In Oklahoma, Both Legislators AND Citizens Can File To Stop Property Taxes

In our LIVE podcast with Oklahoma Representative Jay Steagall, Michael and Jenni talked about how to remove the scourge of liberty that is property taxes. (YouTube, Rumble) Truly, if your home can be taken from you by the government for non-payment of taxes, the Founders of this country may well have not created a Constitution at all. Our entire system of government is predicated on individual liberty and there is no liberty if a citizen is simply renting his property from the government and cannot own the results of his own industry. In this clip, Jay tells us that both lawmakers and citizens can work to place a question on the ballot that would remove the allowance for collection of property taxes from the Oklahoma Constitution. As was discussed throughout the LIVE video (found under the LIVE tab on this channel) was the fact that, a use tax is a far better tax than the UNCONSTITUTIONAL collection of EITHER property taxes or income taxes and both of these must be removed from Oklahoma citizens as the burden to individual liberty that they are.

Jay Steagall Files Bill To Eliminate Income Tax

This short is from our LIVE podcast with Jay on Wednesday, 12.11.24 called, "Let's Talk About Property Taxes" which can be found under the "Live" tab on our channel. (Live links at YouTube and Rumble) This is the copy from the House Media Office regarding his bill: Steagall Files Bill to Eliminate Income Tax by 2035 OKLAHOMA CITY – Rep. Jay Steagall, R-Yukon, today filed legislation to phase out Oklahoma's personal and corporate income taxes over a decade, with the goal of eliminating the tax entirely by 2035. House Bill 1009 would reduce the personal income tax rate by 0.00475% annually and the corporate income tax rate by 0.004% annually over 10 years. Steagall had filed a nearly identical bill, House Bill 3058, for consideration during the 2024 legislative session. "Recent polls show that Oklahomans overwhelmingly support the elimination of the state income tax, an effort for which I have filed legislation in the past two years and filing once again for the 60th Legislature," Steagall said. "The state income tax is a clear violation of our own state constitution and I will continue to pursue righting this wrong in the upcoming session." Steagall pointed to Article 2, Section 2 of the Oklahoma Constitution, which declares "all persons have the inherent right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry." He said income taxes go against the foundation of the state constitution and encroach on Oklahomans' liberties. The state income tax was created statutorily in 1915. Stegall noted that the gradual reduction over a decade would give the Legislature ample opportunity to act on tax reform, a move he said was "much-needed."

To Regulate Insurance Rates Or Not - Kayla Blount; ROPE Report Short

In case you missed it live, you can find the full podcast here on Rumble and on YouTube.

Suffice it to say, insurance rates are high in Oklahoma because of our weather – and COVID. During COVID many insurers brought their prices down, only to have catastrophic weather conditions arise and cost them more than what they were earning in premiums. This – plus our awesome Biden-induced inflation – created a real perfect storm for people who had suffered a storm only to have to pay higher prices for the wood and shingles (etc) to fix their roofs and/or dwellings.

In the clip above, Kayla addresses this situation and suggests that, while Oklahoma may – at some point – have to look at some kind of legislation to keep rates from continuing to rise unabated – legislative intervention in the insurance market can become a real double-edged sword.

Homeschool Bills in 2024 OK Legislative Cycle Show Lack Of Protection For Oklahoma Citizen Rights

Watching how quickly legislators are trying to now suddenly regulate Oklahoma homeschoolers after decades of freedom - now that Oklahoma has passed "universal school choice" - is just an indication of what a poor job Oklahoma legislators are doing protecting the freedom of Oklahoma citizens as a whole. You may or may not homeschool, but you should care whether or not homeschoolers are left alone, because if they come for them, they'll eventually come to regulate what you're doing as well.

Bad Homeschool Bills In Oklahoma (2024) - Why You Should Fight Them Even If You DON'T Homeschool Your Kids

The bill discussed in this video (HB4130 - Swope), would cause Oklahoma parents homeschooling their children to be forced to register with the Department of Human Services, among other things. Even if you don't homeschool in Oklahoma, you should be extremely concerned about this bill. Why? Check out the video....

OK Representative Sherrie Conley Explains The Legislative Process In Under 2 Minutes!

Watch Oklahoma Representative Sherrie Conley explain the entire legislative process in under 2 minutes. If you've ever wondered what goes on under the dome on Lincoln, THIS is for you!

The Problems With "School Choice"

Every legislative session in Oklahoma, the topic of "School Choice" rears its head. People become "School Choice" advocates because they believe the concept will put parents back in the driver's seat for their children's education. But what does the term "School Choice" actually mean?

The Oklahoma State Chamber of Commerce and SB707: Are They Misinformed, Or Perpetuating A Falsehood?

Recently, I was sent an email from the State Chamber of Commerce that contained the following several paragraphs:

If you want a test that matters, it matters what you test. Specifically, if you want to make sure that Oklahoma high school students are ready for a career or college when they graduate, use a test that colleges know, understand and look at as part of their entry requirements. That was the point behind

SB 707 (Ford/Denney) which passed in the Senate, but was amended this week in a House committee. The original version of the bill would have allowed the State Department of Education to reduce the number of end of instruction tests and to make those tests relevant. But it was amended to prevent the state from using something like the ACT which a majority of students already take.

Our agenda calls for making sure testing is aligned with college and career readiness. What other reason is there to have end of instruction tests? If your test gives no indication that a student is prepared for life after high school then it is a waste of time and money. The original version of SB 707 keeps control of standards with the state as lawmakers intended with HB 3399 passed last year. The original version of SB 707 had wide support in the education community. It's important for students, parents and the business community that the original language be restored.The language to which the email's author is referring is what we've explained numerous times will disconnect Oklahoma standards from Oklahoma tests so that what is taught does not have to be tested.

Let's parse the State Chamber's argument here:

1. First of all, the State Chamber argues that Oklahoma should be using "a test that colleges know, understand and look at as part of their entry requirements". This language is euphemistic for ACT. Yes, some colleges use the ACT (or SAT, or a combination of both SAT/ACT) to decide admissions, but they also use grade point average to a larger degree than either test as it is a better predictor of college success than the ACT (OU and OSU say as much on their freshman admission requirements page). If the Chamber's argument is college success, then the ACT is just a portion of what is expected for college readiness so why go to battle over this issue?
2. The Chamber argues here that SB707 was amended to prevent the state from using ACT by putting back in the words "corresponding student assessments" after the words, "The subject matter standards and". (Don't forget, SB707 changed the Common Core repeal bill from last year (HB3399) to unhook the standards from the tests by removing "corresponding student assessments"). The Chamber felt that 'unhooking' the tests from the standards was necessary to allow the state to use the ACT. Apparently, they didn't do their homework. They've already made this argument about a different part of HB3399 last year while fighting the repeal and that was proven to be a false assertion. This year, I understand several legislators consulted Capitol legal staff for their 'read' of the testing language and both the Senate and House legal staff concluded that the original language from HB3399 does NOT prevent the state from using the ACT. Did the Chamber do any research on this issue before they began to support this bill? What about the original senate author? It would appear not.
3. The State Chamber maintains in this email that their agenda calls for creating tests that are aligned with college and career readiness. Didn't we just go through the process of proving Oklahoma's educational standards as college ready? Yes. It was determined - in order for the state to get back its coveted NCLB waiver, that Oklahoma's previous-to-the-Common-Core-standards - PASS - met the also-coveted College and Career Ready label. PASS has been certified College and Career Ready, therefore any tests created from PASS would hold students to "College and Career Ready" knowledge. The ACT then, is a red herring and there is no reason to change SB707.
4. As though they're not informed enough to understand the real argument here, the State Chamber goes on to indicate that SB707 "keeps control of the standards with state lawmakers as intended with HB3399". Not to be rude, but so what? The Oklahoma Constitution holds the veracity of this statement - not HB3399. We found that out after the State Board of Education sued the state over HB3399 and the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that lawmakers have the final say on Oklahoma educational standards. This is another red herring offered up by the Chamber to solicit support from parents by misleading them. I find that distasteful because it's another fallicy - appeal to emotion.
5. They end their email with yet another form of fallacious reasoning by pleading that this bill had 'widespread community support'. It certainly has no support in the community of grassroots education activists who worked for years to try and rid the state of the Common Core State Standards. These people are still engaged and active and understand that their work is in jeopardy if HB3399 is allowed to be changed to unhook standards from tests. But then, according to their constant pushback against our efforts, it would seem they don't care about our informed opinions.

In the end, it is important to really read information provided by ANY of the organizations who pushed back against the repeal of the Common Core to discern their agenda and the voracity of their statements. This particular email from the Oklahoma Chamber is full of fallacious reasoning and incorrect statements. Please research and determine this to be true and examine with a critical eye ANY information regarding your child's education. Only parents have their children's best interest at heart and those doesn't follow a legislative agenda.

Senate Education Bills Scheduled for February 9, 2015

We're going to try and do a legislative update every week where we post the bills being heard in the Oklahoma House and Senate along with comments we might have on the bill. We can't delve into each and every bill - we just don't have the manpower - but we read what we can. There are also some we can assess right off the bat just by the title. In general, if the bill mandates local schools to add a program, we should ask for a NO vote. Only local parents should request a program or class. Please take the time to contact your House and Senate member to ask for a NO vote on those particular bills. If we have no comments in red, we either support the bill or don't have enough information to comment. Thank you!

Senate Education Committee 2/09/15

SB 18 -Loveless- task force to study admin ed costs

SB 29 - Brecheen- OSDE provide written notice of expiring teacher license

SB 50 - Smalley-lowers grade level to participate in AG courses to 6

SB 68 - Holt- allows more charters in lg cities with districts of 5000 or more-sponsored by the city

NO SB 136-Stanislawski- changing governance over online charters to " Statewide Virtual Charter School Board",and  "Negotiate and enter into contracts with supplemental online course providers"; (Charter schools are public schools and as such need to be under the purview of the OSDE!)

SB 171-Loveless-  "Flexibility for Rural Education Act of 2015"- strikes cap limit language from original charter bill -any district, tech center or college could sponsor a charter

SB 177-Halligan - increasing the income cap for eligibility from $50000 to $55000 for OHLAP;

SB 262-Paddack-Oklahoma Department of Labor, shall make available to school districts information regarding workplace safety training for grades seven through twelve. Such information shall include the Oklahoma Department of Labor's "Youth @ Work Talking Safety: A Safety and Health Curriculum for Young Workers".

NO SB 285 -Ford- aligning pre K standards to new standards The Constitution of Oklahoma does NOT specify that children should be educated until 8! We should not be perpetuating educational standards for children we have no business formally educating developmentally, and according to our Constitution.

SB 301-Loveless- allowing the State Board of Education to suspend or deny teacher certification upon certain findings- crimes

SB 302- Loveless-more Indian charters- located within the former reservation or treaty area boundaries of the tribe on property held in trust by the Bureau of Indian Affairs of the United States Department of the Interior for the benefit of the tribe

NO SB 303 Shaw/Denney - adding "age-appropriate child sexual abuse and assault awareness training - parents may opt out and will be given written notice – (STOP mandating things to the schools! Plus, once this is in school, it will be hard for parents to stop the program)

SB414 Brinkley-listing eligible schools ( religious schools) for OHLAP

NO SB 504 Jolley-- a nonprofit university offering online, competency based degree programs to be eligible OHLAP recipients (Our tax money should not be sent out of state)

SB 505Stanislawski- created in the State Treasury a revolving fund for the Statewide Virtual Charter
School Board to be designated the "Statewide Virtual Charter School Board Revolving Fund",issued by the State Treasurer against claims filed as prescribed by law with the Director of the Office of Management and Enterprise Services for approval and payment

SB 711-Sparks - forward info on teacher dismissal to OSDE

SB 763- Bass-provide foster kids guardians info on OHLAP, and eligibility

TW Shannon And The Common Core (Updated 6/18/14)

Come election time, everyone has a story.  Some are better than others, but the most important thing to voters should be whose story is true.

Because there has been much said about T.W. Shannon and the Common Core fight in Oklahoma, I thought I would spend a few minutes detailing what I know.  Now please know, I realize there are two sides to every story.  I'm telling mine.

In December of 2012, just after T.W. Shannon had been announced as the historic new Speaker of the Oklahoma House of Representatives, Lynn Habluetzel and I met with him in his tiny office.  We had tried to schedule the meeting several times, but it just so happened, that today, a mere week before Christmas, he was in town and had time to visit.

At that meeting, Lynn and I provided the new Speaker with a run-down on Common Core, complete with a folder of written materials to read.  T.W. was attentive, took notes and at the end of the meeting, assured us he would look into the issue further.  We smiled, shook hands, wished him a Merry Christmas and said good-bye.

Representative Gus Blackwell introduced HB1907 the next session; a bill to provide a task force to study the costs of Common Core in Oklahoma.

The bill was heard in the Rules Committee which Blackwell chaired and passed unanimously.  In determining when we could plan for the bill to come to the Floor of the House, Calendar Committee Chair, Pam Peterson told us all Task Force bills were being held until all other bills could be heard.

The whole story can be found in my original blog, but suffice it to say, we were then told by Representative Blackwell that Speaker Shannon had killed the bill because the Governor had said she would veto it.   The Speaker then offered Representative Blackwell an interim study to be conducted over a number of days and over which Representative Blackwell would have free reign. (The study was conducted in October.  Few legislators - including T.W. Shannon - were present.)

From there, a series of events occurred in 2013:

• ROPE had a rally in the hall of the Supreme Court against Common Core that was well-covered by the media.
• Speaker Shannon had a change of heart, does a 180, says he believes Common Core is "federal intrusion into our education system", and will write a bill to help stop it.
• Speaker Shannon is a guest on the Glenn Beck Show (Dana Loesh was subbing that day)
• While he is gone, Representative Dennis Casey apparently authored a piece of anti-Common Core language that was attached to HB1719 (which we never saw but in draft form - it was never officially filed apparently as there is no record) which then died because it was 'accidentally' (?) sent to Senator Clark Jolley's Appropriations Committee (Senator Jolley helped author the legislation placing Common Core into Oklahoma State Law - SB2033 in 2010)
• Representative Blackwell authors HJR1011 to stop implementation of Common Core unless several categories of inquiry are met - the bill is not filed
• Legislative Session 2013 ends without a bill of any kind passing either Oklahoma legislative body

During 2014:

• Speaker Shannon authors HB3331, to stop the federal overreach of Common Core into Oklahoma
• Speaker Shannon leaves his Speaker's post to run for Senator Coburn's seat
• HB3399 is authored by Representative Jason Nelson after meeting with a number of grassroots activists prior to the beginning of session
• Holly Gerard, from the Oklahoma State GOP Executive Committee, Carolyn McLarty, National Committeewoman and I begin to work with Representative Nelson and others (also Senate author Josh Brecheen) to develop, discuss and study HB3399
• Holly, Carolyn, Lynn, Ronda Vuillemont-Smith (Tulsa912Project) meet with Representative Shannon about his bill - he says he will keep it to make sure we have a vehicle if something happens to HB3399
• HB3399 goes to the floor after Speaker Jeff Hickman takes over authorship - Representative Shannon is absent for the vote
• HB3399 goes to senate, conference committee and back to the floor for a vote, T.W. Shannon votes YEA

Now, once the bill passed the Senate - during the time it is waiting to be signed by the Governor - a veritable slew of Representatives signed on as co-sponsors of the bill: Kern, Bennett, Ortega, McCullough, Cockroft,
Brumbaugh, Sears, Echols, Walker, Derby and Shannon.  It is a very political move to sign on as a co-sponsor once the heat is off and you know the bill is going to pass.  However, it must be said that Sears, Kern and Shannon actually did do more than virtually anyone on the list historically and this year alone.

Did T.W. Shannon stop Common Core in Oklahoma by himself?  Absolutely not.  Did he move the conversation?  You'd have to say he did.  Was he a key player in stopping Common Core in Oklahoma?  He was one of the first legislators to speak publicly against it, but with the two twists of stopping Blackwell's bill and putting repeal language on a Jolley-bound track - I've always wondered how much of this was rhetoric simply because nothing came out of all the talk.

I like T.W. Shannon.  Face it, the man is likable, articulate and has a great 'cool' factor.  The only problem is that it takes more than a 'cool' factor to create a strong legislator that can stand FOR conservatism in the face of everything AGAINST conservatism at the federal level.  In fact, you need to look at his voting record.  I've never seen so many YEA's in my life.  My goodness he's agreeable, but not every bill can be a yes - only those that limit government, and many times that means a 'nay'.  T.W. Shannon is a very nice man, but I need more action and less talk.  I need more results and less attempts.  While I absolutely appreciate the efforts on T.W.'s part to change the discussion on Common Core, I'm not ready to send T.W. to Washington, D.C.

Via call from TW Shannon (6/18/14):  T.W. explained that he told Gus he was concerned his bill wasn't going to pass the House, let alone the Senate and that the Governor wouldn't sign it.  By offering Gus the interim study on Common Core instead of allowing the bill to come to the House floor for a vote, Shannon believed he would give the fight against Common Core a chance to develop.  Shannon was concerned that  if the bill made it to the floor and was voted down, it would do more to hurt the cause against Common Core than simply denying the bill a hearing and allowing Gus an extended period of time to bring Common Core issues to the public through an interim.
I asked him about the attempt to add Common Core language to Representative Osborn's bill after that, but he didn't remember the specifics and indicated he would contact someone in his office at that time who might know.  If I didn't have trouble remembering my kids birthdates, I could call that statement into question.
It was also interesting to me that he admitted being 'agnostic' on the topic of Common Core until after Lynn and I visited with him and he began to study the topic further.

Understanding the Legislative Process - Simple Steps To Use During the Legislative Session

I am writing this blog today because I understand people believe Oklahoma has passed a Common Core bill.

When I first became involved in the legislative process, I knew NOTHING about how a bill was signed into law other than what I had heard on School House Rock in middle school!  Unfortunately, I assume everyone on the ROPE list knows at least what I know now. I am sorry for that!  Please let me go back to my role as teacher, and provide some information I hope will be helpful to those of you just starting out on the journey of informed and attentive citizen!

I'm Just a Bill (Schoolhouse Rock!)

Of course, this video outlines the process of a bill at the federal level, but it's the same basic process at the state level.  Below is a very abbreviated version of how this process works at the state level, but I am hoping it will give you an understanding of how LONG this process takes.

Representative Gus Blackwell's Common Core bill (HB3167) did pass out of the Administrative Rules Committee Wednesday (2/12), but that is only the second step in a nearly 8 step process, with lots of Amendment and Conference steps in there we won't discuss right now.  If you would like to learn more, please visit "How An Idea Becomes A Law" on the Oklahoma Legislative Website.  In addition, here is the link to the overall legislative calendar that provides all the deadlines in the process so you'll have an idea what will happen when.

In order to give you just a very abbreviated look at the process, I have come up with the steps below and the points at which we'll have to have contact with our legislators.  This way, when we send out an alert asking you to call, you'll know where the bill is in the process. Please note that the process is the same for BOTH House and Senate.  (PS: Now that the House has a new Speaker, the Speaker may decide to change Committee assignments, so you'll have to use the link for 'Committees' to determine if there have been changes - if we don't specify)

Step 1. A bill is written

Step 2. The bill is assigned to a Committee.  There are a NUMBER of Committees.   Here are the House Committees, here are the Senate Committees.

Step 3.  The Committee Chair decides to hear - or not hear - the bill, depending upon the Chairman.  This is why it's important to pressure the Senate to hear Common Core bills in Committees.

Step 4. If the bill isn't heard, it's dead for the session (year) 

4a.  If the bill IS heard and it doesn't pass, it's dead for the session 

Step 5. If the bill DOES pass committee, it may or may NOT be put on a calendar to go to the floor where all legislators vote.  This applies to BOTH House and Senate.

5a. In the House, the Calendar Committee decides if a bill reaches the floor

5b. In the Senate, Floor Leader Senator Mike Schultz decides not only to which Committee a bill is assigned, but whether or not it reaches the floor for a vote.

Step 6. If the bill gets to the floor, it is voted on by that chamber (House or Senate). If it passes, it goes to the opposite chamber when bills switch chambers on March 13.

Step 7. March 13th, House Bills go to Senate, Senate Bills go to the House and the whole process STARTS all over again from step1.

Step 8. Once a bill has passed BOTH the House AND the Senate, it goes to the Governor for her signature - the final step before a bill becomes a law.

So you can see, this is a LONG PROCESS and we have to eat this elephant ONE VOTE at a time by making calls every step of the way! If the bill comes from the House, we'd make calls;

1. To House Committee Chair to hear bill
2. To Committee Members to vote it out of committee
3. To Calendar Committee to have bill sent to the House floor
4. To have Representatives vote our way when the bill comes to the floor.
5. To Senate Floor Leader to assign the bill to a Committee
6. To Senate Committee Chair to hear the bill
7. To Senate Committee members to vote it out of committee
8. To Senate Floor Leader to assign the bill to the Senate floor
9. To have Senators vote our way when the bill comes to the floor
10. To have Governor Fallin sign the bill (should it make it through both houses)

Hopefully, I haven't missed anything!

I know there are many more things you'd like to do in a day than follow this whole process (I know I would and my kids think EXACTLY the same thing FOR me!), but this is a process that only goes from February to May.  The rest of the year is ours!  Please learn this process - it's an integral part of good citizenship anyway and, as usual, we could really use your help!

Thank you for all you do for our country and our kids,

Jenni White
President 

ONE MORE THING:  Today, Lynn had an opportunity to speak with Governor Fallin at the Chamber of Commerce luncheon.  When she told her she did not want Common Core in Oklahoma, the Governor replied that she didn't want them either WHICH IS WHY THE STATE HAS OUR OWN OKLAHOMA ACADEMIC STANDARDS.  

Apparently, those who work for our Governor have our Governor fooled into believing the Oklahoma State Department of Education has adopted Oklahoma standards.  This could be further from the truth.  I have been able to document that Oklahoma's Math and English Standards are Common Core.  I have also been able to document that Oklahoma's Science Standards ARE the National Science Standards.  I have even been able to document that Oklahoma History Standards follow the C3 (National History Standards) almost to a fault.  Please familiarize yourselves with these FACTS.  Look up the links in our research yourself to make sure I am being accurate.  Then, tell the Governor herself, 

OKLAHOMA DOES HAVE 

COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS

and 

COMMON CORE IS NOT OK!

To Heck With Diamonds, Common Core is Forever

ROPE has been closely following the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) cost issue, since NO ONE in charge of public education in Oklahoma – including the purse string holders at the state legislature – have been able to tell Oklahomans what the Common Core will cost Oklahoma taxpayers. 

I wrote an article last month that was published in the American Thinker titled “The Ed Tech Scam”, to shed light on the fact that the CCSS have become an unfunded state mandate – specifically in the area of technology requirements.

Yes, the CCSS lovers say, 

“Adopting new materials isn’t really a cost of the Common Core, it’s just a cost in education of providing relevant materials to students that are there anyway.” 

However, when you have at least one Oklahoma Superintendent honestly reporting (to a national education magazine) how pinched he is to get technology in place prior to the roll out of the Common Core tests, we are inclined to suspend belief.

"Once you get into a testing situation, you have to be able to support it without interruption," said Mr. Kitchens, who added: "I do not think this is going to be a cheap exercise at all."

As we’ve reported previously, legislators cemented the Common Core State Standards into Oklahoma law in order to get Race to the Top funds without even a cursory review of draft forms of the standards as there were none available at that time.  This would seem a clear violation of the public trust. 

Legislators to taxpayers, 

“Hey guys, you’re responsible for funding these, but we have no idea exactly what’s in them or how much they’ll cost the state or what they’ll do to Oklahoma education, but trust us.”

Obviously the trust wasn’t warranted.  Currently, fourteen states have some form of legislation against the CCSS.  Clearly all is not well in CCSS-land.

Indiana recently threw out their Chief For Change (Jeb Bush/Foundation for Educational Excellence) state Superintendent Tony Bennett in favor of relatively unknown candidate Glenda Ritz, mainly because of flap over the cost and effectiveness of the Common Core State Standards.  Directly on the heels of this upset comes legislation to force the Indiana state legislature to examine the cost of the Common Core before continuing their implementation.

Tony Bennett has not left the building, however.   He now presides over the Florida State Department of Education, where, interestingly, the Florida state Board of Education is questioning whether or not the Florida education juggernaut is ready to roll out and administer the PARCC tests because of their cost.

"One hundred million won't get done everything we need to get done," Barbara Jenkins, superintendent of Orange County schools, told the board.

Hoosiers have already caught on to the fact that their former State Supe has gone to another state and told Floridians they just can’t afford the reform measures he was deposed for pushing inside their borders.  I’m not sure how this could inspire confidence in any Common Core state.

 

Then there’s the fact that so much of today’s ‘education reform’ efforts have been tied to private funding by Bill Gates. 

In a clear, well-researched article written for the Heartland Institute on this topic, Joy Pullman quotes Betty Peters’ (Alabama State School Board member) concerns,

“A lot of private foundations are making decisions that would normally be left up to a public institution that would be accountable to the taxpayers.”

As often as we have heard the word “accountability” from our Oklahoma State Department of Education, this should be an eye-opener.  How in the world can the Council of Chief State School Officers or the National Governor’s Association (architects of the Common Core State Standards, funded in part by the Gates Foundation) be held accountable to Oklahoma taxpayers for education ‘reform’ efforts such as the CCSS?  They are all copyrighted so they can’t be modified yet the CCSSO and the NGA have a disclaimer;

“NGA Center and CCSSO do not warrant, endorse, approve or certify the information on this site, nor do they make any representation as to the accuracy, completeness, efficacy, or timeliness of such information. Use of such information is voluntary on your part. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process or service does not constitute or imply endorsement, recommendation or favoring by NGA Center and CCSSO."

Then there is the Jeb Bush factor.  As information trickles into the public domain reporting the methods in which the Foundation for Educational Excellence writes educational policy through Janet Barresi and other Chiefs for Change, jaws should drop.  Why should Oklahoma taxpayers be supporting Florida education reforms – especially those shown not to be as successful as first advertised?  
 

This session in Oklahoma, Senator Clark Jolley has drafted a bill (SB447) which will usher in yet another new education ‘reform’ measure.  MORE new tests!  Yes, Oklahoma has chosen to believe the CCSSO’s verdict that most students will fail the PARCC ‘assessments’ when they are to be instituted in 2014.  

Certainly, Oklahoma’s public school students cannot fail these tests with so much riding on them (the A-F school designation for one).  Consequently, not only is Senator Jolley advocating that we must buy another set of tests (formative tests) to be given up to four times per year before the summative PARCC tests come on line, but that we should support this plan by cementing it into law – as with all other Race to the Top education reforms Oklahoma is currently implementing – without RTT funds.   

Why must these tests be written into law?  Every teacher gives (or should give) formative tests over content taught – something akin to chapter tests.  These allow teachers to see whether or not students are ‘getting it’ in time to re-teach or re-direct learning to improve concept understanding.  Certainly, this type of testing is better than summative (high stakes) type testing, but why should Oklahoma teachers have another law to follow?  

Oklahoma teachers have enough on their plate without being mandated to follow another type of test.  Even formative tests can be misused in such a way as to force teachers to teach to the test and isn’t that all PARCC tests are doing?

It has come to my attention this week that a company called Bellwether Education Partners supplies this type of “transitional national achievement test”.  I did a little research on Bellwether and found they work with such organizations as Chiefs for Change and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.  We know Dr. Barresi is a Chief for Change.  One must wonder if there is a connection here as with the other education ‘reforms’ to which she’s been linked.  Again, Oklahoma should not be implementing education ‘reforms’ simply because they are being done elsewhere or because another foundation is willing to ‘help’ Oklahoma with their implementation.

From what source is the money going to materialize to pay for these new tests?  We haven’t even figured out how to pay for the PARCC tests.  It must be taxpayer funded – all government is.   Maybe that’s why Dr. Barresi has asked for a whopping $75 to $100 million in extra funding for next year.  The press release sent out by her office lauding Senator Halligan and Senator Ford – from whom the funding requests were submitted – quotes Senator Ford as saying,

“We have three areas in education we must address, including statutory requirements to fund programs such as medical benefits, additional appropriations to pay for reforms we’ve already enacted, and additional funding at the local level that school boards can use to address specific needs in their individual districts,” said Ford, R-Bartlesville.

Why are you asking taxpayers to fund these reforms AFTER you enacted them into LAW Senator Ford?  Why should taxpayers be jumping up and down to fund ‘reforms we’ve already enacted’ when they haven’t originated in Oklahoma, were never read by those who enacted them, never had any functional testing demonstrating their efficacy and have been shown not to work in Florida from where they did originate?  Certainly, taxpayers deserve an answer to that question. 

 

In closing, several interesting polls have come out recently regarding the Common Core.

Whiteboard Advisors, Education Insider 

“conducts an anonymous survey of a small group of key education influential (policymakers, though leaders, and association heads) to get their thoughts and commentary about the context of the current debate and possible outcomes.”   

Their survey for February 2013 that polled ‘insiders’ on the Common Core show that support for PARCC testing is falling.  In addition, 87% of respondents say they expect more states to drop out of the Common Core Assessment Consortia (like Alabama and Utah),

“as they start to get a fuller picture for the implementation costs of assessments and professional development and get very unhappy about what they have signed up for in a budget constrained environment.” 

77% of respondents believe schools will not have enough bandwidth to meet the Consortia’s recommended specifications in time for the tests to come on line.

The 2013 MetLife Survey of the American Teacher, shows that only a maximum of 24% of teachers and principals either believed the Common Core would improve student achievement or prepare students for college and the workforce (page 76).   

So why are we doing this ed 'reform' thing again?

I get the sneaky suspicion it’s not about kids…

Can You Hear Us Now?

Today no fewer than two articles have come out in EdWeek online utilizing work that is being done by Restore Oklahoma Public Education (Pressure Mounts in Some States Against Common Core and Opposition to Common Core Grows Across the Political Spectrum).  TWO.  In a NATIONAL online education journal.

Hmmm...to what were the articles pertaining?  COMMON CORE.

It is hard for many to remember at this point - but hard for us to forget - that ROPE took it upon ourselves four years ago now (2009) to research and write about the this so-called "state led" (only to prevent the Core from being illegal as a national curricula is against federal law, not because it is in any way "state led") effort.  This, just one year after our Oklahoma legislature passed SB222 in a conglomerate bill addressing nearly every education "reform" produced by the Obama administration in order to attract Race To The Top funding.

Here are a few of my comments on those two articles that further articulates our position:

It was clear to us from the beginning that this was NEVER about kids. It is about elitist Republicans who say they eschew federal funding in public education, all the while propagating overreaching education policy generated by a Democrat-controlled federal Department of Education in order to get kickbacks and federal funding enough to enlarge their fiefdoms.

Common Core, the associated testing mechanisms (PARCC and Smarter), and the vast data collection system (State Longitudinal Data Systems or P20) being promulgated at the federal level and accepted by the states for their 30 pieces of silver, are about as much about kids and education as fishing is to space travel.

The recent expose in the Washington Post by Valerie Strauss should be the nail in the coffin that wakes up a sleeping public to realize what dupes they are in this little Kabuki theater our states call education "reform".

Heck NO this isn't about kids. None of this is about anything other than adults wanting to line their pockets on the backs of children attached to parents who don't know enough to be skeptical when the education elite of their states tell them, "Relax, we've got this covered. We know better than you what your kids need. We need to make sure our state is in line to pick up that 'free' money. After all, we send it from our state to the feds, we need to get it back somehow and if we don't do it, some other state will!"

 And:

Many governments past and present have utilized public education as a change agent for society. Disconcertingly, many of these have done it in a very similar way - using wealthy individuals and government elitists to broadcast and monopolize their message.

Many states (like Oklahoma) adopted the Common Core sight unseen. How do you as a legislator explain that to parents? "Parents, we believe that some educational standards we have never seen nor read, which were developed outside of our state by well-connected people in business and government, that have no track record at all, will be better for your child than those standards your child has in place currently through your local school board."

Awkward isn't it? This might explain why none of our authoring legislators ever bothered to explain why Oklahoma was signing on to Common Core before they planted it in state law.

Please see this blog by my colleague Danna Foreman where she found solid proof that this Common Core thingy is about changing society.

Ultimately, the goal of P-16 (a state longitudinal data base (SLDS) to collect information on children from Pre-K to 16 - now "workforce and beyond) reform is to create, as Harold Hodgkinson wrote in All One System, "a single system of education underlying all of the segments" (Institute for Educational Leadership, 1999). As the Consortium for Policy Research in Education said, the time has come to end the long history in American education of segments acting "independently and at cross-purposes from one another" (June 2000).

Wow.  This isn't at all like creating a little society full of Borgs is it - or Stepford Wives?

Truly, this has to stop.  Between the testing and the usurpation of privacy that comes with the exciting SLDS that will collect all the information any pervert (I mean person) could ever want on other people's children, not to mention the associated costs, this can not stand. 

Apparently other states are thinking the same thing.  Missouri, Indiana, Utah, California, Alabama, Washington and others are actually looking to abandon this rickety ship before it goes down and takes their children with it.  Just like so many of the states signed on sight unseen, they should jump off now, now that their eyes are being opened to the size of the iceberg they're about to hit.