Parent alert: The Feds want your kids 24/7

May 13, 2015

Public boarding schools on Obama regime’s agenda

It was not even a dozen years ago that apprehensive Arizona parents balked at what was being pushed as “Full Day Kindergarten” by leftist Gov. Janet Napolitano. It was put into effect in 2004 despite objections to the governmental overreach subjecting preschoolers to institutionalization and liberal indoctrination when they were barely out of diapers.

Many parents opted out.

Fast forward as the educrats have even more insidious schemes in mind for America’s children. Federal Education Secretary Arne Duncan on Tuesday proposed the idea of public boarding schools open 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

“One idea that I threw out is the idea of public boarding schools,” Duncan said at the National Summit on Youth Violence Prevention in Crystal City, Va. “That’s a little bit of a different idea —- a controversial idea —- but the question is do we have some children where there’s not a mom, there’s not a dad, there’s not a grandma, there’s just nobody at home?”

Does Duncan mean ever? Or are these parents or other relatives simply at work when the kids arrive home from school?  We all know not all home situations are ideal, but less ideal are governmental communes.

“There’s just certain kids we should have 24/7 to really create a safe environment and give them a chance to be successful,” Arne Duncan continued. “I think all of our schools should be community centers,” he said. “Our schools should be open 12, 13, 14 hours a day with a wide variety of after-school programming.

Pay attention. We are witnessing the incremental encroachment of the benevolent dictatorship which author Aldous Huxley prophetically envisioned in 1932 in his literary masterpiece, “Brave New World.”  No longer fictional, it’s being brought to us nearly 85 years later by the Obama administration. This book was once required reading in high school English classes. It needs to be brought back.

Read the full CNSNews report by Penny Starr who points to documented soaring school violence rates. The report includes the brief but nonetheless alarming news video clip of Secretary Duncan.


AZ Regents grant illegals in-state university tuition

May 8, 2015

ABOR and Superior Court judge reward illegality in Arizona

With this May 7 announcement, the Arizona Board of Regents reversed previous policy and will now allow illegal alien students to pay lower in-state tuition rates instead of  non-resident rates.

There was not a single voice raised in dissent. The Regents’ vote was unanimous.

This new policy, granting foreign nationals lower tuition than your Arizona-born niece who has grown up in California and wants to attend Arizona State University, is a farce.

On April 21 we posted AZ Board of Regents: Double talk on tuition, noting in-state tuition for illegals provided another costly incentive for the illegal hordes invading the U.S. Just days ago, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Arthur Anderson unilaterally ruled in direct contradiction of Arizona voters* that students in possession of work visas under Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order, are eligible for the lower in-state rate.

“Federal law, not state law, determines who is lawfully present in the U.S. The circumstance under which a person enters the U.S. does not determine that person’s lawful presence here,” Anderson haughtily opined. Judge Anderson’s decision will save the illegals thousands of dollars a year. ASU in-state basic tuition rates are $10,157 this year. Out-of-state students pay $24,503.  (Full cost schedule here).

By executive order in 2012, Barack Obama provided illegal aliens work authorization and other benefits if they qualified for “deferred action” as “childhood arrivals” (DACA) under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012. An additional executive order announced on Nov. 20, 2014, extended deferred action benefits to “childhood arrivals” regardless of age, and to illegal parents of U.S. citizens or legal permanent resident children (DAPA). Implementation of the second executive order has been temporarily enjoined by Federal judge Andrew Hanen of the Southern District of Texas.

Obviously, there is no way to substantiate age at entry claims, which is why forged and counterfeit birth certificates constitute a big business.

According to a report in the daily, Regent’s Chairman Mark Killian was quoted as breezily saying, “Let’s move forward and get our kids educated in Arizona.” The “kids” Killian so warmly describes as “our(s)” are actually the responsibility of their foreign national parents. 

This decision comes on the heels of Killian‘s April 10, statement that included a condemnation of the “reality of $100 million in budget cuts that went far beyond expectations has made it considerably harder to balance university budgets. While we will focus on efficiency and realigning our strategic plan for long-term sustainability, these cuts have real impact on our students, and result in $1,000 less per student from the state. We must take into account the harsh reality of the magnitude of these cuts that may result in reductions in positions, programming and services as well as increased costs for students. “

Arizona taxpayers will ultimately be on the hook to ante up those increased costs, while our actual children will be forced to compete for college placement with those Mark Killian has foolishly concluded are also “ours.”

 

*In 2006, Arizona voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 300, 71 to 29 percent. Among its provisions was the prohibition of those without proof of legal residency being classified as in-state students and receiving state and federal financial aid or in-state tuition.


AZ Board of Regents: Double talk on tuition

April 21, 2015

In-state tuition for illegals another costly incentive for law breakers

The Arizona Board of Regents known for its propensity for ever-increasing tuition and fee hikes for state university students, is back to its old trickery.

On April 10, Regent Chairman Mark Killian, released this statement that included a condemnation of the “reality of $100 million in budget cuts that went far beyond expectations has made it considerably harder to balance university budgets. While we will focus on efficiency and realigning our strategic plan for long-term sustainability, these cuts have real impact on our students, and result in $1,000 less per student from the state. We must take into account the harsh reality of the magnitude of these cuts that may result in reductions in positions, programming and services as well as increased costs for students.”

The former Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives, familiar with budget realities, paints a grim picture.

So if money is tight and educational calamity lurks behind the ivied walls, why is providing in-state tuition to illegal alien students a front burner issue? The so-called Dreamers —- brought to the United States illegally by their illegal parents must be between the age of 15 and 31 and have come to the U.S. before the age of 16. Obviously, there is no way to substantiate such claims, which is why forged and counterfeit birth certificates constitute a big business.

In 2006, Arizona voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 300, 71 to 29 percent. Among its provisions was the prohibition of those without proof of legal residency being classified as in-state students and receiving state and federal financial aid or in-state tuition.

This is the posted cost of attendance for all categories of ASU students.

Providing in-state tuition to illegals not only encourages more illegal immigration while enhancing our status as a magnet-state  —- it is fundamentally unfair to U.S. citizen out-of-state students. Such a policy also forces taxpayers to subsidize the education of illegal aliens while exposing the state to legitimate lawsuits on the part of out-of-state students required to pay the higher rates.

The Arizona Board of Regents is expected to release its final tuition and fee proposal for the 2015-2016 academic year on May 4, at 2 p.m.

ABOR is required by state statute to hold a public tuition hearing to provide notice of any proposed increased tuition or fees prior to setting rates for the upcoming academic year.


Janet Na­politano still coarse, boorish as UC Prez

March 20, 2015

CBS San Francisco does a hot open mic reveal of the woman Arizonans got to know all too well as loutish and arrogant. Never accused of exercising decorum or restraint as governor, Janet Na­politano brazenly puts her classlessness on display as University of California President.

Smacking gum like a long-hauler and clearly irritated as students protested the fifth 5% annual tuition increase —- during a Board of Regents meeting in San Francisco —- Napolitano turned to a fellow regent and said, “Let’s just break. Let’s go, let’s go. We don’t have to listen to this crap.” Her open mic caught the comment. After that, the regents and Napolitano filed out.

Her attitude was markedly different from her earlier, conciliatory tone at the very same meeting where she said of the students, “They want to be sure that their voices are being heard and I want to commit to them that their voices are being heard.”

To make their point loud and clear, a frustrated group of the tuition-hike weary student protesters pulled off their outer clothing down to their underwear or exercise clothes revealing the words “Student Debt,” to symbolize what they likened to having to give the shirt off their backs for continually escalating tuition rates.

Protesters said they suspected the regent’s meetings were scheduled during a busy week of midterms, but they say they vowed not to stop protesting until their message is heard.


Kids behaving badly? Study offers explanation: You must be an illegal

March 15, 2015

New study explains insecurities, criminal behavior in children of illegals

Nancy Landale is not exactly a name resonating off lips in Arizona, but the results of her latest study delving into the “special insecurities” and their links to “behavioral problems” of children of illegal aliens recently merited a front page report titled, “Fear of having a parent deported may increase risk of behavior issues.“ 

Daniel Gonzalez, who coincidently covers immigration and minority communities at the Periódico de la República de Arizona (Arizona Republic), authored the news article. He calls Landale’s study, which provides justification for higher risks of behavior issues compared with children of legal immigrants and U.S. citizens, “groundbreaking.”

Prof. Landale’s research at Penn State focuses on family patterns and health outcomes of racial and ethnic minorities in the United States. She’s been at this for years, as her Curriculum Vitae attests —- currently investigating the health and development of Mexican children of illegals, with an emphasis on links between illegal immigration and assimilation processes, family contexts and multiple dimensions of health. These reports don’t come cheap. They are underwritten by massive research grants. As an example, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development:  “Mexican Children of Immigrants Program Project.” (2009-2016) Total Direct Costs: $3,851,858. Total Costs: $5,158,193.

The funding for these absurd studies ultimately comes out of our pockets. But even in Pennsylvania Nancy is feeling the extra pinch for education, health care, and incarceration —- costs that have obviously increased since this report detailing the $728 million yearly burden to native-born Pennsylvania taxpayers was released in 2009.

Previous generations of legal immigrants who came to America via Ellis Island would have been appalled to have little Giuseppe, Sean, Helmut, Abraham, Miklos or Casimir do less than their best in school and certainly would not have given them cover for chronic bad behavior or criminality. That change in attitude might be the reason the legal immigrants succeeded. They knew America provided opportunity and they expected their children to take advantage of the rare gifts they were being given. The families worked hard, educated their children and enthusiastically assimilated into Americans.

The $113 billion annual drain said to be the high cost of illegal immigration is also substantially higher since this 2010 report (revised in 2011),The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on U.S. Taxpayers.”

This video is from 2011:


Education or divisive, anti-American indoctrination in TUSD?

March 7, 2015

Tucson Unified School District and AZ SPI Diane Douglas form odd alliance

The Arizona Daily Independent recently ran this cogent report, “Douglas finds TUSD Ethnic Studies class in compliance.” Posted midweek, it began with this well-turned phrase, acknowledging waning support and unusual alliances:

“Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Diane Douglas found Tucson Unified School District’s Ethnics Studies Culturally Relevant classes to be in compliance of Arizona law. The Superintendent, who is trying to avoid a recall, hastily called a press conference to announce her decision.”

Diane Douglas ran for state Superintendent of Public Instruction and was elected as a grassroots conservative candidate based on her unwavering opposition to the federal mandates under- girding the Common Core curriculum and support for local control of public schools. Now those issues have fallen by the wayside as she works hand-in-glove with TUSD Superintendent Heliodoro Torres “H.T.” Sanchez to implement the anti-American,  La Razaendorsed ethnic-studies programs.

The ADI report concludes:  

“After several missteps, it is widely believed that Superintendent Douglas is making strictly politically motivated decisions to avoid a possible recall effort.”

In January, after barely two weeks in office, Douglas disappointingly exhibited a startling new position on the separatist studies. In a statement released following her initial meeting with Sanchez she indicated she is not, in fact, opposed to ethnic studies. Douglas hit a low note with this conclusion, “It is important to correct the misunderstanding that the Arizona Department of Education is opposed to ethnic studies. If any child educated in Arizona is not exposed to the suffering, trials and triumphs of all ethnic groups who have contributed to our state’s rich cultural mix, then we are failing to teach accurate history.”

Seeing Red AZ has been following the TUSD’s ethnic studies program since 2008. A sampling of the reports can be found following this post, “Diane Douglas disappointingly parses ethnic studies.”

In January 2011 even the leftist AZ Republic editorially lambasted the TUSD’s ethnic studies duplicity as “bogus.”  The editorial rightfully referred to the data used to buttress the claims “repeated constantly by [the program’s] defenders that students perform better academically as a result of taking ethnic studies classes and that they go on to college more often” –— “academically unsupportable.” Further the newspaper states that officials who make such claims “are acting irresponsibly in doing so.” The editorial goes so far as to say the results “appear rigged.”

In the intervening years, the only thing that has changed is we now have an irresolute superintendent fearful of being ousted and eager to make any concessions to avoid that embarrassment.


Weakened SPI Diane Douglas cedes power

March 3, 2015

Elected Superintendent of Public Instruction relinquishes authority to unelected state board

The Arizona Daily Independent does a fine job of explaining the current bizarre state of affairs involving recently elected Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction, Diane Douglas, her Chief of Staff Michael Bradley, and their willing acquiescence in allowing the Senate Education Committee to eviscerate her authority in overseeing the State Board of Education’s staff.

Among other things, HB 2184 would remove any oversight of the unelected board and staff by changing the language defining her role with the board from “executive officer of the State Board of Education” to “executive officer responsible for the execution of policies of the State Board of Education.”

Attempting to put the best face on this abdication of duties in the wake of her public battles with Gov. Doug Ducey, in which Seeing Red AZ championed her effortsDouglas now claims she supports the restraining measure in order to save legal expenses for the taxpayers.

Don’t skip over the concerns expressed by leading conservative and former Senate Majority leader Thayer Verschoor. He is quoted in the news report as referring to Douglas’ actions as an “abdication of power” and the revision of duties as  “VERY BAD POLICY.”


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 363 other followers