We Have Come For Your Kids - Part II

By CAMILLE GIGLIO

August 24, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - Continuing our roundup of CA's far reaching and devious education bills, it seems as though the tactic of these out-of-control legislators is to - under the guise of "building bridges" - empower the self-appointed "master planners" to override parental authority and plan the future of other people's children.

When educators and legislators talk about the development of education master plans they always start out by referring to the 1960's creation of the once in a lifetime created California master plan. From there they make it appear that any current activity in this regard is just a mere adjustment of those plans and goals.

The original master plan set standards for, basically, what type of educational programs the various levels of state schools, especially, colleges and universities would concentrate on offering plus linkage of all education, K-18, into one smooth exercise in accessing entrance.

It also addressed issues of equal opportunities regardless of social and economic levels, and easing of access regulations for all students in California.

Today's goals for an Education Master Plan go way beyond that to determining in the early years just what educational channel each child will walk through throughout the child's educational years ending in the pre-planned and desired college graduation outcome and into workforce enrollment.

In Sacramento there is the legislative Joint Committee on the California Education Master Plan. Its committee is composed of the legislators who most often are the authors of all the touchy/feely pseudo education; social studies programs or after school, health care, workforce development bills.

This committee periodically holds hearings on education, the latest being in March of this year. John "I'm ok, you're ok" Vasconcellos, former Santa Clara legislator and chairman of the Education Committee that wrote legislation to re-do the Education Master Plan was one of the presenters at that March hearing.

The latest Education Master Plan legislation, AB 1901, Post-Secondary Education Master Plan is authored by Assemblyman Ira Ruskin, (D-Santa Clara). It has passed both houses and is awaiting the Governor's signature. He has until August 31 to sign or veto this bill. I would urge a veto.

Here is the stated goal of this bill: "California has now passed the threshold of becoming a state with a new multicultural majority as the ethnic composition of the population is changing dramatically. Our state's future economic, social, and cultural development depends upon ensuring that all its citizens have opportunities to develop themselves so that they can contribute their best to society."

Note that the emphasis is on contributing to society, not to one's personal, academic and intellectual development in order to more efficiently direct one's own life.

AB 1901 continues:

"?Current estimates indicate that California will need to prepare more than one million additional graduates by the year 2025 in public higher education institutions to meet our workforce needs. [emphasis added] California needs to prepare now for the projected enrollments in the 21st century. And, if the goals of the master plan and its subsequent updates are to be fully achieved, especially if groups that are historically and currently underrepresented increase their rates of participation in higher education, enrollments will most likely exceed even these projections.

"?California must support an educational system that prepares all Californians for responsible citizenship and meaningful careers [emphasis added] in a multicultural society; this requires a commitment from all to make high-quality education available and affordable for every Californian.

"?To accomplish these goals, California's system of higher education will need to expand.

"?It is the intent of the Legislature that the work completed by the master plan review committee be used to guide higher education policy."

The only supporter of this bill is the Post Secondary Education Committee itself yet it passed both houses with flying colors. Also an accompanying Assembly Committee Resolution was passed favoring passage of ACR 184 which means that all the legislators approve of this bill without having to put their signatures to it.

This bill very much needs to be vetoed. However, it is the community organizations, stakeholders as they are referred to, who latch onto bills like this in order to promote their programs as those which will most benefit the ultimate goal of an outcome planned student.

It is in the following type bills that we see who will prosper under the elitists efforts to create the future adult most beneficial to society.

SB 798, Mark DeSaulnier, Before and After School Programs.

Since the school day is already so taken up with academics plus programs it is necessary to expand the school day through before and after school programs in order for the Stakeholders to gain access to the students.

This bill addresses the financing of programs but not the specifics of content. It allocates $25,000 a year for five years per after school site if that site conforms to approved 21st Century Community Learning Programs. This is a group which has been given approval by the state to develop programs.

This bill is supported by Children Now, a conglomerate of reproductive rights and parental controls organizations along with Invest In Kids, another umbrella family intervention program.

A companion bill, SB 1157, Education: Healthy Schools Act of 2010 [sponsored by Mark De Saulnier (D-Walnut Creek], is a sop to the environmental groups who would enter the schools and get goals and standards for running the schools according to politically correct standards.

It is sponsored by Parents for Safer School Environment and San Francisco Bay Keeper, both approved for Obama's Greening of America objectives regardless of the costs to taxpayers or states. It also maintains after school programs on environmental issues for students.

SB 1381, Joe Simitian, (D-Santa Clara) Kindergarten: Age of Admission. Amends the age at which is a child admitted to Kindergarten and or first grade. Age is now 6 for First Grade but will be dropped to age 5 and places the student in a transitional class of older aged kindergarteners and First graders. This will have the effect of dropping the age for regular kindergarten and open the options for even younger pre-school.

One of the supporters of this bill is the California Association of School Psychologists. Recall that we have written articles about Senator Leland Yee's and Sen. Mark Leno's bills regarding mental health problems of students all of whom need professional direction including monitoring pregnant women to insure that their preborn child is born mentally healthy. If the psychologists can't get the babies at birth, at least they can try to start getting them at age 3 and 4.

SB - 1380, sponsored by Loni Hancock (D-Berkeley), School Facilities: Construction. Although this bill sounds harmless. It addresses various needs for school construction and modernization, but it is endorsed by a group entitled California Association of Leaders of Career Preparation - CALCP. It seeks funding and authorization through Bonds to direct school construction towards buildings, etc that will facilitate career development not academic preparation. This is not your old auto workshop or home economics with sewing machines, etc.

If you think all of this is just pie in the sky silliness, I would direct your attention to the years of planning that the city of Vallejo put into developing a City master plan for children, birth to 18 years. Every agency they could think of got involved in setting up goals for everybody else's child including training teachers to conduct home visitations, mentoring, etc. before and after school activities, etc. Just Google "young master plan," to see all the programs.

While we are all agonizing over mythical homosexual plans for marriage, ex-Governor Blagojevich's guilt or innocence, saving turtles, etc, the legislature is planning on ways to take over the parental duties. In these proposed bills your children are treated as if they are the property of the state. Warning?this legislation is either sitting on the Governor's desk or waiting for a final Assembly floor vote - there is little time to voice concern.

We Have Come For Your Kids - Part I

Camille Giglio 2010. All rights reserved.