Constitution in Plain English Part 3: The Bill of Rights

The first ten amendments are known as the Bill of Rights and were ratified on December 17, 1791.

Amendment I:

The first amendment guarantees that individuals' rights to practice religion freely, speak freely, freedom of the press, assemble (meet together) peacefully, and petition (ask for a change) the government.

Amendment II:

This amendment protects the rights to "bear arms." This means that people can own guns, not that they can have their arms replaced by a grizzly's arms.

Amendment III:

Home owners cannot be forced to give shelter to soldiers without their consent.

Amendment IV:

A person's property cannot be searched or seized without a search warrant or "probable cause" (a good reason to think that they committed some crime).

Amendment V:

No person can be tried for the same crime twice, forced to be a witness against himself, or have property taken without being paid for it. It also includes the right to due process of law which guarantees a fair trial.

Amendment VI:

All criminally accused have the right to a speedy and public trial, an unbiased jury, to be notified of what crime is being accused, to be able to confront witnesses against him or her, and have a lawyer.

Amendment VII:

In a common law case (cases defined by judges and previous legal actions instead of by legislation), individuals have the right to a trial by jury.

Amendment VIII:

Punishments, bails (payment to be released from custody), and fines will be fair.

Amendment IX:

This amendment talks about the "enumerated powers," which just means that there are rights of the people not mentioned in the Constitution that should not be stepped on.

Amendment X:

This is a critical amendment that basically says, any powers not specifically given (by the Constitution) to the Federal Government and not specifically denied to the states (again by the constitution), is decided by the states. An example of this would be the legality of abortion.

Debbie Twyman & Craig Whitney. Constitution in Plain English. Retrieved February 13, 2011 From the Debbie Twyman and Graig Whitney Film arts and Social Studies web site:

http://www.twyman-whitney.com/constitutiontest/constitutionplainenglish.pdf

Constitution in Plain English Part 2: The Articles

Today we are continuing with the next section of the Constitution.  This post will cover the 7 Articles of the Constitution.  The Articles outline the three branches of government and how they work.  Without further adieu, here are the Articles of the United States Constitution in plain English.

Article 1:

The first article sets up the national legislature and details its powers.

Section 1: The Legislative Branch

This section grants to the congress the power to make laws, and states that it will be made
up of two parts, the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Section 2: The House of Representatives

This section decides how often representatives are chosen, residency and citizenship rules to become a Representative, how long a representative can stay in office, how many representatives per state, what will happen if a representative vacates his/her post, how a speaker is chosen, and the house's ability to impeach.

Section 3: The Senate

This requires that each of the states has two senators in the Senate, there will be a new election for one-third of the Senate every 2 years, describes the age, residency and citizenship rules to become a Senator.  The Vice President is designated the President of Senate and can vote in case of a tie.  The Senate is given the power to choose its own officers and a temporary president in case the Vice President cannot fill his/her duties, and finally, it describes the Senate’s power to act as a jury during the impeachment of officials
of the executive or judicial branches of the national government.

Section 4: Organization of Congress

States that the method used to vote for U.S. Senators and Representatives is up to the states.  Congress is required to assemble at least once a year.

Section 5: The House's Jobs

Each house will be the judge of their own elections and qualifications of it members. Each house may determine the rules of its proceedings, and punish it's members for disorderly behavior. Both houses of Congress must keep a journal of daily proceedings.

Section 6: Money and War-Time Jobs

States that each senator and representative will receive compensation for services to their country to be paid out by the U.S. treasury. They will also be immune from arrest, except for treason, felony, and breach of the peace, during an attendance to a session of their respective house, and traveling there and back. Last no senator or representative will be put into any civil office during the time of war.

Section 7: Bills

All bills for raising revenue (and the paychecks for members of Congress) shall originate in the House of Representatives, any bill passed in the two houses will go to the president and pending approval become a law. If the president disapproves of a bill then it goes back to the Congress and if two-thirds of the members of the House and Senate vote for it, it becomes a law.

Section 8: Powers Granted to Congress

Congress can:

1. Collects taxes, duties, imposts, and excises to pay debts and provide for defense.
2. Borrow money on the credit of the United States.
3. Regulate commerce with foreign nations.
4. Make laws regarding naturalization and bankruptcies.
5. Coin money and establish standards for weights and measurements.
6. Provide punishment for counterfeiting U.S. money
7. Establish post offices and roads.
8. Promote commerce and the arts by granting copyrights and patents.
9. Punish pirates out in international waters
10. Declare war.
11. Raise and support armed forces for national defense.
12. Call forth the militia (the National Guard, and any male over the age of 17 and under the age of 45 who is not part of the national Guard and has no intention of joining the Active Duty Military) when necessary in order to maintain order.
13. Exercise legal control over all places owned by the U.S. (territories such as Puerto Rico and Guam).
14. Make all laws that are necessary and proper to carry out their responsibilities under the Constitution.

Section 9: Powers Forbidden to Congress

1. Congress cannot prohibit the immigration of a person to the U.S. but can charge them money.
2. It cannot ban the process of habeas corpus* during times of peace.
3. It cannot pass a bill of attainder -- one that punishes a person without a trial.
4. It cannot pass a law that criminalizes an act that happened in the past (commonly referred to as the "Grandfather Clause".
5. It cannot pass any direct tax (tax collected directly from the people).
6. It cannot pass a law providing for a tax on items exported from any state (from one state to another).
7. It cannot treat states unequally, giving preferences to one state or another, in passing laws.
8. Money cannot be taken from the national treasury unless Congress votes to do so.
9. Titles of nobility may not be granted by the Congress to any citizen of the United States.

* The basic premise behind habeas corpus is that you cannot be held against your will
without just cause. To put it another way, you cannot be jailed if there are no charges
against you. If you are being held, and you demand it, the courts must issue a writ of
habeas corpus, which forces those holding you to answer as to why. If there is no good or
compelling reason, the court must set you free. It is important to note that of all the civil
liberties we taken for granted today as a part of the Bill of Rights, the importance of habeas
corpus is illustrated by the fact that it was the sole liberty thought important enough to be
included in the original text of the Constitution.

Section 10: Powers Forbidden to the States

1.  No state shall enter treaties with any foreign nation,
2.  Issue their own money
3. Grant any title of nobility
4. Lay duties on imports or exports without the consent of Congress
5. No state can raise and maintain a military force during time of peace without congressional consent.

Article 2: The Executive Branch

The second article sets up the executive branch of the national government and details its powers.  This article includes rules to be followed by the executive branch. It includes the presidential term limit, requirements to become president, how elections of the president will be carried out, what to do if a president is removed from office (through death, impeachment or other reason).  It states that the president will receive a salary for his service to the United States and as head of the military. The president is required, from time to time, to give information about the condition of the nation to Congress (this is usually referred to as the President’s State of the Union Address, an annual ritual that takes place in front of a joint meeting of the Congress, televised and watched closely by millions of peop around the world).

Article 3: The Judicial Branch

The third Article sets up the national judiciary and details its powers. Article Three states that the highest power in the federal court system is the supreme court and any other federal courts that Congress decides to create.  Judges and justices will receive lifetime appointments to their positions “during good behavior.”  Judges’ salaries cannot be lowered during the time they serve in office.  In trials the person shall be tried in
the state in which the crime was committed. Treason is described as waging war against the nation and/or taking the side of an enemy or giving them aid and comfort.  A conviction of treason can happen only if there are at least two eye witnesses to the crime.  Treason is punishable by death but only the person guilty of treason shall lose his/her life.

Article 4: Relations of the States to Each Other

Article Four establishes relations among the states and with the federal government. Full faith and credit shall be given from one state to another in the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of each state (each state must recognize other states’ legal documents, such as marriage certificates and drivers’ licenses). A criminal fleeing from one state to another after committing a crime, if apprehended, must be returned to the state from which he/she fled, at the request of the legal authorities in that state (a process called extradition).
 New states shall be admitted by Congress, but no state can be formed under the control of another. Congress can dispose of or change any boundaries of one state whenever it is needed.  Every state in the union is guaranteed (state constitutions are required to establish) a republican form of government (a representative democracy), and shall be protected by the national government against invasion and/or violence within the state.

Article 5: Amending the Constitution

The Fifth Article describes how the Constitution can be changed (amended). Whenever two-thirds of the members of both the House of Representatives and the Senate deem it necessary, they can propose amendments to the Constitution. To become part of the Constitution an amendment must be ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states (often, in special ratifying conventions held within each state).  Also, amendments must be ratified in a reasonable amount of time (in modern times, that means seven years).

Article 6: National Debts, Supremacy of the National Government National Debts

All of the debts made by the United States government before the ratification of the Constitution will be the responsibility of the national government, just as they were before that time. Supremacy of the National Government The federal government has supreme power over state governments.  All federal laws, treaties agreed to by the national government with other nations, and the Constitution are supreme over state laws.  For example, that means if the state of California passed a law that brought back slavery in some form, it would be void because it's against federal law (under the 13th Amendment, slavery is prohibited in the U.S., unless it comes “as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted”).

Article 7: Ratifying the Constitution:

The constitution had to be ratified by at least nine of the thirteen states present in 1787 to
become law.

Citations:

Debbie Twyman & Craig Whitney. Constitution in Plain English. Retrieved February 13, 2011 From the Debbie Twyman and Graig Whitney Film arts and Social Studies web site:

http://www.twyman-whitney.com/constitutiontest/constitutionplainenglish.pdf 

The Constitution in Plain English Part 1: The Preamble

The Constitution. A lot of people know that it’s the basis for how the Unites States is run and how laws are made. However, I come across a lot of people that purport to quote from the Constitution and do so inaccurately, don’t know that certain things are covered in the Constitution, or quote it without ever reading it.  This, most often, happens when people talk about the "Separation of Church and State".  Did you know that that combination of words doesn't exist in the Constitution.  Even our Congressmen haven't read or at least don't understand the Constitution. One instance is when Senator Chuck Schumer said “...you know, we have three branches of government: we have a House, the Senate, we have a President...”. And he’s running our government? 

I would like you to keep in mind that in this series of articles I will be paraphrasing the Constitution in plain English and will adding in my two cents when I deem fit ( most of this will come when I write about the Amendments). If you would like to read the Constitution word for word you can go to http://www.askheritage.org/free-pocket-constitution/ and order your free pocket Constitution and Deceleration of Independence (which I highly suggest, I mean, it’s FREE) or you can go to http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html and you can read it online.  A lot of these first two posts (The Preamble and The Articles) will be straight from the second citation.  However, I had already written an article VERY similar and thought theirs was worded better.

Let's get started, shall we?

The Constitution consists of a preamble, 7 articles, and 27 amendments. The preamble

explains why it was written. The seven articles lay out the three branches of government

and the rules they have to follow, and the basic way the U.S. government will operate. The

27 amendments guarantee the rights of the people and give more specific rules under

which the government will operate.

The Preamble:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish

Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general

Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and

establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

The Preamble to the United States Constitution is an introductory statement outlining the fundamental purpose and principles the Constitution is meant to serve. It expresses in general terms the intentions of its authors, and is sometimes referred to by courts as evidence of what the Founding Fathers thought the Constitution meant and what they hoped it would achieve.  

Here is a list of the clauses in the Preamble in plain English:

• We the people of the United States – these words make it clear that the authors of the Constitution wanted “the people” to be the ultimate authority – “popular sovereignty” or people power.

•  form a more perfect Union – to create a better government than the Articles of Confederation, which was the constitution that existed at the time.

•  establish Justice – to create a justice system, including courts, to bring order to the nation

• insure domestic Tranquility – to bring peace at home, inside the country

•  provide for the common defense – to create and maintain a national defense against other countries

• promote the general welfare – to help establish and maintain a healthy economy, population and society

•  to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity – to bring freedom and liberty to the people now and in the future

•  do ordain and establish – to invest with authority, to create and give The People’s power to

Citations:

joegerarden (2011). Senator Schumer's 3 Branches of Government: House, Senate & President.  Retrieved February 14, 2011 from the You Tube web site:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pbw1JQbe-_E&feature=related

Debbie Twyman & Craig Whitney. Constitution in Plain English. Retrieved February 13, 2011 From the Debbie Twyman and Graig Whitney Film arts and Social Studies web site:

http://www.twyman-whitney.com/constitutiontest/constitutionplainenglish.pdf 

Changes are already coming!

While writing my last post, a couple things came to mind. First and foremost was that if I’m going to be quoting the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence and use them as the basis for a lot of my arguments, I should probably write an article on them.  These will be my next series of articles.

The second thought that ran through my head was, “Dang, this is a long post!”.  It started me thinking that the mass majority of my readers probably have as little free time as I do (possibly less).  So I've decided, if at all possible, to cut my articles in to smaller, bight sized portions and post them a week or two apart.  If there's anyone that reads as slowly as I do, it probably took them 15-20 minutes to read my last post and I know that my readers time is valuable.  This will also serve another purpose.  This will allow me to get ahead of the power curve and give me a two or three article buffer while I write the one I'm currently researching.  Hopefully, by doing this I will be able to adhere to my goal of one post every two weeks or so.

As usual, happy reading.

Chris

Education

I stated in my first post that my wife is a teacher and that her experiences with her students (and some of their parents) is what prompted me to start writing this blog.

Well let’s be a little more specific so that you can get an idea of where I’m coming from. My wife is a high school math teacher who has taught in four different school systems in three different states (thanks for following me around the country honey). In general, at the beginning of every year she gives a test to her students on the first week of class and I get the privilege to help her grade them (it’s the least I can do for dragging her around the country with me). This test is comprised of simple addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. I’m talking like 60+35, 5X7, 73-24 and 11/22. The kicker is, the kids are not allowed to use a calculator. I have more the twice the fingers I need on one hand to count the number of perfect papers she and I have graded.

Another example would be that when she gives a test, quite often, she gives a bonus question that has nothing to do with the subject at hand. More often than not, these questions are on things that you would think to be common sense. Questions like; “How many stars on on the American Flag?”; “How many states are in the United States of America?” or “How many stripes are on the American flag and what do they symbolize?”. To be fair that last one is really two questions, but I’m sure she would give partial credit if you could only get one of them right. But, I digress. You would be absolutely astonished at how many of our children don’t know the answers to these questions. I could understand if these questions were being asked of 3rd and 4th graders (kind of), but these are high school students who can’t correctly answer these questions.

I don’t know about you, but when I went through elementary school, I had to know all 50 states, be able to point them out on a map and know all their capitals before I could pass the 5th grade (and I’m not all THAT far removed from high school). And I still know the mass majority of them right off the top of my head.  Why aren’t we teaching our kids these things anymore and if we are, why aren’t we enforcing that education later on down the line?

Did you know that according to a 2006 National Geographic poll, that 63 percent of young adults couldn’t locate Iraq on a map even though we’ve been fighting a war there since 2003. 70 percent had no clue where Iran and Israel are. 90 Percent had no clue where Afghanistan was. For that matter, 50 percent couldn’t locate New York State.

What’s the problem? Well, in my humble opinion, it has a lot to do with the Federal Governments continual meddling in the the education system. Please explain to me how a bureaucrat is qualified to decide what our children learn. How many people in the Department of Education have a degree even remotely related to the education field? I don’t know the answer, but I know what my next research project is going to be on.

Again, I digress. Let’s take a look at the Federal Governments defilement of our education system.

Let’s start with the most recent “boost” to the education system, No Child Left Behind (NCLB). This program was purported by all involved to be a measure to “level the playing field” so that all students had the same opportunity to succeed. Through this mandate, the government would decide how many federal dollars a school would get. How do they decide how much one school gets and how much another doesn’t you ask? Standardized test scores. The government decides how much funding a state (and by proxy individual school systems) will get based on test scores and how much the average test score for the school improved over the previous years. The government also gets to stipulate how those dollars are spent.  More on that later.

I contest that NCLB lowers the bar rather than levels the playing field and here’s why.

Initially this sounds like a good plan, right? In theory, the schools that get the best results get more money. Well, let’s look at this objectively. Let’s say that you have High School A that is a “Blue Ribbon” school. This is a school that routinely performs head and shoulders above the national average. This is the type of school that you would expect to keep getting federal dollars, right? WRONG! Since High School A has been performing at such a high level for so long, the improvement in overall standardized test scores has been minimal because there isn’t much room for them to improve. In fact, they may have even gone down a percentage point or two due to the variance of students that are in the school system. Well, since there was little to no improvement in the standardized test scores, High School A gets fewer federal dollars and now has to make do with less money.

I will get into funding, the strings attached and how in the end more money doesn’t always translate into better education a little later. However, at this junction, I do feel the need to point out what less funding means to the school. One, schools have to cut back on spending, which often means fewer teachers. Fewer teachers, means more students per teacher, which means each student gets less attention during class if they need help. Two, those teachers that now have larger classes are doing almost twice the work of their counterparts in neighboring school districts and getting paid, roughly, the same to do it. Hence, the experienced teachers start looking for jobs in those neighboring school systems, leaving High School A with less experience to pull from. Three, there’s less money to upgrade the technology that is used to help our children learn.

What do you think is going to end up happening to High School A if this trend keeps up? You guessed it, the standard of learning will be lowered since there are fewer dollars to spend per student and test scores will eventually start to drop. Fast forward 5-10 years and now High School A is no longer a “Blue Ribbon” school. High School A is now in the 60th percentile of the national average. The school sees the trend and realizes the only way to get more money is to increase test scores. But, how do you do that when you now have less experienced teachers, and 40-50 students per class? Well, the typical answer for schools in this situation is, drum roll please, teach to the test. That’s right, if it’s not on the test, it’s not worth teaching. And since questions like; “Who was the 3rd president of the United States?” or “Who was the principle author of the Declaration of Independence?” (Same answer for both questions for those who didn’t already know) aren’t on the test, guess what’s not taught.

What NCLB actually does is give teachers and states is more incentive to cheat the system. Take a look at what the state of Michigan did in 2004. In 2003, Michigan had around 1500 “failing” schools. In 2004 that number dropped to 216. That’s a great achievement, an 85.6% decrease in the number of “failing” schools. Until you realize that all Michigan did was lower the minimum passing score on the state's assessment test from 74 to 42. There have been several instances of teachers that have been caught asking under performing students to stay home on test day with the promise of extra time or help to finish the test when they come back. Or tapping students on the shoulder when they see the student has marked a wrong answer.

I can hear it already. “But there were issues with the public school system well before NCLB.”
On that issue, you will not hear any disagreement from me. Let’s take a trip in the way back machine to before NCLB, way back to 1979 when President Jimmy Carter enacted the Organization Department of Education Act. The Department of Education took over in May of 1980. Between the 1985-86 school year and the 2005-06 school year, funding per pupil increased 53.6% (Far more than the rate of inflation by the way). Yet, student performance has improved only slightly; 69% of American eighth-graders are still performing below proficiency in math and 71% in reading.

Want further proof that throwing more money at the issue doesn’t solve the problem.
Let’s look at the state of New York, who spends the most per student ($14,884 as of the 2005-2006 school year) and Utah, who spends the least amount of money per student ($5,437 as of the 2005-2006 school year). New York should have significantly better SAT scores and graduation rates if money is the answer, right? Well let’s take a look. For the 2005-2006 school year the average SAT score for New York was 1486 while in Utah the average SAT score was 1667. That’s a 181 point difference. Since not everyone takes the SATs (I didn’t) and since it is commonly accepted that you need to at least graduate high school to be a successful and functioning member of society. Let’s take a look at graduation rates. For the 2005-2006 school year New York had a graduation rate of 65.5%, while Utah had a graduation rate of 84.4%. If you do the math, Utah has an average 10.8% better SAT score, an 18.9% better graduation rate and does it all for 63.5 % less money per student.

Now that we have established that better funding doesn’t necessarily mean better education. Let’s talk a little bit about the strings attached to the federal dollars that the government spends on the schools. We talked earlier about High School A, now let’s talk about High School B. High School B is a school that isn’t necessarily a “failing” school but they are under performing because a large portion of their student body labeled as “at-risk”.  According to the Kansas State Department of Education, an individual is considered “at-risk” if they meet one of the following criteria and have not been identified for special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act:

• The student is not meeting the requirements necessary for promotion to the next grade level or graduation for high school

• The student whose education attainment is below other students of their age or grade level

• The student is a potential dropout

• The student is failing two or more courses of study or the student has been retained (read as didn’t pass and has to repeat a year of school)

• The student is not reading at their grade level

Now, High School B does get special money from the government to help these students, most often in the form of government grants. These grants come with some serious strings attached. Yes, the grant does usually allow the school the funding to hire another teacher specifically to help the at-risk students. This is a good thing as they need the extra help. However, the rest of the money is spent on technology and supplies to help just those students. So let’s say that after hiring the new teacher that High School B finds some new technology (like SMART boards) that could help ALL students learn. Well, if High School B uses the money from the grant to do so, NO OTHER student in the school can use it. That’s right, the money from the grant can only be used to help the at-risk students, the students that aren’t at-risk aren’t allowed to use it whether they would benefit from it or not. How, is that fair to the student’s that aren’t at-risk? Now the at-risk student’s have a leg up on the other students.

The grant money can’t be used to help pay for any of the other expenses that a school has either.  Generally, it can’t be used to help pay the teachers that are already at the school.  So, the educator teaching the Advanced Placement classes (Classes that high achieving students can take and get college credit) gets cut because the school can’t use the grant money to save that teachers job.  Please tell me how this is leveling the playing field?  How is giving money to help the education of underachieving students and, in essence, taking money away from helping the higher achieving students fair? You want to level the playing field, offer mandatory before / after school tutoring programs payed for by the grant.

There are other strings attached to the money as well. Remember that teacher that High School B hired to help the at-risk students. Well, that teacher will be out of the class room, no less than one day a month to attend professional development courses above and beyond what the school already requires. That’s valuable time away from the students the teacher was specifically hired to help. Never mind the fact that the school has already gone through an extensive hiring process to make sure they got the right teacher for the job, now the government assumes that whomever the school hired isn’t qualified to do the job and needs additional training.

One last example of some strings attached to money from the Federal Government.  In order for High School B to get the grant in the first place, High School B had to fire their current principal due to budgetary concerns.  Even though just 6 months prior the Principle had received high accolades from a Superior Court Judge for her accomplishments in improving the education level of the school.  That would be like a company firing a CEO that make the company billions of dollars because he makes too much money and hiring an unproven CEO to take his place because it cost the company less.

The Federal Government is basically using the money earmarked in the stimulus for education to dictate school policies that don’t actually result in true improvement of the education at the school.  The types of restrictions on this money also creates long term budgetary issues for schools that they will not be able to meet.  Hence, furthering the dependence of the state on federal money and further exacerbating the situation.

Now, I’m not saying the Federal Government is completely to blame. I put some of the onus on the Teachers Unions. Now, I’m not talking about their role in making sure teachers get a fair wage. Especially since I believe that our teachers are the leaders of today’s youth (after the parents). I’m talking about how the unions determine who gets paid what and how hard they make it to get rid of the under performing teachers. As it stands right now, teachers make more the longer they are in a school system, whether they are an above average teacher or a substandard teacher. If both have been there for the same amount of time, they make the same pay. There’s no incentive to excel, you will get a pay raise whether you excel or not. Further, if a school system has issue with a teacher, it’s almost impossible to get rid of them.  By almost impossible, I mean that NY State spend 6 years and $350,000 trying to get rid of a teacher that sent sexually explicit emails to a student.

The lack of education that our children and young adults are receiving doesn’t end at High School. Did you know that a majority of Ivy League schools don’t offer ANY form of geography. This initially doesn’t sound like that big of a deal until you realize that the mass majority of our Presidents are Ivy League educated. Did you know that our current president doesn’t know (or at least didn’t while he was campaigning) there are 50 states in our great country? Apparently, he had been to 57 states; still had one more to go and wasn’t going to visit Alaska or Hawaii due to scheduling constraints. By my count, that means that our current President thinks there are 60 states. I understand that sometimes people get confused, or say the wrong thing.  But, I have a hard time believing that that is all that this was since there was NO attempt to correct himself.  Now, I’m not saying that he’s the only one. This just happens to be the most recent example I could come up with off the top of my head. I think this has less to do with government interference than the issues facing our nations High Schools, since a lot of colleges are private institutions. I think the issues in colleges is the fact that a lot of the professors are progressives and believe that a less educated mass is better for the “ruling class”. But that’s a topic for another article.

What then is the answer? Give control of the schools back to the states where it belongs. The Constitution makes no mention of the Federal Government being involved in the education of our nations youth. I DARE you to find where the Constitution gives the right to the Federal Government to govern the education of our children! You can’t! In fact, the tenth amendment states:

     “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the Sates respectively, or the people.” 

That means that if the Constitution doesn’t explicitly give the power to the Federal Government and doesn’t explicitly deny it to the states; the powers reside with the state or the people.

A special thanks to Glen Beck for reigniting my interest in the Constitution and the founding principals. And, (Then) Sergeant Dan Haddock for encouraging me (as a very young man) to educate myself, do my own research and form my own opinions.

Citations:

Roach, John (2006). Young Americans Geographically Illiterate, Survey Suggests. Retrieved January 25, 2011 From the National Geographic Website:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/05/0502_060502_geography.html

Gryphon, Marie (2005, February 18). Education Law Encourages Fuzzy Math. Retrieved January 20, 2011, from The Cato Institute Web site: http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3694

Lester, Duane (February 15, 1010).  No Child Left Behind Leads to Even More Cheating By Teachers.  Retrieved on January 31, 2011 from All American Blogger Web site:  http://www.allamericanblogger.com/9876/no-child-left-behind-leads-to-cheating-by-teachers/

Lefervre, Andrew T. (2008) Report Card on American Education. A State-by-State Analysis 1985-1986 to 2006-2007. Retrieved January 25, 2011, from the ALEC Web site:  www.alec.org/am/pdf/2007_alec_education_report_card.pdf

Johnson, Kirk, Ph.D. and Krista Kafer (2001).  Why More Money Will Not Solve America’s Education Crisis. Retrieved January 22, 2011 from The Heritage Foundation Web site:  http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2001/06/why-more-money-will-not-solve-americas-education-crisis

Luci Duan & Jenny Xue (2008). How Per Pupil Spending Affects Academic Success. Retrieved January 25, 2011 from the University of North Carolina Charlotte Web site: http://education.uncc.edu/cmste/summer%20ventures/2008%20World%20View%20of%20Math%20&%20Data%20Analysis/Luci%20Duan%20and%20Jenny%20Xue.pdf

Balona, Denise_Marie (June 1, 2009). Chunk of funds can’t be used to save most employees’ jobs or pay salaries. Retrieved January 30, 2011 from the Education News Web site:  http://www.ednews.org/articles/education-stimulus-money-comes-with-strings-attached-.html

Hartness, Erin (November 19, 2010).  Strings attached to federal money could oust three Durham principals.  Retrieved January 31, 2011 from WRAL Web site:  http://www.wral.com/news/education/story/8655948/

School Funds have Strings Attached [Editorial] (January 5, 2011).  Retrieved January 31, 2011 from Tribune Chronicle Web site:  http://www.tribtoday.com/page/content.detail/id/551513/School-funds-have-strings-attached.html?nav=5007

Stossel, John (2006). How to Fire and Incompetent Teacher.  Retrieved January 28, 2011 from Reason Magazine Web site:  http://reason.com/archives/2006/10/01/how-to-fire-an-incompetent-tea

ObamaGaffe. Obama Claims He’s Visited 57 States. Retrieved January 25,  2011, from the You Tube Web site:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws

Introduction to the writer and the blog

Well, let’s start my first post in my first blog with a little information about me and what I plan on writing about.

My name is Chris, I’m a Veteran and I love my Country. My wife being a teacher, it has been brought to my attention that an overwhelming majority of today’s youth (and adults) don’t know the REAL history of the United States or the basic principals that this great country was founded on. Hence, I figured it was about time to stop complaining about it and start trying to do something about it. What better way to do that than by exercising my First Amendment rights and  voice my views and opinions online.

I hear from quite a few people and main stream media, that the founding principals and, to some extent, the Constitution are “out dated”, “A good idea from a bygone era” and “Not valid in today’s society". Well, I beg to differ Sir. The founding principles are just as relevant today as they were in 1787.

So here it is. My attempt at reaching out. Here is where I will be sharing my point of views on the founding principals and their relevance to today’s society. As well as, how our diversion from the founding principals has caused a lot (though not all) of the issues we have today and how a return to them could/would fix, I think, the majority of them.

As I know I’m not the smartest guy in the room (as is evident by the, I’m sure, several grammatical mistakes in this post alone) and I’m a huge supporter of the First Amendment, I urge my readers to join in the conversation and share their viewpoints. Especially if they run counter to mine. I’m not here to push my opinions and views on anyone and am always up for an intelligent discussion. Also, if I get something wrong, please feel free to correct me. I’m only human and as such I’m not omniscient. We all have room to learn and grow.

Now for my expectations of my readers. That’s right, I have expectations of you too. As stated previously, I’m open to intelligent discussion and debate. This has it’s consequences. I will not entertain people who just want to start altercations; who yell "false" without a legitimate base for their opinion.  I also don't have time for people who cannot think for themselves and take the opinion force-fed them by main stream media rather than educate themselves and form their own opinions. I’m okay with an opposing point of view, but as I will be backing up the majority of what I write with facts and resources, I expect the same from those who wish to debate. If you start spouting “facts” you better be able to back them up with some research of your own. Who knows, if you make a strong enough case, I might just change my point of view. My paradigm is formed by what I know, if there is information that I’m not aware of that is brought to my attention, it’s quite possible that I could shift my paradigm.

Being as I have a family and a job that keeps me working odd hours, I will be starting out by posting a new article every two weeks or so. Of course that is subject to change. I’m hoping to be able to find time to write once a week, but it will all depend on the amount of research I have to do for each article.

All this being said, I hope you enjoy my writings and I look forward to reading and replying to your comments.

Godspeed

Chris