummings:

In response to the report [demographic report at Thursday’s work session], one of our trustees commented that she’s committed to making CFISD the very best choice for all families. I’m glad to hear that, but I’m a bit confused and concerned, considering some of the anti-public ed political candidates that she and our other new trustees have publicly endorsed.

Knowing that charter growth is a threat to our district and public education in general, it’s imperative that our trustees mind their votes accordingly, and that the community continue to pay attention to such.

This same trustee also stated in the future she hopes to see underutilized campuses “used for things families want.” Although I agree that the district must be judicious in making decisions about the facilities, our facilities now and in the future, the primary priority, and a factor that sets us far and above other educational options, especially charter and private schools, is the commitment to opportunity for all. The promise that all students, regardless of their zip code, campus, or circumstances are afforded exceptional and equitable educational opportunities.

Speaking of equitable, how ‘bout them equity audit recommendations? As a parent partner in education, which according to our new trustees makes me the primary stakeholder in education, what I don’t want is something along the lines of magnet-type programs. CFISD doesn’t need lotteries in order to provide a world-class education to every single one of our students. Opportunity for all means just that.

I’ve talked with Dr. Natalie Blasingame about what “used for things families want” might mean. She suggests that, if there were parents of 20 students that wanted, say, a particular track, maybe a Christian track, it would be possible—at no extra cost—to accommodate that choice. We simply use current facilities and willing current staff to fill the need.

While I am very pro-homeschooling, Blasingame wants the opportunity for the school district to try to meet the needs before a parent feels like they have to turn elsewhere.

Dr. Cummings here reveals a couple of divisive points. She claims, as though it’s common knowledge, that charter schools are a threat to public schools. Charter schools are public schools; they are a type of public school, with funding being part of public school funding; i.e., taxpayer funding.

Every student that goes to a charter school goes there because the public school they were assigned to failed to meet their needs—and because they were among the lucky ones to get a slot in a charter school, which the parents hoped would be a better option. The problem is, the waiting list for charter schools is long—too long. And we’re not getting enough new charter schools. Even though there is great demand, charter schools with proven track records, such as those coming out of Hillsdale College, are being refused a charter in Texas.

When Dr. Cummings says CFISD can “provide a world-class education to every single one of our students; opportunity for all means just that,” she doesn’t mean meeting the needs of all those students who have turned elsewhere because their needs aren’t met; she means she wants to keep them stuck in the failing situation along with everyone else that’s stuck there—so she can make sure all of the state’s education funding goes to indoctrinating them the way she wants.

Stacy DeMeier speaks at the school board
meeting on April 11,
screenshot from here

Another of last week’s public commenters, Stacy DeMeier, is what I refer to at times as a public school believer—like it’s a religion. And anyone who doesn’t agree with her is a heretic. She claims that charter schools are a threat. But, again, charter schools are public schools, just not her preferred sect. If the entire school system were changed so that all schools were charter schools, and parents chose the type they wanted for their child, public schooling would simply look different; it would not disappear. Funding might need to be restructured. Charters actually do cost more per child right now, unlike private and homeschools, which accomplish the goal at lower costs. But if there were a free-market deciding the costs, that could change everything for the better. But DeMeier doesn’t want better services at lower costs; she wants every child stuck in the type of classroom she believes in:

It’s pretty clear that if we, as a community, do not stand up to the recent attacks aimed at undermining public education, including book banning, false accusations of CRT in the curriculum, and the constant attacks on our teachers, then we will be left with a school district that is not receiving adequate funding it needs. We need to support pro-public education representatives. And we especially need board members who are not actively trying to take funds away from our district by supporting and publicly endorsing school choice voucher-loving politicians.

What she calls book banning is removing harmful pornographic materials from school libraries intended for minors. We’re not talking about depriving children from reading Huckleberry Finn for its depiction of racial issues, or Harry Potter because it mentions witchcraft; we’re talking about keeping out of school libraries actual pornography aimed at children. This used to be something parents and schools could agree on.

And there aren’t false accusations of CRT in the curriculum; there are actual examples of CRT ideology being taught—which have been presented in multiple previous school board meetings. I don’t know what she means by attacks on teachers, unless she means teachers who are going against the will of the parents and teaching things we’ve insisted not be taught. Such a teacher might feel “attacked,” if a parent calls for them to be accountable. But no, there are no physical or even verbal attacks on teachers, so that’s what you might politely call a mischaracterization—or, more accurately, a lie.

Ayse Endomayo speaks at the
school board meeting April 11,
screenshot from here

As for physical attacks, though, the person who bragged in that Facebook group about getting the book back in the library, Tana Lam—she reportedly attacked one of the parents—one of those testifying at this meeting and who regularly attends and testifies, Ayse Endomayo (sp?). According to Endomayo's testimony, this happened a couple of months ago outside the meeting. There was a police report filed. The school board has been made aware of it. And yet this person has been allowed to go into a school library and get pornography put back in.

So, what is a heretic in DeMeier’s public school religion? Someone who supports choice for parents who want their children’s needs met without indoctrination or sexualization of the child.

We are at an impasse. As parents, grandparents, and concerned community members, we’d better push harder than the public school religion inquisitors. And we’d better do it now. Because the harm to our children is already being done. The next school board election isn’t until 2023. We need better from our board now.

Call to Action

One more thing. The Texas Education Association (TEA) has, at the direction of Governor Abbott, updated their guidelines for selecting and removing school library materials. (Texas Scorecard story here.) The purpose of these statewide standards is to prevent the presence of pornography and other obscene content in Texas public schools, such as those we’re talking about here in CFISD. The new standards require a district librarian to read all materials brought into libraries, something that has not always happened. And the review and selection process will be transparent and will emphasize parental rights.

I got a text today suggesting that several hundred of us ought to contact our school board members to adopt these new library review policies. What the TEA has set forth is a model policy; it is then up to local school districts to adopt policies. That means the parents need to require it. Maybe a reminder that showing porn or other harmful materials to minors is against the law, so in order to protect themselves from prosecution, they’d better set an appropriate policy.

Take the Money and Run—Or Just Run

In a post linking to an article on the overwhelming problems we have with public schools (“Public Schools Are Cesspools of Debauchery. Get Your Kids Out Now, Before It's Too Late.” By Paula Bolyard), PJ Media asks, “At what point should it be considered parental malpractice to keep your kids in public school?” That’s actually a good question.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis promises parents that pressure
from media and woke corporations will not stop him from 
protecting students in schools. screenshot from here

For me, the answer came in 2000, when we talked it over as a family and pulled our children out of public schools—and never looked back. We weren’t looking at the debauchery, or even more than a rather subtle bias against religion; we pulled our kids out because the schools were doing a lousy job of meeting their particular educational needs. We could much better meet those needs outside of public schools.

That seemed like a good enough reason. Maybe it isn’t a reason every family has; maybe what their schools offer is a good fit for their children.

But now, a couple of decades later, there is no doubt that many schools offer even greater harm than merely failing to educate to a child’s potential. If you think your children’s school isn’t one of those bad ones, maybe you just haven’t looked carefully enough.

This story was linked in the PJ Media
article. There's more detail in the story. 
Some educator assumed 12-year-olds
were not only sexually active, but had
multiple sexual partners and would
 benefit from a pizza analogy.

That article gives a pretty hefty list of stories of school wrongdoing. I’ve written on this a number of times. Here, here, here, and here, for example.   

I shouldn’t have to spell this out, but I will. This is not to indict all teachers as bad, or even most. Many would thrive and do a much better job of educating, if the powers above them would set them free to do so.

The two main categories of evil indoctrination by schools are Critical Race Theory and the LGBT agenda, both of which are more closely related—through intersectionality—than a surface glance would make them appear.

The awakening of parents to what is being taught dawned during the COVID-19 shutdown. Classes were done online, often in the presence of parents, who had not been privy to actual classroom instruction in the past. They turned their heads and said, “What did I just hear?” And then, “No! No way! Not teaching that to my child.” Private schools, by the way, fought to open schools back up; public schools—because of teachers union—fought to keep them closed. So that online learning overheard by parents was their own doing, ironically.

In the spring and summer of 2021, the parental outcry in various school districts got the national attention.  Parents began showing up at school board meetings, where they’d been docile and quietly absent up until then. They began changing out their local school boards. And they began keeping a better watch.

So, right now we’re at a state of heightened awareness, but we have not yet seen the turn to believing that keeping children in failing public schools is “parental malpractice.” We don’t have a concrete definition for such a term, as we might for actual neglect or abuse. But maybe we should get one.

If you go to PragerU, you can find a long list of videos related to CRT and LGBT stuff being taught in schools, raising awareness, and sometimes adding what to do about it—often including pulling kids out of those environments.

Corey DeAngelis, screenshot from here

Today I saw a new PragerU video, “Fund the Children, Not the Schools,” talking about why it makes sense to attach the education dollars to the student. Corey DeAngelis, head of research at the American Federation for Children, points out multiple areas in which government money does not specify where the receiver spends the money:

·        Pell grant recipients choose their college.

·        GI Bill recipients choose their college.

·        Head Start recipients choose which preschool to send their children to.

·        Food stamp recipients choose which grocery store to shop at.

So why not allow that choice for parents of K-12 children?

There is this misconception—we might call it a lie—that allowing choice takes money away from the public schools. But we don’t say that allowing a food stamp recipient to choose a non-governmental grocery store takes money away from some other grocery store. We don’t say allowing a GI Bill recipient to choose their college takes money away from some government institutional college.

DeAngelis blames teachers unions for many of the misconceptions, like the money belonging to the schools. He says,

The truth is the opposite: public schools “steal” money from families. School choice initiatives just return the money to the hands of the intended beneficiaries of the funding—students and their parents.

What actually happens when public schools are faced with competition? The same thing you’d expect to happen with competition in other parts of life: better quality at lower costs.

When faced with competition, public schools do, in fact, up their game. DeAngelis says,

Twenty-five of 27 studies—and the latest peer-reviewed meta-analysis on the topic—find that private school choice competition leads to better outcomes in public schools.

For example, a study published in May 2021 reveals that increased competition from expanding private school choice in Florida improved academic and behavioral outcomes in nearby public schools.

That makes sense. Because, whenever the free market is allowed to flourish, we get better products and services at lower prices. Innovation happens. Demand is met.

So, if we demand better schools—by putting the money in the hands of the parents—we can have the outcomes we want.

DeAngelis also points out that current per student costs in public school is an average of $16,000 annually, while private school tuition is around $12,000. We could save $4,000 a year per student simply by turning over the responsibility to private schools.

During the COVID-19 lockdown year, support for
school choice went up 10%.
screenshot from here

Not realistic? Maybe not overnight. But consider the long waiting lists for charter schools—still a public school option, but with some innovation. The number of available seats in private schools almost meets that need. How many parents would be willing to take the private school option—rather than wait out the years of their child’s education hoping for a win in the charter school lottery? Not all, but many.

What about the question of government strings attached to the money? You think that’s not a problem now? How could giving accountability to parents increase the stranglehold government schools have now?

Maybe working for putting the money in the hands of the parents goes hand in hand with keeping government’s glommy[i] hands off our curriculum choices.

Do we risk damaging the public school system? Maybe that’s a risk we ought to be willing to take. If a collapse of that government institutional monopoly happened simultaneously with a free-market response, the only real losers are the teachers unions. And that includes the indoctrinators who think they have a right to control our children.

Whatever we do right now, it had better be bold and big. We can’t afford to lose a generation of kids. And if they’re your kids in school right now, can you afford for them to suffer any more indoctrination?

As Paula Bolyard says in that PJ Media article, “What’s it worth to you to protect your kids from what’s going on in public schools?”

Maybe the answer has been to turn over the school board and then watch closely. You might give that a year, two tops. If that doesn’t eliminate the problems, you need to cut and run.

If you’re not simultaneously lobbying the legislature to put the school money in the hands of parents, don’t be surprised if, when you need to pull your kids out, it’s going to be at your own expense—even though it shouldn’t be, and even though that solves nothing for all the other kids stuck in that strange indoctrination institution.

School choice—with plenty of free-market involvement—will mean better outcomes for all school children. In that case, take the money and run to better options. But if you can't wait for that huge win over the powerful teacher unions and their sycophants, just run. Whatever the cost, your kids are worth it.

 

---

[i] Online dictionary is telling me this is not a word, even though it was common in my household growing up, as in, “Keep your glommy hands off my candy; you’ve got your own.” Think “glom onto,” which does show up in the dictionary and means to cling to, the way a leech might glom onto a person. 

We Are All Enlisted

At our Tea Party meeting on Saturday, we were, as always, stirred up to action. The people who take a couple of hours out of a Saturday to learn about issues and find ways to take action are a particular breed to begin with. But we were also chastised for not doing enough. There was a Harris County election fraud issue we were presented with a couple of weeks ago (it's example 2 in this post), to pressure the Attorney General’s office to act on. Six hundred or more were given the information and the how-to for making that contact. Only 12 acted. (I was one, I believe, although mine so far was to contact only by email; I haven’t yet followed up by phone.) If we all see voter fraud as an important issue, then why don’t more of us take a simple action when it’s placed before us?

Texas State Capitol, 2018

 

What to Take Action On

One man said he accepted the chastisement, but then pointed out how, even at these meetings, there are so many things to take action on, we feel overwhelmed. Even in getting an answer to that comment, he got a list of six or seven important things to do. And he said, that’s his point. Life is full of these injustices and issues. How do we know where to spend our limited time?

The simple answer is, wherever you feel a passion, enough to learn the issue to speak intelligently on it, so you can share that with your circle of influence, and with your representatives.

I’ve been doing that for quite a number of years now. Decades. There’s not a lot of payoff. There are places I can see my work has been useful. But there are many more where I don’t feel I have the energy to do one more thing, and I hope others step up.

Here are some of the issues I’ve worked on over the years:

Defense of Marriage. I lobbied the state legislature in 2003, which worked, but was almost immediately overturned by the US Supreme Court. Continual work was eventually done in by the Supreme Court in Obergefell, and even the most effective advocates have gone silent. (See my Defense of Marriage collection.)

School Choice and Parental Rights. School failures consist of failure to teach what is needed and also teaching what is subversive to civilization. It is a basic God-given right for parents to see to the care and upbringing of their children. That’s why these two issues are closely related. We’re losing ground, because of teachers’ unions and international anti-family pressures. School choice is only a tiny effort to whittle away at the problem. I’m on a committee working on this issue for the current legislative session. We have yet to get a good school choice bill, despite promises from some of our best elected officials. This is in a state where the vast majority of parents would like school choice and probably 90% would say parents need to have the final say. I don’t know that public education is solvable. We need market solutions, with parents taking on the main decision-making for their own children. For a good overview of the parental rights problem, I recommend this video: “Overruled: Government Invasion of Your Parental Rights.” (H/T to Janice for passing this along to me.)

Abortion. There are always those who have been more activist than I am on this. I trusted them to do this important work while I work on other issues. But I have written on it, and lobbied for it, and worked for appropriate wording in the state platform. There is greater willingness from the public for abolishing abortion (with exception for life of the mother and, among some, in cases of rape). Meanwhile the minority opposition is more starkly contrasting—favoring abortion up until the moment of birth, or maybe beyond. We have passed a no dismemberment abortion bill, and a 20-week bill. Some states have passed heartbeat bills. But these all accept the assumption that we get to decide when it’s OK to kill a developing human baby. Even as we gain traction in the society on this issue, we make very little legal progress.

The Electric Grid. It became more than apparent a couple of weeks ago that we don’t do well without electricity. A freeze in Texas is going to be brief. But even from that 2-3 days without power, there were dozens of lives lost, and people are going to spend months dealing with the mess caused by frozen pipes. And everyone is casting blame. I’m more concerned about a longer and more extensive loss of power such as would come from a solar flare or an EMP strike. Loss of life, from starvation or disease mainly, could be beyond something we’ve seen since medieval plague times. We did finally this past week get a bill in the legislature that we think might address it. It’s relatively inexpensive and doable. But for reasons I don’t fully understand, there has been huge resistance (no pun intended) by the electric providers to get it done, even when the cost is not placed on them.

For the sake of brevity, but not for lack of importance, I’ll just add Religious Freedom and Healthcare Choice, without comment.

 

The Frustration

I do what I can on these issues, fitting my little bits of activism into and around a pretty full schedule of just living my life. I don’t know how to tell when an issue becomes so urgent that it requires setting everything else aside for a time until it is resolved—because some of these things don’t get resolved in a normal human lifetime.

Let’s add to this, we’re living in times when the odds are stacked against the side of freedom, prosperity, and civilization.

I was listening to the Viva & Barnes Sunday Night Livestream, and they were discussing particularly the Pennsylvania case dismissed by the Supreme Court last week. Robert Barnes was skeptical of Justice Amy Coney Barrett from the outset, and now is saying something like, “I told you so,” since her vote would have been sufficient for cert (only 4 of 9 are needed to take on a case). But the Court is saying there isn’t a time they will take up a case on this issue. Justice Thomas, in his dissent, called them out on this.

Robert Barnes offers them these seasonal excuses when they're determined not to take a case [around 28 minutes—the fuller discussion starting around 18 minutes]:

It’s not ripe in spring,

It’s no standing in summer,

It’s laches by fall,

And it’s moot by winter.

There’s a rule that should apply to whether a case can be considered moot. If it’s capable of repetition, —in order to set down rules for future similar situations—and if it’s likely to evade Supreme Court review—because it will be beyond remedy by the time it reaches the Supreme Court. If those two things are present, then the case is not moot. For that reason, election disputes should never be considered moot, and historically for decades have not been. Justice Thomas was right in his dissent. The Democrat appointees and three of the Republican appointees, including two appointed by President Trump, were simply wrong and have done harm to our Constitutional Republic.

So, we have an expectation of justice. We have laws. We have rules. We have precedent. But we do not get justice.

We elect officials to represent our views and defend the Constitution of the United States, yet so often they fail to do so.

We pressure them—taking time from our lives to force them to do their job—and only sluggishly, and only on occasion do they even listen to us.

Frustration builds up.

That is why, when you get a chance to hear from the former President who was elected four years ago because he would stand up to this frustration, you listen.

President Trump spoke at CPAC yesterday, which was more highly anticipated that anything Biden has said since inauguration. The crowd was ready and willing to support him in whatever he said. It wasn’t, certifiably, his best speech. It wasn’t polished. It probably wasn’t cleaned up and shortened enough. But he did say we would carry on. He was still in the fight (politically speaking).

President Trump giving speech at CPAC 2021, February 28, 2021
screenshot from here

He would have nothing to do with starting any new party; why do that and divide the Republican Party, which he owns from the grassroots up at this point? He told us we’ll work on election reform at the local and state levels. We’ll win things back in 2022. And he hinted that he might run again in 2024. “Maybe I’ll beat them a third time,” is how he put it, since this crowd knows he won the vote in November. He did suggest going to his website and contributing. There’s speculation this is part of a move to build up a new and separate—and uncensored—communications alternative, which will be necessary to reach people.

I don’t see how we can last up to and through another election cycle with the totalitarian dictators making the moves they’re making now. It’s not like past eras of even a decade ago. We can’t stand for this.

But how do we stand against it?

Supporting a champion for our side has been useful the past several years. It has helped clarify things. But I think we can see that no single champion is going to be enough. We have to keep soldiering on, in the face of apparent overwhelming odds. I think, instead of assuming continuing to do that is insanity, we must assume that, as we do all we can, God will fight our battles for us.

 

All We Can Do[i]

It’s that question of “all we can do” that occupies my thoughts. I don’t know how to tell when my contribution is enough. But I do believe that, if I trust God to guide me, I must act when prompted. And that will be enough. If all of us act when we’re prompted to act, we will collectively be the champions we need. We won’t each cover all the causes that are worthy. But enough of us will cover each one that we’ll represent the pressure out here from a freedom-loving people.

Become a Heritage Action Sentinel

If you need some guidance on where to get info, I suggest—well, several things. But let’s start with this one: become a Heritage Action Sentinel. When you’re in this national group, you’re tied in to what’s happening each week in Washington. There’s a weekly half-hour call. You can listen on your phone, or live on Facebook. Or the recording. Or get the call notes in your email inbox. When it’s time to act, they let you know and help you with what to say to your elected officials. They also encourage state and local work on similar issues. You can of course contribute money, but none is required to be a Sentinel. 

Become a Precinct Chair or Party Volunteer

Another way is to be a precinct chair or volunteer for the Republican Party. I’m not all about party loyalty; I’m about loyalty to our Constitution. Right now there’s none of that to be found in the Democrat Party (although you may find it among individual Democrats). Whatever part of it you could get in the Libertarian Party, you can get among Republicans, so that’s just a better place for your efforts, I think.

Right now, in my general vicinity (the area covering my church congregation, for example) there are five precinct chair vacancies. That means no one in the 2-3,000 people living in that precinct has stepped up to do the basics of running elections and attending a quarterly meeting to do party business. I’d say, if you become aware of this need in your area, and you’ve been looking for a way to take action, this assignment is for you. Look up your county party website and find out how to sign up. (Harris County info is here.) 

 

New precinct chairs being sworn in at our meeting January 25, 2021

If you have an active precinct chair, let them know you’re available to help. That might mean doing some block walking to identify like-minded people in your precinct, and helping get them connected to good information ahead of any future elections. Maybe it will be working on a committee, like outreach, or vetting candidates for local elections.

Join Clubs and Groups

There are clubs to help get people informed and activated. My local Cypress Texas Tea Party is one. We meet the fourth Saturday of the month at a barbecue place. I’ve been attending since 2010, very shortly after it began. Last month we had standing room only. This month was a more normal full room. There are groups for women, for college students, for Hispanics. Find a group of like-minded people meeting in your area. This will get you informed and connected—so the promptings to act will show up as you’re needed.

Become an Election Worker

You could step up to work elections. Presiding judge, alternate judge, and clerk are all paid positions. Poll watchers are unpaid but also essential. If you do the numbers, we need either a presiding or alternate judge plus one clerk and one poll watcher per polling place; in our county, that’s around 800 workers and 1200 poll watchers on election day. Plus there are the people who do the ballot counting—and the observing of the ballot counting. It takes a brigade to run a free and fair election.

Alan Vera, who has been our soldier in command in the election integrity fight, told us at a recent meeting, his sons have served deployments, a year at a time in Afghanistan and Iraq, to preserve our freedoms. Alan is a retired Army Ranger (and, really, they never retire). And I believe he said his father and grandfather had also served. So look at your life, he said, and see if maybe you can deploy for just a day.

 

These are not peace times. There is a war ongoing against our Constitution—and with it our freedoms of life, liberty, property—and our culture. We are all enlisted[ii].

---

[i] In the Book of Mormon, in 2 Nephi 25:23,  we read, “for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.”

[ii] This is the title of a hymn, text anonymous, music by William B. Bradbury.