[From "EducationDoctor", the email name of a friend involved in education issues.... The article to which he refers by Phyllis Schlafley is missing, but his own commentary is helpful. See letter by Marc Tucker.
Be aware that, although Bush has replaced Clinton, virtually nothing has changed in the education scene. So long as civil government remains in control of education, not much is likely to change. The temptations on politicians to force in schools teaching that which will keep the politicians in power is, in the long run, overwhelming.
Everything civil government does is done at gunpoint. Education is not an exception. There are some things that ought never, never, never to be done at gunpoint. A free people controls their own education -- just like their own religion. And for the same reasons. Both religion and education form the minds and hearts of the people. E. Fox]
The article below was published in the Washington Times on December 22, 2000. I have attended conferences and workshops sponsored by the Eagle Forum, whose president is the author of the article, Phyllis Schlafly. Phyllis Schlafly is a conservation woman who shared with her followers Marc Tucker's "Dear Hillary Letter" - the letter Marc Tucker wrote to Ms. Clinton less than a week after she became America's First Lady in November 1992. The eighteen-page Dear Hillary Letter establishes the base line for Clinton's so-called new economy and education reform initiatives that for the past eight years school districts have been implementing without telling us the truth about Clinton's agenda.
Marc Tucker's plan became the foundation for the four federal laws we commonly refer to that has helped the government create the monster we call the Wild Beast of the New World Order. Phyllis Schlafly is known by most of her followers as "Mother" because of the nourishing manner by which she details the issues she vehemently opposes.
This report is by far, the best I read of her many writings, her web site, and/or the newsletters she publishes monthly. The only problem I have with this letter - as detail and revealing as it is, is why wait until after the Clinton/Gore administration leaves office to tell the "brutal" truth about Clinton's School-To-Work and global economic plan? Most of her reports are ambiguous to the reader, especially those that do not know the objectives, the agenda, and the goals behind the education reform movement. Those of us that research these issues, write too technical for the lay-citizen. This report, breaks down what I believe should have been released long before now but, I guess like most people tell me, no one believes the government has "intentionally" mean for the desired outcome. NOT! Although most elected officials do not realize what they voted for, those special interest and sponsors are aware of the intent. Clinton - the master politician that he is, knows very well that the minorities he claims to support are the people that will be hurt the most by the School-to-Work agenda. All eyes are on Bush now - Is help on the way? Or, can we expect the agenda to move forward as planned? Its going to take an awful lot of work on our part to help people understand why the current School-To-Work plan must be repealed and eliminated...
By the way, Ms. Schlafly receives every email we send. Its people like her, Charlotte Iserbyt, Berit Kjos, B.K. Ekman, Thomas Sowell, John Taylor Gatto, Erica Carle, Barbara Morris, Robert Holland and others who writes, emails and speak in opposition to what the government has done to our education system that helped me to weigh and understand the issues we frequently share with you. Ms. Schlafly's web site URL is http://www.eagleforum.org.
Note: Regardless to opposition, we plan to work with anyone or group that desires these nationally known authors and speakers to speak at education summits or events. Let's face it, the conservatives will be in the peoples house on January 21, 2001, we may as well learn the issues so as to determine how we want our schools to be run, what they will teach, and how.
Read this commentary. Your eyes will be opened. You will be able to connect a few more dots. And we'll keep sending the reports so that you'll understand why we must join forces to rid our schools of the government controls and intrusive mandates. Zalee Harris - Education Doctors - Maryland Phyllis Schlafly: "Education policy Competition"
As members of Congress are jockeying for chairmanships in the 107th Congress, the committees that handle big money seem to get all the headlines, but the House education committee chairmanship may ultimately have the most influence on policy. Public opinion surveys indicate that education is the biggest U.S. issue, and the new chairman will decide quo vadis at our current crossroads, which way will Congress go?
School choice may be the most visible education controversy, but it's not the one that the chairman will be able to resolve, because that is primarily a state and local issue. The chairman will have a big impact, however, on whether we continue to implement President Clinton's two controversial 1994 laws, Goals 2000 and School-to-Work or, instead, call a halt to the mission and curriculum changes those laws initiated.
"School-to-Work" is bureaucratic jargon for imposing a new paradigm on public schools that de-emphasizes traditional academic studies and replaces them with vocational-technical (vo-tech) courses for all students. There's nothing wrong with vocational education; that's always been an option for high school students.
But School-to-Work is not an option; it's a federal law, quintessentially Clintonian. States that accept STW funds, and all states have accepted them, are subject to STW regulations.
School-to-Work is the mainspring of the Clinton administration's audacious plan to impose German/Japanese-style national economic planning to parallel the 1994 Clinton health care plan to take over the entire health industry, one-seventh of our economy. Indeed, the same schemers were the principal architects of both plans: Hillary Rodham Clinton and Ira Magaziner.
The writings of Clinton's economic adviser, Robert Reich, show that he is a frank admirer of the German model, which exercises government control over the economy by controlling access to the work force through the schools. School-to-Work was easily sold to big corporations, which envy the privileged corporate-government relationship their peers enjoy in Germany and Japan.
The STW paradigm is marketed to public schools all over the country by Marc Tucker's National Center for Education and the Economy, whose letterhead boasts the names of Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Magaziner and David Rockefeller Jr. The STW paradigm is packaged for governors by offering them federal funds, a route to bypass state legislatures and school boards, and attractive "partnerships" with corporations.
One marketing outreach aimed at governors is a 501 (c) (3) organization called CDS International (initials not explained on its letterhead). CDS brags that it has organized STW programs for representatives of public schools, government, industry and labor in more than 20 states.
CDS' brochure explains that STW's goal is to move American children into "The German Dual System of Vocational Training" under which Germany transfers nearly 70 percent of its students at age 16 from full-time secondary school to spending most of their time as apprentices in the workplace. National training standards have been established for each occupation in Germany, and company training is governed by federal law.
The German system requires the student to spend three to four days a week in the work force under an employer's mentorship, and only one to two days a week in traditional education learning mathematics, science, social studies and languages.
CDS states, "The dual system regulations and examinations are products of close cooperation among schools, government, employers (operating through their associations), and workers (represented by their unions)."
The STW paradigm involves establishing the mind-set that the mission of the schools is to serve the work force and the global economy, rather than to give all American children the basic knowledge and skills that can enable them to be all they can be. This is why the 1994 STW law dictates that the secretaries of education and labor "shall jointly provide for, and shall exercise final authority over the administration of this act," and why the House committee that wrote this law is called the Education and the Workforce Committee.
Rep. John Boehner, Ohio Republican, one congressman now running for chairman of this committee, has made it clear which side of the STW controversy he is on. In a Dec. 7 letter circulating on Capitol Hill, he comes out strongly against proposals to separate education and the work force into two committees.
Mr. Boehner's letter states in bold italics that "it is simply impossible to consider work force and education issues separately . . .. The two are becoming even more indistinguishable as lifelong learning becomes absolutely necessary in the New Economy"
The new school-corporate Partnership is tantalizing to big government Republicans who spend taxpayers' money and solicit corporate political donations. Mr. Boehner's letter reminds us that "a structure that allows education and work force issues together also allows us to add employers to our coalition efforts"
To have any chance of seizing the initiative on the education issue, the Republican Congress will have to elect a House education committee chairman who understands and opposes Clinton-style School-to-Work.
Note: The CDS organization mentioned in this article has a web site. Their address is: http://www.cdsintl.org/workforce.html (sorry, link gone).
Letter from Marc Tucker to Hillary Clinton
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Go to: => TOP Page; => EDUCATION Library; => ROAD MAP