25 March 2008
Michigan
Dear Representative Clack,Michigan
The Michigan legislature has before it House Bill Number 5912, a bill that would require home-schooled children to be registered with their school districts.
My question is: Why?
The United States was built on the principle of individual freedom, and the State of Michigan has fought, from its very inception, to maintain the independence of its citizens from government interference. We, the citizens of the state of Michigan don’t like government intervention unless we can see good reason for it. Have we forgotten young Governor Mason, deposed briefly by federal intervention for purposes of political expedience, who was re-elected in a landslide in a protest by the people of Michigan who, on the same day, voted for the constitution which serves our state so well?
It alarms me that the state legislature now intends to require home-schooled children to be registered with the government, a principle that flies in the face of the freedom of the citizens of this state and can serve no purpose useful enough to justify this violation of citizen autonomy.
For every tale of woe about an irresponsible family who neglects their children by failing to educate them, there are a thousand such tales of publicly educated children in our state who enter high-school without basic literacy skills. For every story about an abusive family who keeps their children home to hide their abuse, there are hundreds of stories of children whose abuse is discovered only when the child is killed, though teachers had reported the evidence to child protective services.
Those families who neglect their children's education would not be more readily identified simply by registering them with their school districts, but the education of those children whose welfare has already been entrusted to the public school system of the state of Michigan will be threatened by the addition of one more burden on the local school districts, already understaffed and struggling with inadequate funding. While home-education will continue successfully, as it always has, the already burdened state system will have the increased workload of registering its home-educators and their students.
There is no evidence to suggest that home-education in Michigan is broken. Registration of home-educators achieves no end useful enough to justify this intrusion into the privacy of home-educating families, nor the further assault on the resources available to educate the children entrusted to the public schools. As a home-educator, I can assure you that government registration can represent a significant barrier to home-educating families who may consider moving to Michigan. Home-educators tend to be"can do" people, people who see a problem and work toward a solution rather than waiting for the government to fix it. This is the very sort of people Michigan needs to make its way back from the brink of economic disaster.
Surely there can be no fruitful end to an endeavor that would burden an already under-funded system with useless information, and present one more barrier for the kind of autonomous, enterprising families we need so badly in our state in these difficult times.
Please reconsider your co-sponsorship of this bill that flies in the face of our freedom and adds to the already substantial burden that the people of the State of Michigan bear in these difficult times
Misti Anslin Delaney
Parent Educator
MI
To my readers: please feel free to take this letter, make it your own and send it to your own Michigan representative. I will sending paper letter to Lansing tomorrow.
Representative Brenda Clack is the major sponsor of this bill.
Rep. Brenda Clack
N0798 House Office Building
P.O. Box 30014
Lansing, MI 48909-7514
517-373-8808
brendaclack@house.mi.gov
CO-SPONSORS OF H.B. 5912 are:
(There are 24, you might want to select those who represent you.)
Joan Bauer: 517-373-0826, joanbauer@house.mi.gov
Bob Constan: 517-373-0849, bobconstan@house.mi.gov
Marc Corriveau: 517-373-3816, marccorriveau@house.mi.gov
Robert Dean: 517-373-2668, robertdean@house.mi.gov
Kate Ebli: 517-373-2617, KateEbli@house.mi.gov
Barbara Farrah: 517-373-0845, barbarafarrah@house.mi.gov
Richard Hammel: 517-373-7557, richardhammel@house.mi.gov
Ted Hammon: 517-373-3906, tedhammon@house.mi.gov
Shanelle Jackson: 517-373-1705, shanellejackson@house.mi.gov
Bert Johnson: 517-373-0144, bertjohnson@house.mi.gov
Robert Jones: 517-373-1785, robertjones@house.mi.gov
Kathleen Law: 517-373-1799, davidlaw@house.mi.gov
Richard LeBlanc: 517-373-2576, richardleblanc@house.mi.gov
Gabe Leland: 517-373-6990, gabeleland@house.mi.gov
Mark Meadows: 517-373-1786, markmeadows@house.mi.gov
Fred Miller: 517-373-0159, fredmiller@house.mi.gov
Gino Polidori: 517-373-0847, ginopolidori@house.mi.gov
Mike Simpson: 517-373-1775, mikesimpson@house.mi.gov
Alma Smith: 517-373-1771, almasmith@house.mi.gov
Virgil Smith: 517-373-0589, virgilsmith@house.mi.gov
Aldo Vagnozzi: 517-373-1793, aldovagnozzi@house.mi.gov
Lisa Wojno: 517-373-2275, lisawojno@house.mi.gov
All of them can also be reached at:
N0798 House Office Building
P.O. Box 30014
Lansing, MI 48909-7514
Edited to remove Joel Sheltrown, who has officially withdrawn his support for this bill.
I just wanted to offer two small cents to answer your question. I too was concerned about this legislation, but having counseled with one of the co-sponsoring legislators, I realize that this legislation is not even about you or I. The fact of the matter while you suggest there is no proof that the system is broken, there actually is. Some irresponsible parents whose kids fall out of the public school system for one reason or another elect to allow them to stay home, but are not homeschooling. When the truant officer finally shows up at the home, the parent suggests that he/she is homeschooling in order to avoid discipline. We all believe that every Michigan child has a right to an education. Parents have a right to alternatives and choice. And just as you have suggested that home-educators tend to be "can do" people, we cannot at the same time subscribe to the conspiracy theory that the "registration" process will pose a barrier to home-schooling as a viable educational choice. It is more probable that the irresponsible parents will be more easily identified.
ReplyDelete--Nicole
Michigan Parent
Hi Nicole,
ReplyDeleteI understand your sentiment, but I cannot see how registering home-schoolers actually solves that problem. The law already gives truant officers legal recourse if they suspect that no education is taking place in the homes of those who claim to home-school.
The law as currently on the books 1561(3)(f), requires education to be taking place in the home in 8 specific subjects. My reading of that law suggests that it is incumbent on the home-educator to prove that their children qualify for the exemption to the compulsory attendance act (by teaching those subjects in the home) in the event that they are challenged in court.
Registering homeschoolers does not do a single thing to bring the abusive parents you talk about to justice.
Your last comment, that irresponsible people will be more readily identified in the registration process, does not follow. Registering parents are required to present names and addresses only.
There is no "conspiracy theory" implicit in the letter, or in the minds of home educators opposed to this bill. The bill is a bureaucratic non-solution to a truancy problem that has been with us since compulsory education was introduced in this country.
The departments resources might be better spent prosecuting irresponsible parents, rather than registering responsible ones.
Take care
Rod
I'll be sending my letter right after this.
ReplyDeleteI agree, I don't understand how making the 'real' homeschoolers register it will stop the neglectful ones ???
Thank you for your comment, Nicole.
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid that this bill is indeed about you and I.
Or at least, it is about my family, since we home school, and I have no intention of registering.
You say that there is proof that the system is broken, but you offer none. In case you hadn't noticed, the platitude your cosponsoring legislator offered to you amounts to "Oh, no, you have no reason to fear as long as you're a good person. We're doing this to catch 'those terrible people'!"
Who the 'terrible people' are changes, but the reasoning may we be as old as legislation itself.
It's the classic misdirection used by the powerful when they want to curtail the freedom of the common person without much debate or struggle. I am not saying that your legislator doesn't believe it, only that he or she may well have heard the argument so many times herself when giving away one freedom or another that it has come to sound like a real argument.
You have not explained why those "lazy parents' you describe are not being caught by existing laws that they are already breaking. Surely someone noticed when the child stopped showing up for class?
You don't explain how the children, who were clearly not being served by their schools if they were allowed to "fall out of the system" (or, very possibly, were pushed out), are better served by my being registered than they were before.
It's not because it gives the truant officer "teeth" -- the law already says that certain subjects must be taught at home in order for a student to be exempt from compulsory education. Use those laws, if the child will be better served by being forced back into the school system.
I agree whole-heartedly that every child deserves an education but the eager student be ill-served if we squander the limited resources we have for the education of the children of this state on the staff and infrastructure that would be required to collect, maintain, and use the homeschool registration information.
There is no "conspiracy theory" here. The bill can not do what it promises to do and it will cost precious resources that this state can ill afford. Those who value their freedoms must be willing to step up and fight for them. Those who value choices must be willing to stand up and be heard. Those who value Universal education must carefully steward the limited resources available to provide for those who would drink at the public well.
A good example of making laws that have no effect on the malefactors but serve mainly to turn otherwise law-abiding people into offenders.
ReplyDeleteAs for why the law exists- I suspect it has a lot to do with the ongoing battle against home schooling by those who have a vested interest in making home schooling harder- public school teachers and administrators. I'll bet the teacher's union is a string lobbying for this bill.
Thanks for stopping by, Michael!
ReplyDeleteI think the NEA and the school administrators are probably not sad to see this bill proposed, but I can imagine all kinds of reasons it might seem like a "good idea" to some people that have nothing to do with "making homeschooling harder" but also have nothing to do with our children's welfare.
One example: schools receive funding based on head count, so administrators might very well see each of our home schooled kids as a "missed opportunity" for funding. If they can find us and market their services to us, they can get full funding for every one of us who sign up for some cursory service, like being allowed to play on the after school soccer league.
A second example: the NCLB law forces schools to make their students names available to the military for recruitment. The military, for the moment, has no way of reaching home schooled kids directly, and I'm sure that they see this as a problem. Once the schools have a list of home schooled kids in their jurisdiction, I suspect that list is also covered by the notification law.
Those are two reasons that have nothing to do with "making homeschooling harder" but also have nothing to do with our children's welfare. I suspect that there are others...