OUTRAGE! TX Textbooks Proposal: Students Must Discuss Gutting Social Security

[Joanne98]

With the long-running Texas history textbooks standards fight scheduled to end with a final vote by the State Board of Education Friday, arch-conservative board member Don McLeroy is proposing a new set of changes that read like a tea party manifesto.

The new amendment (.pdf), which is expected to get a vote on Thursday, would require high school history students to "discuss alternatives regarding long term entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare, given the decreasing worker to retiree ratio" and also "evaluate efforts by global organizations to undermine U. S. sovereignty."

McLeroy, who will leave the board at the end of the year after a primary election loss, says the first provision "is a critical thinking skills item, and it is also relevant to assessing the policies of the various ideologies that have shaped where we are as Americans."

As justification for that second item, McLeroy writes: "Threats of global government to individual freedom and liberty include the votes of the U. N. General Assembly, the International Criminal Court, the U. N. Gun Ban proposal, forced redistribution of American wealth to third world countries, and global environmental

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/tx_textbooks_proposal_students_must_discuss_guttin.php?ref=fpa

[Jefferson23]

1. Authoritarian lunatics. ACLU is trying to counter this, thank goodness:

Texas Rewrites the Past, Jeopardizing the Educational Future of Children Nationwide


Today, the Texas State Board of Education released amendments to the state's social studies curriculum that essentially rewrite history to comport with the personal ideological and religious beliefs of some members of the board. As explained below, the proposed amendments depart drastically from accepted historical accounts. Indeed, as the New York Times Magazine has reported, they are so disturbing that at least one member on the board vehemently exclaimed, "burst out in seemingly embarrassed exasperation": "Guys, you're rewriting history now!"

If the changes are implemented as proposed, it could affect the education of students from kindergarten to 12th grade across the country for the next 10 years: because Texas is one of the largest purchasers of textbooks nationwide, the changes the board makes to its standards often end up in textbooks purchased by other schools districts around the country.

From a civil liberties point of view, among the more troubling recommendations are changes that minimize the importance of constitutional protections requiring the separation of church and state and that paint the country as rooted entirely in sectarian ideology, a claim that educators and historians dispute. For instance, the board eliminated a standard that would require students to "examine the reasons the Founding Fathers protected religious freedom in America by barring government from promoting or disfavoring any particular religion over all others."

Moreover, the proposed amendments intentionally distort the rights of minorities and women and minimize their roles as historical figures. For example, Archbishop Oscar Romero, an important leader in the Hispanic community, was removed from the curriculum.

Meanwhile, under the proposed amendments, Confederate leaders are painted in a positive light — elementary students are asked to "explain the growth, and development, and impact of the cattle industry…" including contributions made by Charles Goodnight and Richard King, both active supporters of the Confederate States of America. This pro-Confederacy bias may explain why civil rights — specifically those of African-Americans, Latinos and women — are given short shrift under the revised curriculum, in which such key advances are portrayed as the result of government actions and equality on paper equals equality in reality.

The proposed revised standards deserve close scrutiny. Some of the changes may seem relatively harmless at first glance, but it's important to remember that these changes will affect the education of a generation. If an entire generation of children grow up thinking that it's permissible for our government to favor one view of religion over others, what will the next generation believe? If these same children fail to understand the importance of the struggle for civil rights, how can we be sure that they will remain committed to correcting such abuses in the future?

The public has 30 days to comment on the proposed amendments to the curriculum released today. Rest assured we will be submitting ours and encouraging others to do so too.

But the real problem here is a process that gives board members the ability to place their personal beliefs above the need for superior academic standards. Public schools should be used to educate, not indoctrinate, students into political and religious belief systems, and decisions about curriculum should be decided by educators, not politicians.

To get an idea of how a few Texas School Board members are trying to impose their ideology on millions of public school students, take our Texas Textbook quiz.

We're reviewing the new textbook guidelines now. Check back here for more details on how to voice your concerns to the school board.

http://www.aclu.org/blog/racial-justice-religion-belief-womens-rights/texas-rewrites-past-jeopardizing-educational-futur/

[newtothegame]

3. ??

"discuss alternatives regarding long term entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare, given the decreasing worker to retiree ratio"

The ACLU is on this, thank goodness? What does that mean? Decreasing worker to retiree ratio is a fact. What's wrong with kids using their brains to help find ways to fix this? :shrug:

[Jefferson23]

5. Are you aware of what the definition of the Texas board wants to teach?

You can read more about it if you like, it is not a benign approach, it is an indoctrination.

The ACLU is not opposed to kids using their brains, but Texas would like them to receive information that concludes
FOR them what to think based on limited and inaccurate information.

There is a great deal of info. I suggest you check out the ACLU website.

Here is one current story, give you an idea: Did Texas school board abuse its power?
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/history/did-texas-school-board-abuse-i.html




New ACLU Of Texas Report Documents State Board Of Education Abuse Of Power
Legislature Should Establish Guidelines For Curriculum Standards

http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/05/13

[PSzymeczek]

21. A better way to fix it

is by removing the cap that limits Social Security taxes to the first $106,000 of wages. Let those with 6- or 7-figure incomes pay the tax on all their compensation.

[Politicalboi]

22. I think some with 8 or 9 digits

Should not be able to collect SSI. If you are a millionaire in the hundreds of millions, you should no longer receive SSI. Only if you lose everything, then should you be able to continue and collect and get back wages. Give them other tax breaks, but not SSI.

[marmar]

23. Es serioso?

Umm, the last thing the Texas Bd of Ed wants kids to do is use their brains.

[jaxx]

6. They're trying to raise little bigots to be as crazy as they are.

We need to show our concern to our own school boards too and tell them these books are unacceptable in the USA. Talk about indoctrinating the minds of the kids, jeez.

[dkf]

2. It's scary to think kids might revolt and not want to pay for their elders.

They might even be pissed when they realize the enormity of the debt we have saddled them with. Poor kids.

[kestrel91316]

4. Future kids won't be paying for my SS retirement. I've been paying into the system

since I was a teen, and have no plans to retire before 70, if ever. I will have paid for my retirement through decades of contributions and INTEREST.

[dkf]

9. No you paid for your elders.

Social security is a pass through system. It is not savings. If you die you don't get a lump sum. You can't cash it out. It takes other people paying into the system in order for you to get anything or it takes tax receipts.

[kestrel91316]

17. I am aware of the bookkeeping aspects. I am talking about the PRINCIPLE of the thing.

I have been paying in since age 16, so there had damned better be a fucking payout.

[dkf]

24. Well tell that to the kids.

In principle kids should take care of their parents too. Sometimes that Is how things work and sometimes not.

[glitch]

8. They won't be paying for their elders. Boomers already paid for both themselves and their elders.

We were told boomers were unique because their parents didn't have social security to pay into during the bulk of their working lives. So the much maligned boomers picked up the difference but were promised that was a one time generational tax.

Allegedly the post-boom generations will be paying for themselves. Unless of course the loans/raids on what should have been a locked box aren't repaid. The setup for which is precisely why this generational rift is being cultivated.

[Enthusiast]

13. You are dead right!

This is precisely why this generational rift is being cultivated.

[Enthusiast]

14. 'WE' have not done this.

Those in the government that used social security to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy are responsible starting with the Reagan Administration. The money should be there.

[The Backlash Cometh]

7. Can you imagine the right-wingers today if they didn't have those

socialist safety cushions to help them pay the mortgage?

[Enthusiast]

12. And what is their alternative?

Extreme poverty? Work till you die? The sick and disabled trying to somehow make a living? These right-wingers are horrible. Privatizing social security would only provide profit for a few while disadvantaging millions.

[jtrockville]

10. I hope they study the Great Depression, and the background

for why we have SS in the first place. Today's students can't help but be aware that financial markets can and do collapse.

[nxylas]

15. RW spin on the Depression: it was WW2 that ended it

It is obvious, therefore (to them), that war is a good thing.

[jtrockville]

19. Even so, SS was needed because the financial market crashed.

Regardless of what they consider to be the reason the we were lifted out of the depression, during the depression SS was instituted as a safety net for when the financial markets crash.

[nxylas]

20. In their mythology, it prolonged the Depression

There's a big push this last year or so to piss all over FDR's legacy (though opposition to the New Deal has always been a cornerstone of conservatism), saying that he wasted all that money on poor people, instead of spending it on battleships. Only THE WAR (yay!) managed to undo the damage, saving the economy through the power of manly manliness. Welfare spending is for women and poofs.

It burns them that massive government spending got America out of the hole, but at least they can console themselves with the knowledge that the money was spent on killing people, and not on helping them. That makes them feel better. Strange people.

[brooklynite]

11. Perhaps someone should propose students discuss eliminating oil subsidies...

...strictly as an exercise in critical thinking, you understand.

[Jefferson23]

16. Ha ha, that would be great! n/t

[yellerpup]

18. Outrage! x1,000,000 eom