I am still banned form leaving comments at the Madville Times marketplace of opinions. Odd that Cory Heidelberger, the owner of that business, would say this about SB67's attempt to let business owners decide who they will or will not serve:
I totally oppose Representative Hickey's effort to deny equal marketplace rights to those same people.
Clearly another example of the totalitarian left's hypocritical intolerance toward those they disagree with. Cory even agrees with the paranoia of SB67 being a fascist plot being conducted by the Klu Klux Klan:
"One correction, Brian: it's not even clandestine. But is South Dakota the Klan's destiny?"
I am once again writing to share my concerns with Common Core. I am not able to make it to Pierre for legislative session as planned, due to the weather.
I am the parent who was furious when I received the letter telling me I would be breaking the law if my 6th grade daughter did not take the Smarter Balanced Assessment. I have since pulled my daughter from public school and am currently homeschooling her. I put the letter out on Facebook and it has gone across the country and infuriated many people, rightfully so! I feel that threatening parents and students is an overreach of boundaries and do not appreciate it. I do not feel as though I should be bullied by any government entity whose income comes from taxpayer dollars!
You have asked why public school students cannot "opt out" from taking the Smarter Balanced state assessments and the potential consequences if a parent were to prohibit the student from taking the assessment. All school districts are required to administer the state assessment to all students in the tested grades, and all those students are required to take the assessment. SDCL 13-3-55; 24:55:07.01. The only exceptions is for some students who are limited English proficient. ARSD 24:55:07.11.
Keeping the student home from school to avoid the assessment would not only violate these laws, but also potentially violate the State's truancy laws. All students of compulsory school age must attend school, and wishing to avoid taking the state assessment is not a recognized excuse to the compulsory attendance attendance law. SDCL 13-27-1, 13-27-6, and 13-27-6.1. In addition, prohibiting the student from taking the assessment could violate individual school district policies.
Moreover, prohibiting the student from taking the test could adversely affect the school district. If more than five percent of students enrolled in the tested grades refuse to take the test, then the school district could lose points on its state accountability score. ARSD 24:55:07:02.
This is an example of how the Educrats really view the role of parents regarding the education of their children. Here is more analysis on Schopp's bully tactic:
This is a bully tactic and her interpretation of state law is flawed.
13-3-55. Academic achievement tests. Every public school district shall annually administer the same assessment to all students in grades three to eight, inclusive, and in grade eleven. The assessment shall measure the academic progress of each student. Every public school district shall annually administer to all students in at least two grade levels an achievement test to assess writing skills. The assessment instruments shall be provided by the Department of Education, and the department shall determine the two grade levels to be tested. The tests shall be administered within timelines established by the Department of Education by rules promulgated pursuant to chapter 1-26 starting in the spring of the 2002-2003 school year. Each state-designed test shall be correlated with the state’s content standards. The South Dakota Board of Education may promulgate rules pursuant to chapter 1-26 to provide for administration of all assessments.
The way I, and others, which includes an attorney, and many of our legislators read this, is that the schools are required by law to administer the test but it does not say that students are required by law to take it.
MEW notes that Missouri’s Department of Education says much the same thing even though there isn’t a state law that backs it up.
Schools are required to give the assessment. Students are not required to take it. We need to remind state departments of education that parents are the ones who are ultimately responsible for their children’s education, not the state.
On his Friday program, conservative talker Rush Limbaugh reacted to an article by Breitbart's Matthew Boyle about the aims of the Republican leadership to pass an immigration reform bill that includes an amnesty provision and what conservatives are doing to prevent that.
“Now I would describe people pushing this against the will of the people as ‘thugs,’” Limbaugh said. “I’ve always thought of thugs as bullies. In the modern vernacular, most of the time I use the word ‘thug,’ I happen to be talking about union thugs or jack-booted government thugs.”
Plus, whether you agree with public incentives for job and economic development or not, by definition, the public incentive (to be an incentive) likely takes more risk than some of the private money. It is that way with SBA programs, GOED programs, Department of Entergy, etc. programs.
So taxpayers money are used for projects that would not be started if one risked his own money. That is why economic development through government is not as efficent as a system that is truly free market. That is why the only logical solution is to shut down South Dakota's GOED.
First, I'd like to know who's paying the transportation to Pierre, and really for the entire anti-Common Core campaign. I expect Bollin and other folks are on the payroll. This is the sort of astro-turf campaign we've come to expect from the righties. The fact that a bunch of rather sheep-like citizens made fearful by a lot of cuckoo talk and can be mobilized to look like a grassroots effort is nothing too surprising(eg., see the Tea Party). The fact is anti-Common Core campaigns are being run by a national cabal, bankrolled by powerful righty interests with deep pockets. The fact that some folks that look to be "grassroots" come to Pierre can't hide the big moneys are behind this fax grassroots effort.
Second, the idea of "show and tell" is going to be interesting. All they are going to be able to "show and tell" is manufactured nonsense, since Common Core hasn't really been implemented yet. In other states these "grassroots" anti-Common Core mostly consist of the same people who lead and support efforts to cut funding for public education and support privatization of education. This effort is all about weakening public education, so the private and religious schools can reap the benefits.
Melody Schopp, South Dakota’s secretary of education, made some misleading statements in your Jan. 13 front page report on the upcoming Common Core legislative battle. She gave the impression that individual student information does not go to the federal government. As you will see, if she does not have a conflict of interest, she certainly is biased.
What your readers may not know is Schopp is a member of the Council of Chief State School Officers, which is a private, non-governmental organization based in Washington, D.C., that holds the copyright on Common Core. Its website admits that, in partnership with the United States Department of Education, it put together the Common Education Data Standards Initiative that involves collecting student data “from early childhood through K-12 education to post-secondary education and the workforce.”
Schopp’s CCSSO is also in partnership with the “Data Quality Campaign” that says the above-mentioned student data is linked “with other critical agencies such as health, social services and criminal justice systems.”
This spring, Schopp is requiring, as allowed by state law, all South Dakota public schools to administer the Smarter Balance assessment tests. SBAC received a grant from the federal Race to the Top program that makes SBAC bound to “make student-level data” available to the Department of Education “on an ongoing basis” and “must provide timely and complete access to any and all data collected at the state level” to the Department of Education.
And for any parents who are concerned about the Fourth Amendment privacy rights of their children and their family, Schopp has stated in writing that there are “potential consequences if a parent were to prohibit the student from taking the assessment,” including the enforcement of “the state’s truancy laws.”
So who exactly is Schopp working for? When Schopp says Common Core was state-led, we now should understand that means the state government of South Dakota has agreed to be an arm of the federal government and corporate special interests. Can we have the Legislature stop this agenda? Only if you speak up; now is the time.
I don't see him doing any push-ups, but Democratic candidate for governor Joe Lowe is pushing his opponent, Governor Dennis Daugaard, on his treatment of hospitals and poor folks who need health coverage. Lowe opens the week with a press release decrying the Governor's refusal to take a huge infusion of federal cash to expand Medicaid.
Lowe opens not with the moral argument, but a practical market argument: pay people for the work they do!
I have the quaint opinion that doctors, nurses, and hospitals should be paid for their work. Dennis thinks they should just expect that they'll get stuck with the bill a certain percent of the time and should hope they can make up for it by overcharging someone else [Joe Lowe, press release, 2014.01.20].
Governor Daugaard claims that we don't dare expand Medicaid because he continues to "have doubts about the federal government’s ability to deliver on their promises." Lowe says that claim is inconsistent Tea-Party pandering:
If you follow that logic, South Dakota should not accept highway funds, school funds, college funds or any other billions in federal money that flow through the state budget. He's using a double standard.
That double standard points to another big difference between Dennis and me. He's apparently afraid of the Tea Party. I'm not [Lowe, 2014.01.20].
Lowe is hoping any Tea Party vote for which Daugaard may be angling will be neutralized by the 48,000 South Dakotans he's trying to help:
We have 48,000 people left in the cold by Dennis's double standard. It's mean-spirited and short-sighted. It's damaging to people's health, it's damaging to our medical providers, and in the long run it's more expensive [Lowe, 2014.01.20].
Governor Daugaard, you and the Legislature have two months to take this issue off the election table. Expand Medicaid, and you help people, pay hospitals, stimulate the economy, and take a really useful argument away from your political opponents.
Sorry I copied the whole post, but I wanted to make sure I had their argument in context. And I would make my argument over at the Mad site, but I have been banned from making comments.
I just so happened to know someone on Medicare who recently required an emergency operation. The bill from the hospital was over $39,000. Medicare paid a little over $6,000 and is making the patient who gets about $800 a mong in Social Security (about $10,00 per year) chip in over $1,200. So instead of being out the full $39,000, thanks to the government's Medicare program, the Corporate Medical establishment is out $32,000. So the South Dakota Democrats want expand another government program that will use additional federal debt so the hospitals only have to shift $32,000 instead of $39,000? A reduction of 15%.
And the Democrats claim not to be afraid of a Tea Party movement that points out that the Constitution prohibited federal involvement in funding the states' medical schooling and yes...highways. That all changed when FDR packed the Supreme Court with socialists who systematically destroyed the American Constitutional Republic. Well Daugaard and the rest of the SDGOP establishment are also not afraid of the Tea Party, as they accept $2 billion in federal debt backed money for highways, schools and yes medical costs, and all in the name of a "Planned Global Economy" which includes things like federal EB-5 programs. But in reality they are planning a global economic failure.
Bottom line, Cory, Lowe and the rest of the Democrats are willing to be 85% Republican when it comes to making hospitals cost shift low-income medical bills. That is pretty much an argument that is 85% double standard to charge the other side for being guilty of using double standards. More and more it becomes obvious that both political parties are wrong. How many have the courage to stand on their own two feet and say that?
Troy Jones likes to spin truth into lies. Can he take Daugaard's $4.266 billion budget and say it is a not a 15.5% increase over the $3.693 billion spent in the year ended June 30,2013. Instead of spending time covering the rear ends of the SDGOP Establishment, maybe his time would be better spent on finding out where the extra $573 million is going.
When you have an Attorney-General more concerned with sweeping the misdeeds of his fellow party members under the rug than actually conducting legitimate investigations of serious misconduct, this is what you get. South Dakotans, by and large, are happy to have bad news just go away, with any flimsy excuse for dismissal sufficient to their needs. It's why we are so comfortable with a one-party state and fundamentalist religion.
That was made by "toclayco". Cory attacked Pat Powers for allowing anonymous comments and have deleted comments I made on his web site in the past because they were considered conspiracy theories. Anybody believe the totalitarian will delete the anonymous conspiracy theory? Of course there is the argument that RINOs, that wear the cloak of Christian conservative, give both conservatives and Christians a bad rap that is false. The RINO's ways are more in line with an atheist liberal Democrat.
When Rounds announced his exploratory committee in September 2012, Rushmore PAC burst with excitement and photos of their man for Senate. Of course, Rounds's Peter Norbeck PAC gave Lederman's Rushmore PAC $2000 in August, 2012, so how could Lederman not be excited? Lederman's PAC also shared the joy of Rounds's official campaign announcement at the end of November, 2012.
But this morning when I search the Rushmore PAC website for "Mike Rounds," I find nothing. The three breathless September 2012 articles are gone.