|
|
|
 |
EdAction
Maple River Education Coalition PAC
105 Peavey Rd, St 116
Chaska, MN
55318
952-361-4931
http://www.EdAction.org
E-mail
May 25, 2001
Federal HR1: After the House Vote
The final vote that passed the disastrous HR1 was lopsided: 384 to 45.
Noteworthy is that 34 of the 45 dissenters were from President Bush's own
party, and more Democrats supported the bill than did Republicans. Only
one Minnesota Congressman opposed the final bill, Rep. Sabo. It is never
easy for an elected official to vote NO on any final major spending bill,
particularly education. Putting a good bill together is far easier than
rejecting the final product.
Before the final vote, a move was made to delete the expanded
3rd through 8th grade federal testing requirements. In Minnesota, these
tests are the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCAs). Currently,
federal Title I requires MCAs in 3rd, 5th, 7th and 10th grades. MCAs
assess whether the schools are implementing the Profile of Learning. The
amendment to delete these expanded federal mandates was called the
Hoekstra/Frank Amendment. This amendment would not have removed
the federal mandates to the Goals 2000/STW content standards, but would
have been a significant improvement.
Unfortunately, the Hoekstra/Frank amendment failed. The good news is
that all eight members of the Minnesota delegation supported the
amendment! The vote was 173 in favor and 255 opposed. There was strong
opposition to the expanded federal mandate! We want to thank every member
of the Minnesota delegation for listening to the overwhelming public
outrage against the federal Goals 2000/STW curriculum that is being forced
on Minnesota and every other state. Please call and thank them for being
responsive to your deep concerns over education in our state. It is a
tribute to you, the thousands of activists across this state, that our
delegation voted in a rare display of unity on a major policy issue.
Please take the time to call them to express your support for their vote
on the Hoekstra/Frank amendment.
|
Critics confused
Most revealing throughout this debate was the strong
support HR1 received from people who define themselves as
critics of progressive education. While criticizing the
Profile of Learning, the new math, the national history
standards and group-project learning on one hand, they
drive forward the federal mandate for Goals 2000/STW state
content standards and their mandated aligned assessments (MCAs).
They do not understand that the Profile of Learning is
the intended result of the federal mandate! The new
education system has been put into place for the purpose
of creating a School-to-Work, minimum competency, radical
worldview federal curriculum, whether federal testing
advocates want to believe it or not. Would-be Profile
critics lose credibility when they oppose the Profile one
day, and the next day force the federal content standards
and testing mandate upon us.
The Star
Tribune, May 23rd, noted:
"The Minnesota Education League,
a nonprofit group that's promoting more school
accountability and parental choice, said it intends to
distribute thousands of 'vote scorecards' throughout the
state to hold Minnesota's congressional members
responsible for their votes on the education bill.
Among other things, the league said it
opposes any efforts to kill the Bush testing plan.
"'If we are going to hold the
education system accountable for results, parents must
be able to easily determine how their children and
schools are performing compared to others in their
state,' said Morgan Brown, the league's executive
director."
The Education League threatens to send out scorecards
opposing the good votes of Minnesota's
Congressional delegation to kill the expansion of
those federal mandates. Yet this same group sent out a
statewide fundraising letter last month blasting the
Profile of Learning and asking for contributions so they
could work to stop it! Nowhere in their letter did the
Education League mention that they support the
MCAs; that they support the federal accountability
system that brought us the Profile of Learning; that
they support expanding state accountability
measures tied to the MCA's. Nor did they mention
that they would lobby against the work you have
been engaged in to end the federal mandate. Not all those
who claim to oppose the Profile of Learning are opposed to
the new education system that put it in place. |
|
We also thank the Congressmen who ultimately voted to oppose HR1. Those
45 are listed at the following location.
The following noteworthy amendments were added before the final vote
was taken:
1. Graham/Tiarht amendment: (passed on a voice vote)
- Establishes the right of parents to inspect and review
instructional materials and to inspect and review surveys, analyzes
or evaluations before being given to a student.
- Requires surveys, analyses, or evaluations concerning political
affiliations or beliefs, mental or psychological problems, sexual
behavior or attitudes, illegal or antisocial behavior, appraisals of
family relationships, other privileged relationships, or religious
practices or belief to have prior, informed, written consent of
parents.
- Requires medical or mental health exams, testing treatment or
immunizations to have prior, written, informed consent of
parents, unless expressly permitted by state law. We
supported this amendment.
2. Akin Amendment: (passed on a voice vote)
- Requires that the test measure "objective knowledge, based on
measurable, verifiable, and widely accepted professional testing and
assessment standards, and shall not assess the personal opinions,
attitudes, or beliefs of the student being assessed." We
supported this amendment.
3. Norwood/Barr/Graves Amendment: (passed on a voice
vote)
- Institutes the right to discipline students with disabilities. We
supported this amendment.
4. The Hill amendment: (passed on a voice vote)
- Establishes so-called "small learning communities." In
reality, "small learning communities" are the
implementation of School-To-Work career clusters and mandatory
vocational training for all students. We opposed this amendment. For
a look at how these "small learning communities" are being
implemented in Minnesota and how they are career tracking for our
students, see our review St. Paul's
"Education Blueprint". Very few House members would
have known what "small learning communities" are or how
they operate. Such is the way that federal law is being passed.
5. The Velasquez amendment: (passed on a voice vote)
- Provided money for 21st Century Schools. 21st Century schools are
the "one-stop" plan that transform schools into centers
for all family needs: health care, child care, youth activities and
the like. 21st Century schools was tried at Dayton's Bluff in St.
Paul at a huge cost. It was a monumental flop as far as increasing
academic achievement. Few House members would have had a good idea
as to what 21st Century schools were. We opposed this amendment.
Next week, the Senate will probably finish up its work on the bill.
From there the House and Senate versions will go to a conference committee
to work out the differences.
Worldnet Daily referenced some of our concerns in their
article, "Activists decry Bush
education bill". Many other national publications circulated the
research and information we provided.
|