What Issue Will Unify Conservatives to Join the Outrage? Parental rights have been trampled by Tony Evers, Wisconsin’s Superintendent of Schools. Public hearings revealed that Evers’ method of implementing Common Core Standards ignored state statutes which define local control of schools. A basic conservative principle is to assure that America is a nation of laws. Wisconsin’s state laws have been ignored by elected officials. The public is waiting for collective cries of outrage from conservative legislators. Let’s consider how liberals typically handle an issue that they deem threatens their rights: If liberal parents were opposed to Common Core Standards, liberal politicians and supporters would identify the process of ignoring state statutes to implement Common Core as an injustice and a political goldmine. First, liberals would find someone willing to announce his candidacy to run against the current Superintendent of Schools. They would make sure this potential candidate took the lead in exposing the injustices perpetrated by the current State Superintendent and they would assure this potential candidate that liberal legislators would provide visible support as the press releases begin to roll out repeatedly until the next election. The first run of press conferences and press releases would expose the hubris of a narcissistic elected official who thinks he has the right to ignore or circumvent state laws. “Are we a nation of laws or political tyrants?” would be the mantra for weeks. “Are we going to allow elected officials to ignore state statutes with impunity?” would become the mantra for many more weeks. Silence would never be an option. The second phase of press conferences would focus on school board members who had tried to provide due-diligence and bring truth to the public but had been stopped by heavy-handed policies of a State Superintendent of Schools who is turning the state Department of Public Instruction into a political office. Months of additional press releases would provide testimony from school board members who would painstakingly explain that they just wanted to provide parents with both sides of the issue but their fellow school board members censured them and demanded their resignations because they refused to accept the edicts from this law-breaking State Superintendent. The third phase would introduce dozens of parents and other stakeholders who had tried to exercise their right of local control of schools by asking a few questions or providing some relevant information, but the school board refused to allow individuals the time legally recommended for them. Parents who refused to surrender would be featured as defenders of freedom. They would explain that they spent their own money to run ads and rent a space to hold a public information session about Common Core but had to cancel because school officials intimidated those providing the venue. “How can our legislators sit by and allow a rogue DPI and out-of-control school leadership to politicize our child’s education?” liberals would ask. Additional interviews would include well-informed parents who quote research proving that parental involvement increases student academic success. The school boards and the DPI would be held accountable for policies which have resulted in poor test scores. The press is unlikely to ignore a group of sympathetic legislators supporting an emotional parent and child. Parental rights would remain the focus as angry parents explain how important a quality education is to their family. A parent would explain that this child would be the first in their family who expected to get a college education, but the actions of this State Superintendent were robbing their child of the benefits of parental involvement in the most basic aspects of education, of shaping the standards their child is expected to meet. The child would be present and emotional as the parents accuse the State Superintendent of his willful suppression of opportunity for the child to advance into a higher socio-economic status. Once the foundation for change had been established, the public would be ready for a solution. The future candidate for State Superintendent would take the lead and become the savior by doing what is necessary to provide a quality education for children in Wisconsin. The future candidate would explain that many states have superior standards that have been proven successful. Certainly our State Superintendent could gather those standards, make a few changes to update and improve them, and provide a state-created set of baseline standards as required under state laws. Liberal legislators and educational supporters would assure the public that once the state provides those baseline standards to the districts, parents are ready to participate in customizing those standards to meet the needs of local children. The legislators would then encourage the public to make their wishes known and to protect our children from these incompetent bureaucrats. Not only would the foundation for the next election for State Superintendent be established, but the present State Superintendent would be pressured to reluctantly recognize his mistake and reinstate local control by removing all state and federally aligned standards, curricula, and testing from the schools. Then he would work with local communities to replace Common Core Standards with a preferable set of standards. This could happen if conservative citizens would insist that elected legislators respect existing state statutes granting local control of schools. Conservatives say they believe in a nation of laws, but when will they take the steps necessary to convince legislators that Wisconsin must function as a state governed by laws?
Posted on: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 11:32:20 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015