Similarities Between TTP Trade Deal, Common Core & The Student Success Act
Do you notice similarities between the Trans-Atlantic Trade & Investment Partnership (TTIP) Trade Deal, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)/ trade promotion authority (TPA) Republican leadership and President Obama are trying to pass with Common Core adoption? The bills/mandate involve lack of transparency with the voters, the urgency of passage (it’s a crisis!) and the fact that those agreeing to the mandates/law don’t know what’s in the text of what they are supporting. Many of the politicians have not even read the trade bill and the taxpayers (and also may politicians) only have surface knowledge of the details and ramifications of the bill. It’s ironic that this lack of transparency mimics the famous we have to pass it so we can find out what’s in it line from Speaker Nancy Pelosi regarding her urging of the passage of The Affordable Health Care Act and she is now demanding transparency for this bill. In fact, it was Pelosi who was instrumental in derailing the trade bill’s passage last week in the House. (How lack of transparency is permissible for some bills but not others is another post for another day).
This bill takes away the sovereignty of American courts and it will be necessary for international sources to settle future disputes. The bill will require the loss of American jobs and workers are promised there will be millions of dollars available for job retraining. One ‘minor issue’ is that these millions are to come from Medicaid. Who will be cut from the Medicaid rolls and where will the new jobs be located and what are these new jobs? Those details are not disclosed. It is reminiscent of how the CCSS consortia were to be funded after the Federal stimulus funding ran out which provided their existence.
The United States government is supposed to be for the people to protect their individual rights, not to lord over the people and to hand American sovereignty to oligarchs. So it is with Common Core. The standards/assessments have been handed over to a pre-determined group of private NGOs who face no accountability to the public. Who will hold the choice architects accountable when individual rights are trampled and freedom is lost? Where is the mechanism? As in the CCSSI and the current trade bills, it doesn’t exist.
Here’s a short youtube video describing the TTIP trade deal. As this article states, TPP and TTIP, Two Different Trade Agreements, Both Will Have the Same Disastrous Results so it is applicable to our pending US bills:
Contact your elected representatives to tell them to vote NO both on TTP and The Student Success Act, HR5. Both expand the power of the few and take decisions out of the hands of states and local decisions. Regardless of the purported intent of both these bills, they take away the rights of the people and compel them into subservience to a non-elected group of elitists with no accountability. As one reader commented on a pro-TTIP article in The Economist in 2013:
I can’t share the enthusiasm of the article. As the article mentions there is little left on tariffs that can be abolished. On the other hand we see that dogmatic globalization is increasingly leading to anonymous global organizations undermining our democracy and imposing their own vision on what our governments should do instead. This undermines our governments and as a consequence economic growth.
A current article in HotAir about the trade deal has a reader stating what happens when you have centralized control and ‘choices’. On an educational level, think what type of ‘choice’ districts/states have in developing/directing educational delivery in current reforms/pending legislation:
(click graphic to enlarge)
Why should you oppose HR5? Here is information on The Student Success Act from Parents Against Common Core:
Congressional Leadership Is Bull-Rushing Through HR5, the 600 Page Reauthorization of No Child Left Behind (rebranded the “Student Success Act”)
The House votes on it this week. Call your Representative and call the Speaker of the House and tell them to vote “no” on HR 5!
Below are just a few of the problems.
1. HR5 Denigrates Parental Rights and Seizes State Sovereignty
- No program shall “operate within a State, unless the legislature of that State shall have . . . waived the State’s rights and authorities to act inconsistently with any requirement that might be imposed by the Secretary as a condition of receiving that assistance.” (Sec. 6561) (emphasis added).
- Federal requirements will trump the rights “reserved to the States and individual Americans by the United States Constitution” to lead in the education of their child. (Sec. 6564)
- Requires states to change laws and regulations to “conform” to HR5. (Sec. 1403)
- Alters the governance structures of states by requiring them to form “Committees of Practitioners” to whom the state must submit rules and regulations. (Sec. 1403)
2. HR5 Does Nothing to Relieve Children From No Child Left Behind’s (NCLB’s) Oppressive Testing Requirements.
3. Feds Will Effectively Direct State Education Policy through Enhanced Continuation of Heavy-Handed NCLB Policies
- Requires states to demonstrate to the federal government that their standards, assessments, and state accountability systems meet the goal of “prepar[ing] all students to graduate high school for postsecondary education or the workforce.” (Sec. 1001)
- Requires states to submit comprehensive state plans, which the Secretary can disapprove. (Sec. 1111)
- States had to make the same showing and meet the same definitional goal to receive NCLB waivers and Race to the Top grants.. HR5 allows for a Common Core “rebrand.” (Sec. 1001) and (Sec. 1111(3)(A))
- Prohibitions against the Secretary forcing states into adopting Common Core are meaningless.
4. Increases Federal Data Collection To Control Curriculum
- Empowers the Department of Education to request individual student and teacher data from State and Local Education Agencies.
- Authorizes substantial new funding to use this data to evaluate whether schools are using “effective” instructional methods. (Sec. 2111(b)(1)(A)) and (Sec. 2132)
The header graphic may be accessed here.