Showing posts with label jeb bush. Show all posts
Showing posts with label jeb bush. Show all posts

Thursday, March 26, 2015

Death Throes of Common Core

From the Warning Signs of Alan Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

Know the Warning Signs from Alan Caruba
Americans are learning the hard way that the federal government should not be permitted to impose one-size-fits-all standards to education.

It was never intended to play a role in education and the absence of any mention in the Constitution is proof enough that education was intended to be supervised by the states where the school districts, schools, and parents are closest to the process.

Common Core is going to play a large role in the 2016 elections and that is likely to impact former Governor Jeb Bush the most. At the heart of the unhappiness with Common Core has been its emphasis on testing.

A March 20th Wall Street Journal article, “Bush Faces Test of Exam Policy”, reported that “A Rasmussen Reports nationwide survey in February found that 52% of respondents thought there was too much emphasis on testing in schools and 69% believed there was too much ‘teaching to the test.’”

The transformation of the nation’s educational system began when the Department of Education was signed into law by Jimmy Carter in 1979 and began operating in 1980. It continued with the passage of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), the name given to the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

It requires all public schools receiving Title 1 federal funding to annually administer a state-wide standardized test to all students. NCLB was coauthored by Representatives John Boehner (R-OH), George Miller (D-CA) and Senators Edward Kennedy (D-MA) and Judd Gregg (R-NH).

President George W. Bush was a leading NCLB advocate and signed it into law on January 8, 2002. Each state was expected to develop its own standards because NCLB did not impose a national one.

This year when its reauthorization came up for consideration, it was pulled from the House floor in February. The Heritage Foundation deems it “outdated, ineffective, and prioritizes government standards over the needs of individual students.”

According to Neal McCluskey, Associate Director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Educational Freedom, “There is no compelling evidence that No Child Left Behind, and federal intervention overall, has produced much good, while it is very clear it has cost substantial money and is unconstitutional.”

In Missouri, circuit court Judge Daniel R. Green, ruled in February that the state’s payment of more than $4 million in membership fees as part of a standardized testing consortium was illegal. The Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium “is an unlawful interstate compact to which the U.S. Congress has never consented, whose existence and operation violate” Article 1 and 10 of the federal Constitution. It dealt a blow to Common Core.

It’s not just Missouri. In January the Mississippi Board of Education voted to withdraw from the Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers consortium which is one of the two tests aligned to Common Core. A full repeal of Common Core standards is under discussion.

By June 2014, two months before its implementation date, 19 states had either withdrawn from the tests or had paused implementation of the standards. Four of the 19, Indiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Louisiana had completely exited the national standards. Alaska, Nebraska, Texas and Virginia never adopted it.

Gov. Bush is beginning to put some distance between himself and Common Core. His spokeswoman, Kristi Campbell, said “There is such a thing as too much testing.” Reportedly “he says the federal government shouldn’t impose particular tests or curricula on states.” Meanwhile, in one state after another, Common Core is being rejected.

Facts-not-Fantasy
On the political front, the Heartland Institute’s monthly newsletter, School Reform News, reported in March that “Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a front runner in the contest for the Republican nomination for president, made bold reforms of elementary, secondary, and college education a prominent part of his proposed 2015-17 budget.”

“The budget, presented on February 3, would remove the cap on the state’s school choice program, eliminate state funding for Smarter Balanced tests tied to Common Core State Standards, and cut $300 million from the University of Wisconsin over two years in exchange for greater autonomy for the system.”

On Capitol Hill, four Republican senators including Rob Portman of Ohio and Pat Roberts of Kansas have introduced a bill that would prevent the federal government from strong-arming states into adopting education standards such as Common Core and, presumably, NCLB.

The bill is called learning Opportunities Created at the Local Level Act. As reported in the Daily Caller.com, it “would limit the federal government’s ability to control state educational standards and curriculums through financial incentives, grants, mandates, and other forms of influence.”

There’s no way to know when Common Core will die or whether No Child Left Behind will suffer a similar fate but the trend nationwide is obvious. Parents, teachers, schools and districts want to determine the best curricula for the children in their systems.

They want the federal government out and that is a very good thing.
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Sunday, March 22, 2015

Dear Barbara Bush . . .

From the Files of Jeff Crouere at Ringside Politics.com in New Orleans, Louisiana

Visit the Website of Jeff Crouere at Ringside Politics.com

Thank you so much for the thoughtful “friend” fundraising letter that you sent me and millions of other Americans this week. You were so kind to solicit donations on behalf of your son Jeb’s presidential campaign. Of course, you let us know that you “changed your mind” because on April 25, 2013 you told Matt Lauer of the “Today” show that “there are other people out there that are very qualified and we’ve had enough Bushes.”

I realize that it is a woman’s prerogative to change her mind. I also am not surprised that you now have a different view regarding Jeb’s aspirations and want to support him since he is surely running for President. Nonetheless, I must respectfully decline your request and inform you that I will be encouraging everyone I know to emphatically tell you “no” as well.

I do not hate the Bush family for I know all of you are patriotic Americans. However, I must note that the Bush family has done tremendous harm to this nation. Your husband was elected President because of Ronald Reagan, yet squandered his legacy. George H. W. Bush broke his promise to the American people and raised taxes, thus giving the nation the plague of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Your son was even worse. George W. inherited a large surplus, but created expensive entitlements, a massive new government department and pursued out of control domestic spending and unfunded foreign wars. He turned the surplus into a $468 billion deficit for his successor and left the country an additional $5 trillion in debt.

Your son Jeb is a nice guy, but he is as uncharismatic as your husband and other son, George W. More importantly, he is wrong on too many important issues. He is pro-amnesty, will not rule out higher taxes, supports Common Core and believes the moderate Mitt Romney ran a presidential campaign that was too far to the right.

On foreign policy, it was revealed this week that one of Jeb’s advisers will be former Secretary of State James Baker, a creature of the Beltway who is infamous for his anti-Israeli views. Baker is a well known GOP insider and moderate who supports establishment candidates and loathes Tea Party activists. For icing on the proverbial cake, it was just reported that Jeb is friends with a fugitive who is evading justice in Spain. Clearly, he has the wrong type of friends.

Speaking of friends, in your letter, Mrs. Bush you wrote, “We need and appreciate your help, “friend.” Thank you for your support and I look forward to counting you among our ranks.” You may call me “friend” but just don’t count on my support. As a “friend,” let me remind you of your statement to Matt Lauer less than two years ago, “there are a lot of great families and it’s not just four families…..he’ll (Jeb) get all our enemies, half our friends.”

Well, I am in the group of “friends” who are not with Jeb. Here is the most important reason why, he will lose. If Jeb runs, the Republican ticket will surely lose and our country will be subjected to four years of Hillary Clinton or whatever crazed liberal is nominated by the Democratic Party.

Our country cannot afford four more years of a liberal in the White House. We need a conservative, which is the only type of Republican nominee who can win. Sadly, your son, like the entire Bush family, is not a conservative.

Mrs. Bush, while you may have changed your mind about Jeb running, I have not. What you said less than two years ago is still true today; our country has had “enough Bushes.”

Sincerely, Jeff Crouere
______________________________________________

Jeff Crouere is a native of New Orleans, LA and he is the host of a Louisiana based program, “Ringside Politics,” which airs at 7:30 p.m. Friday and 10:00 p.m. Sunday on WLAE-TV 32, a PBS station, and 7 till 11 a.m. weekdays on WGSO 990 AM in New Orleans and the Northshore.

For more information, visit Jeff's web site at www.ringsidepolitics.com or email him at jeff@ringsidepolitics.com.
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Monday, March 9, 2015

CPAC 2015 full of surprises

Jindal surprises: Walker and Paul still solid from a Michael Shannon Report from CPAC

CPAC 2015 featured a number of unlikely and unacceptable alleged candidates for president including big mouth Donald Trump and deadbeat Carly Fiorina.

Of course Trump is just in it for the branding boost and the ego massage, which actually makes sense in a Kardashian sort of way.

But how could Fiorina possibly think she's a credible candidate? She ran once for the Senate in California and lost. To top that off she stiffed her consultants for thousands of dollars in bills she still refuses to pay.

Other than the odd bankruptcy, I think even Trump pays his bills. But enough of the sideshow candidates.

There were solid presidential candidates at CPAC and you can have the benefit of my opinions and abuse in this week's Newsmax column.
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Thursday, October 30, 2014

A Clinton vs. Bush Race - Again?

A Clinton vs. Bush Race? Again? from the files of Jeff Jacoby at the Boston Globe

A Clinton or Bush was on a national ticket in every presidential election from 1980 and 2004.
Now Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush are being talked up as candidates for 2016.

Jeb Bush's son, George P. Bush, told ABC News the other day that his father will "more than likely" run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

The former Florida governor's other son, Jeb Bush Jr., told The New York Times that the extended Bush clan and its key allies "are getting fired up" about the prospect of a run for the White House by yet another member of the celebrated political family.

A Clinton or Bush was on a national ticket in every presidential election from 1980 and 2004. Now Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush are being talked up as candidates for 2016. In the Democratic camp, meanwhile, the "Ready for Hillary" super PAC is spending $23,000 a day, or more than $2 million per quarter, to build the infrastructure for what is expected to be a second presidential campaign by the former secretary of state.

Though Clinton hasn't declared herself a candidate, she is seen as the Democrats' default nominee for 2016.

There are nearly 80 million families in the United States, according to the Census Bureau. Are American voters so lacking in resourcefulness that they have to keep going back to the same two families to find a president?

The White House has been occupied by a Bush or Clinton for 20 of the past 26 years. A two-term Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush administration could extend that run to 28 of the 36 years between 1989 and 2025. In every presidential election from 1980 to 2004, a Bush or Clinton was on a national ticket. Barack Obama interrupted that streak in 2008 — but only, it seems, temporarily.

"When the Clintons lost to Obama, they simply turned Obama's presidency into their runway," columnist Maureen Dowd wrote in March. Clinton's tenure at the State Department may not have been distinguished for its diplomatic achievements, but as a vehicle for generating animated Hillary-in-2016 speculation, it was ideal.

As for the Bushes, apparently not even the family matriarch has been able to keep the machine from revving up for another campaign. Last year former first lady Barbara Bush dashed cold water on a potential Jeb run. "There are other people out there that are very qualified," she said, adding bluntly: "We've had enough Bushes."

Americans claim they disapprove of family dynasties dominating national politics. In an April poll, 69 percent of respondents agreed that presidential contenders shouldn't be drawn from just two or three families. But it's easy enough to offer lip service to the anyone-can-grow-up-to-be-president egalitarian ideal that America has always liked about itself.

The proof of the electoral pudding is in the voting, and the results over the past generation speak for themselves: Bush 41, Clinton 42, Bush 43. Now, as both tribes strategize about capturing No. 45, thousands of activists, fund-raisers, donors, and organizers are poised to jump on the bandwagon.

"As long as there are elections, people will vote for candidates whose names they recognize," writes Richard Brookhiser in America's First Dynasty, his history of four generations of the Adams family. "It is the tribute democracy pays to aristocracy."

A political family brand plainly counts for something, or parties wouldn't be so eager to nominate the children or spouses or siblings of well-known politicians. A slew of candidates running for office this year are trading on their family name.

Among them: Georgia gubernatorial hopeful Jason Carter, grandson of President Jimmy Carter; the aforementioned George P. Bush, running for Texas land commissioner; and Michigan's Debbie Dingell, who hopes to take over the US House seat her husband has held since 1955.

No American clan has been more politically prolific than the Adamses, whose family tree includes two presidents, three governors, a US senator, and nine members of the US House. But a candidate's surname should be no credential for public office — not even if that surname is Adams.

No American clan has been more politically prolific than the
Adamses, whose family tree includes two presidents, three
governors, a US senator, and nine members of the US
House.  But a candidate's surname should be no credential
for public office — not even if that surname is Adams.
There's no mystery about the advantages that can be conferred by such a family legacy — innumerable contacts, a pre-existing network of loyalists, high name recognitition, entrée into political circles, a headstart up the campaign learning curve. What does mystify — mystifies me, anyway — is why that should attract voters.

I wouldn't dream of voting for a candidate for no better reason than genealogy. The taint of nepotism and royalism would repel me.

The suggestion that a candidate's surname is a credential for high office is antidemocratic and oligarchic, and it ought to make no difference whether that surname is Bush or Clinton or Kennedy — or Adams.

"It may be that certain families just have a sense of commitment or even a predisposition to want to be in politics,"

Hillary Clinton told the German magazine Spiegel in July. Maybe so, but I'm pretty sure the craving for political power isn't confined to elite families that can be trusted to use that power wisely. If Americans wanted to be ruled by hereditary nobles, they could have avoided a lot of trouble in 1776.

Barbara Bush was right. We've had enough Bushes running for president. Enough Clintons, too. Dynasty was fine as a TV series. It doesn't belong in the White House.
_____________________________________________________________

Click Here - Become a Truth Serum Partner Now