Use the icons above and below to follow me on many of the social media sites.

Subscribe to the
RuminationsBlog
RSS Feed
or Twitter Feed
using the buttons below.

Monday
Sep062010

By What Right?

          In the blogpost, Big Brother is Asking, I told everyone that the Census Bureau selected me to complete the American Community Survey (ACS).  Even though my compliance is required under Section 221 of Title 13 of the United States Code, I have refused.  It is worthwhile to remember that we the people are bound together under a constitution.  This mutually agreed upon social contract defines the limits of government, not the limits of our individual freedom.  So, I ask, by what right does the government require me to divulge detailed personal information?   

          Article one, section two, of the U.S. constitution originally stated that,Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers….”  To determine those respect numbers the section went on to authorizes the census.  Simply put, allocating taxes and representatives was the original purpose of the census.  The Fourteenth Amendment deleted the three-fifths rule from the section, but the amendment still states that, “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers….” Dividing representatives among the states remained the purpose of the census.  Politicians and the Census Bureau have perverted the original purpose of the census into a gross intrusion upon the privacy of Americans.       

          In stating his opposition to the ACS, Congressman Ron Paul of Texas said, the Founding Fathers “never authorized the federal government to continuously survey the American people. More importantly, they never envisioned a nation where the people would roll over and submit to every government demand.”  Congressman Paul is correct that the Founders never gave such intrusive census power to the government.  If the action of the government is unconstitutional then citizens have an obligation to resist.  I will not roll over and submit.  Fine me if you will, arrest me if you must, I will not complete the survey.

 

Bookmark and Share

Sunday
Sep052010

The New Playground 

            One of the simple pleasures of childhood is gliding back and forth on a swing, but thanks to over protective government and a litigious society swing sets, high slides, seesaws and even merry-go-rounds are fading from elementary school playgrounds and public parks.  As reported by USA Today, Scott Burton, President of Safety Play Inc. states, “Everybody’s afraid of being litigated against. They just tear it out and don't replace it.”

          At one West Virginia school, a child jumped off a swing and broke his arm.  The parents sued and as a result, the swings are gone.  At a Massachusetts school, children can’t play tag, at another students are forbidden to hang upside down from the monkey bars.  A combination of lawyers, safety experts and playground safety guidelines from the federal government force the removal of the tall swings and slides that many of us remember from our youth.  These are replaced with “cooperative play climbing challenges.”  If you would like to see the new “perfect playground,” click on the embedded video.

          In a recent article, Investors.com quotes Philip K. Howard, author of The Death of Common Sense, as stating, “There is nothing left in playgrounds that would attract the interest of a child over the age of four.”  Sad isn’t it.      

 

Bookmark and Share

Friday
Sep032010

What is Best for the Children?

          Even though I regularly blog about public schools and education, I’ve resisted writing about this because of my mixed feeling.  However, now that Mick has been arrested, found guilty and the state has suspended his license, perhaps I should reveal my connection with him and summarize my somewhat conflicted thoughts. 

          Five years ago, I taught across the hall from Michael “Mick” Moulton at Morton Junior-Senior High in Lewis County, Washington State.  Even though we were about the same age, I was novice a teacher, while Mick had many years in education and at the Morton school.  Since his door was directly across from mine, it was only natural that I would talk to him.  He was always friendly to me and gave helpful advice.

          At the time, I didn’t know that twice before he had been disciplined for inappropriate contact.   Mick was a strict disciplinarian and did things his way in “his class.”  This tended to evoke strong feelings from students.  The average student didn’t want to meet his expectations for assignments or conduct.  They wanted to be in most any other class, but the school was small and choices were limited.  As I thought about the case over the last few days, I recall a couple of girls saying he was “creepy,” but they never voiced specific complaints with me. 

          I haven’t seen or spoken to Mick since I left the district but, if we had met, I would have shaken his hand and talked about old times.  Frankly, I was surprised when I heard that several students accused him of inappropriate touching and leering.  I wondered if the allegations were true or merely the lies of a few disgruntled students.    

          The district suspended Mick and, after entering an Alford plea on charges of assault in the fourth degree, he served 20 days in jail.  That is usually the end of such cases, but not for this one.  He hadn’t been fired by the school district, only suspended and placed on paid administrative leave for the remainder of the 2009-10 school year.  The Washington Education Association, teachers union, supported his appeal when the district finally did fire him. 

          The indisputable facts are, Mick was disciplined twice for inappropriate contact with students, convicted of assault on students and served time in jail.  The conduct of a man I would have called friend saddens me, but the conduct of the union angers me.  The WEA regularly proclaims that it acts, “for the children.”  How could Mick’s appeal be for the children?

          On what can only be described as a technicality Mick, and the union, won and he was rehired.  Parents were outraged.  Picketers appeared outside the school.  Citizens formed a Facebook page, Morton Schools Justice, to vent their frustrations and organize.  Most parents withdrew their children from his classes. 

          In the end, Mick never showed up at school.  He called in sick for three days and then Randy Dorn, the state Superintendant of Public Instruction, suspended his license for unprofessional conduct.  Mick can appeal, but if he does not, the order will become final in 30 days.  Regardless, I’m certain Mick will never teach again.      

          Twice before in this blog I have taken Dorn to task, but in this case, he has done his duty.  Suspending Mick’s license, allowing another teacher to be hired to teach his classes, was the right thing to do for the children and isn’t that what public education is supposed to be about.    

 

Bookmark and Share

Saturday
Aug282010

Big Brother is Asking

          Recently I received a letter from the Census Bureau informing me that I would receive an important national survey.  The letter identified the forthcoming letter as the American Community Survey and asked that I fill it out promptly and mail it back.  Later in the letter I was warned that, “Your response…is required by U.S. law.”  I did a bit of checking and discovered that refusing or willfully neglecting to complete the American Community Survey (ACS) is a misdemeanor under Section 221 of Title 13 of the United States Code.  The fine is $5,000.  Let me make this clear.  I am not neglecting to fill out the American Community Survey—I am refusing.

          A few days later I received the 2010 ACS document, a 27-page survey asking all the usual questions you might expect on a modern census form, name, sex, date of birth and so on.  However, it doesn’t stop there.  Here are just a few of the questions, you will be asked if you are unfortunate enough to receive it.  Some have been paraphrased for brevity.

          Describe your home.  Is it a mobile home, one family house, apartment, boat, RV, etc?

          Does your home have,
               hot and cold running water?
               a flush toilet?
               a bathtub or shower?
               a sink or faucet?
               a stove or range?
               a refrigerator?
               telephone service?

            Last month, what was the cost of electricity or gas for this house?

            What was the cost of water and sewer for the last year?

            Did anyone at this house receive food stamps or WIC?

            What is the monthly rent or mortgage?

            What do you think the house or apartment sell for if it were for sale?

            What are the total property taxes?

            Do you have a second mortgage?

            Are you deaf or blind?

            What is your marital status?

            How many times have you been married?

            When did you last get married?

            Have you given birth in the last 12 months?

            Do you have difficulty dressing or bathing?

            What is the address of your place of employment?

            What kind of business or industry is it?

            What were your most important duties?

            What is your salary, commissions, bonuses and tips from all jobs?

            Do you have trouble concentrating, remembering or making decisions?

            Are you a citizen of the United States? 

          I find it interesting that the federal government doesn’t want Arizona to ask that last question of people, but they do.  Also, you must answer these questions for everyone in the house and these are just a few of the questions asked.

The government has not constitutional authority to ask such things and fear of prosecution will not compel my compliance. 

Bookmark and Share

Thursday
Aug262010

No More Happy Birthday

            Singing Happy Birthday might be offensive to some so it must be abolished. 

That was the conclusion of principal Dr. Jodi Davidson of Chesterfield Elementary School in the Rockwood School District of Missouri.  Fortunately, parents sent angry emails and phoned the school forcing this hypersensitive principal to back down—somewhat.  Now, the embedded local news reports states, as long as students who do not celebrate birthdays are gone, Happy Birthday may be sung in the classroom.        




Bookmark and Share