HSLDA Shouldn't Endorse Federal Candidates

I learned this evening, through the MeetUp group Homeschoolers for Ron Paul, that the Home School Legal Defense Association Political Action Committee (HSLDA PAC) has endorsed a candidate in the GOP Presidential Primary race... former governor Mike Huckabee. This endorsement by HSLDA President J. Michael Smith and HSLDA Chairman Michael P. Farris was actually made in July via a letter to member voters prior to Iowa's Ames Straw Poll. (Obviously, the news took a while to trickle down here. Probably couldn't stand the heat.) I searched the HSLDA website, and could not find any mention of the endorsement. HSLDA is a 501(c)3 non-profit and prohibited by law from making political endorsements; HSLDA PAC is not a non-profit and can endorse candidates to their hearts content even though they have ties to HSLDA. Nice little loophole there, huh? (This would be so much simpler if the government would simplify the election process, but that is a post for another day.) I was able to find a copy of the letter here if you are interested in reading it.

As a member of HSLDA, I felt I should write to them and express my disappointment at their endorsement. Here is what I wrote:

Greetings!

I am writing to express my disappointment at HSLDA's endorsement of former governor Mike Huckabee for the position of Presidential Candidate in the 2008 GOP primary.

I agree that former governor Mr. Huckabee is a friend of homeschooling families, however, I do not believe that HSLDA should be endorsing ANY candidate on the federal level. Using the rule of subsidiarity, education of any kind (government school, private school or home school) should be handled on the local level. When national education organizations, such as HSLDA, promote a Presidential candidate, it is not only purporting its favor of a specific candidate but also condoning the federalization of the education system in America. This federalization is a losing situation for homeschoolers. In the event that HSLDA feels it must endorse a candidate on the federal level, it should reserve that endorsement for a candidate who supports the de-federalization of America's educational system.

HSLDA could be a better resource to its members by educating them on the stands of every candidate and pointing out which are friends of homeschooling by emphasizing their voting records and other actions in this realm.

Please take a constitutional stand and help reduce the interference of the federal government in the lives of homeschooling families by refusing to endorse candidates for federal positions based on issues that should not be handled at the federal level.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to seeing a list of all homeschool friendly candidates for races at all levels of government on HSLDA's website in the near future.

Blessings,

Seriously, I think that they should not endorse any federal-level candidates, and that includes Ron Paul. The only possible exception that I could think of would be if they endorsed a candidate who was determined to eliminate the Department of Education for being unconstitutional, but since that is obviously not something they plan on doing, I would rather that they endorse no one.

Some interesting tidbits that I uncovered while I was preparing my letter to HSLDA:

1. According to The American Spectator, the Federal Election Commission is investigating HSLDA's endorsement of Huckabee saying:

"It doesn't appear from the materials we've been given that HSLDA PAC was involved in any way with the planning of this endorsement," says an FEC staffer. "Everything was through the nonprofit arm. It doesn't appear that these folks even attempted to build a firewall, so it makes us wonder about coordination."

That's just what you want to hear about the organization that you pay in case you have need of legal representation, huh?

2. I did a search on HSLDA's website for "Huckabee" and came up with 11 hits. Six of these were for interviews with the former governor on HSLDA's radio spot Homeschool Heartbeat. The remaining 5 pertained to Mr. Huckabee's thoughts and policies on education (with homeschooling implications) or homeschooling specifically, generally all pro-homeschooling. (If you do your own search - for anything - on their site, ignore the hit count in the upper right-hand corner of the window. It is not accurate. You have to scroll through and hand count.)

3. I also did a search on HSLDA's website for "Ron Paul" and came up with 25 hits. All 25 hits pertained to legislative decisions or opinions of Dr. Paul. All were in support of less government intrusion into the lives of homeschooling families. None were related to interviews. (As with the hits for Mr. Huckabee, some of the hits for policy were for a single piece of legislation or issue that was being discussed multiple times.)

4. A search for "Fred Thompson" at the HSLDA site yielded one hit. It was for a vote HSLDA found favorable (in 1997).

5. A similar search for "Giuliani" yielded no hits.

6. A search for "Mitt Romney" yielded one hit. It was in regards to sex education in Massachusetts schools. HSLDA mentions in the alert that the purpose of sending the alert is not directly related to homeschooling but to "family issues in Massachusetts."

7. And just a little FYI... there is no constitutional right to education stated (explicitly or otherwise) in the US Constitution. (This has been upheld in numerous Supreme Court decisions, including the case of San Antonio School District v. Rodriguez- see Section II,B, paragraph 9 of Justice Powell's court opinion.) Therefore, education falls under the stipulations of the 10th Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

I am definitely against HSLDA endorsing any candidate, but I am a little disturbed that they don't even seem to be logical in their endorsement. Given my discoveries in #2-6 above, HSLDA has mentioned Ron Paul more times when speaking of legislators who support freedom for homeschoolers than of any other candidate. So why aren't they endorsing Ron Paul instead? The lack of logic all-around on the behalf of HSLDA just astounds me.

If you are a member of HSLDA, please go to their website and send them an email (you'll need your login information) letting them know that you believe their endorsement of Mr. Huckabee, or any federal-level candidate, is an endorsement of federalized education which is bad for homeschoolers.

If you are not an HSLDA member but would like to make them aware of your disapproval of their endorsement of federalized education via their endorsement of federal candidates, go to their website for contact information. (If you can't find it, let me know and I'll dig it up for you.)

And no, I won't ban you or anything if you contact them and give a different point-of-view than I have expressed here. Why? It's your right.


For purposes of full disclosure, please note that I am a member of both HSLDA (although not of HSLDA PAC which is, as far as I can tell, a separate entity) and of Homeschoolers for Ron Paul. I am also a member of a local Ron Paul MeetUp group.

Update: (09/20/07 @ 8:09pm) I have added a link to HSLDA PAC's website above. Also, according to HSLDA's "About & FAQ" page, they are a 501(c)4 non-profit, not a 501(c)3 as stated in the American Spectator article that I referenced above. What's the difference? I haven't a clue, really. All I learned about 501(c)s I learned on Wikipedia, here and here.

Creed by Steve Turner

Creed
by Steve Turner

This is the creed I have written on behalf of all us.

We believe in Marxfreudanddarwin
We believe everything is OK
as long as you don't hurt anyone,
to the best of your definition of hurt,
and to the best of your knowledge.

We believe in sex before, during, and after marriage.
We believe in the therapy of sin.
We believe that adultery is fun.
We believe that sodomy is OK.
We believe that taboos are taboo.

We believe that everything is getting better
despite evidence to the contrary.
The evidence must be investigated
And you can prove anything with evidence.

We believe there's something in
horoscopes, UFO's and bent spoons;
Jesus was a good man
just like Buddha, Mohammed, and ourselves.
He was a good moral teacher
although we think His good morals were bad.

We believe that all religions are basically the same--
at least the one that we read was.
They all believe in love and goodness.
They only differ on matters of
creation, sin, heaven, hell, God, and salvation.

We believe that after death comes the Nothing
Because when you ask the dead what happens they say nothing.
If death is not the end, if the dead have lied,
then it's compulsory heaven for all
excepting perhaps Hitler, Stalin, and Genghis Khan.

We believe in Masters and Johnson.
What's selected is average.
What's average is normal.
What's normal is good.

We believe in total disarmament.
We believe there are direct links between warfare and bloodshed.
Americans should beat their guns into tractors
and the Russians would be sure to follow.

We believe that man is essentially good.
It's only his behavior that lets him down.
This is the fault of society.
Society is the fault of conditions.
Conditions are the fault of society.

We believe that each man must find the truth that is right for him.
Reality will adapt accordingly.
The universe will readjust.
History will alter.
We believe that there is no absolute truth
excepting the truth that there is no absolute truth.

We believe in the rejection of creeds,
and the flowering of individual thought.

"Chance" a post-script

If chance be the Father of all flesh,
disaster is his rainbow in the sky,
and when you hear

State of Emergency!
Sniper Kills Ten!
Troops on Rampage!
Whites go Looting!
Bomb Blasts School!

It is but the sound of man worshiping his maker.

as heard on The Search for Absolutes in a Pluralistic Society (Part 3 of 3) on "Let My People Think" featuring Ravi Zacharias (I downloaded the series free from iTunes)

Preach It, Sister!

Almost a year ago now, I was given the privilege of proof-reading the manuscript for the first in a planned fiction trilogy. I thought the book was wonderful and really enjoyed reading it. It was hard to put down, and I think I read it through three times before I was forced to actually send the manuscript back so that Jennifer could get to work on editing and revising. (BTW, Jennifer, if you're reading this, please keep writing. I am dying to know what happens!)

Since then, I have been able to enjoy Jennifer's writing through her blog, I Will Read 10 Pages. She has a wonderful post on there that I highly recommend, Why the 11th Hour Pisses Me Off, about global warming. She explains (vents) beautifully about why all this global warming hysteria is just plain aggravating... and wrong.

Thank you, Jennifer, for some sanity.

A Lesson in Intolerance

Get out the duct tape. Seriously. Your head might explode.

The whole "tolerance/ PC" thing grates against my nerves for the very reason that many (dare I say, most) preachers of "tolerance" are really preaching intolerance and conformation to their world view over the views of others. They don't want tolerance, they want submission.

A "discussion" on the ABC show The View this morning illustrated this perfectly. No, I don't watch this show... my head would have exploded long ago. I heard the audio on Glenn Beck this morning while eating breakfast. I almost vomited. Speaking of which, put down all beverages and maybe take some peremptory antacid before clicking the link below. The lack of respect that was shown was unbelievable.

Here is an article that describes the encounter and includes a transcript and links to the video in three different formats. I don't recommend reading the transcript, just click on one of the links to watch the video yourself. (Primary sources are always better than interpretations... even mine.)

I showed the video clip to Primo, who is ten. Before I showed it to her, I told her that I knew she wouldn't understand most of what they were talking about but that I wanted her to watch and listen to how the women spoke to and treated each other. Then I hit the play button and let her watch. When she was done, I asked, "So, what did you think?"

"Well the larger woman wouldn't let the woman with yellow hair talk. Then she kept telling the woman with the yellow hair to ask a question, but she was trying to ask the question. The big woman just wouldn't let her. She's not very nice."

A ten-year-old could see it. Respect is respect. Just because you disagree with someone and you believe that you are right and the other is wrong doesn't give you the right to talk all over them then pretend that you understand their opinion. It doesn't show intelligence. It shows a lack of respect, intolerance, and an uneasiness with your own opinion.

Glad I got that off my chest. I feel better now. Thanks for listening. Now would be a good time to think about which Logic curriculum I want to begin with Primo next year.