Navigation

Tag Archives | Arizona

Arizona: AIMS Failed And So Will PARCC and Common Core

By on May 16, 2013 in Education, Government, Quotes 6

Benjamin Franklin said, “Education is the key to unlock the golden door of freedom.” I think that we can all agree that education is paramount to a successful society and that it would behoove us to create a system that promotes and accelerates. However, how do we ensure that our children are best educated?

There is a new program on the block that is getting snapped up by schools around the country called the Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI). In Arizona the AIMS test has been struck out and the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) has taken its place which uses the CCSSI platform. As of right now the teachers have been getting trained of how to teach a CCSSI based classroom. Next Governor Brewer must sign AZ HB2047 to allow the PARCC test be the new standardized test for Arizona. The third phase is for the PARCC test scores to be shared with the federal and other state governments to continue to standardize the test. AZ HB2563 requires the AZ State Board to enforce the PARCC testing. Neither HB2047 or HB2563 have been signed into law but Governor Brewer’s aide Matthew Benson stated, “At the heart of Common Core is the notion of implementing more stringent internationally benchmarked standards. She is 100 percent supportive of the concept.”

If we can encourage our politicians to vote NAY on HB2047 and HB2563, we’ve effectively stopped the Phase II of the implementation of the Common Core.

Debra Goodwin here at TAC has written a good overview of CCSSI and why it is bad in her article called Common Core: An Attack on Freedom and What to Do About it. Columnist Michelle Malkin wrote, “For decades, collectivist agitators in our schools have chipped away at academic excellence in the name of fairness, diversity and social justice. Progressive reformers denounced Western civilization requirements, the Founding Fathers and the Great Books as racist. They attacked traditional grammar classes as irrelevant in modern life. They deemed ability grouping of students (tracking) bad for self-esteem. They replaced time-tested rote techniques and standard algorithms with fuzzy math, inventive spelling and multi-cultural claptrap.” Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Arizona Uses Bill of Rights to Make History on Capitol Grounds

By on December 27, 2012 in Announcements 6

December 15th is National Bill of Rights Day, which was the perfect day to dedicate the nation’s first monument to The Bill of Rights. The monuments were erected right across from the Arizona State Capitol in Wesley Bolin Memorial Plaza.

Positioned upright are the 10 limestone monoliths, all of which stand 10-foot tall. Each stone tablet is carved with large block letters with amazing craftsmenship. The tablets bare roughly 500 words, but are some of the most important words written by our founding fathers.

1. Free speech. 2. The right to bear arms. 3. Freedom from having soldiers take over your house. 4. Freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. 5. The right to due process of law. 6. The right to confront your accusers in an impartial court of law. 7. The right to sue and be sued. 8. Freedom from cruel and unusual punishment. 9. A recognition that other rights exist. 10. The right for states to retain sovereignty from the federal government

MyBillofRights.org Executive Director Chris Bliss, who came up with the idea, has a mission. To “promote an enduring awareness of and respect for the freedoms and the principles guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, through the installation of Bill of Rights monuments and permanent displays in civic spaces across America.”

“It is time for us to rediscover our own Bill of Rights; to elevate it to the position of public prominence it richly deserves; and in so doing to help replant the seeds of America’s greatness so that the generations who follow can share in their bounty as we have,” says Bliss Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Getting the Message Out There

By on June 15, 2012 in Uncategorized 0

Through the social media such as Facebook and Twitter, one can gain a little insight into the mindset of elected officials at all levels of government.  As a New Jerseyan, I follow Governor Chris Christie through his Twitter feed, and frequently share my feelings about his actions, agree or disagree.  Another one who interests me, or did once upon a time, is Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, whom I follow via her Facebook page.

The first thing that got me interested was Governor Brewer’s rhetoric regarding the federal government’s handling of illegal immigration.  My interested doubled when SB1070 was signed into law.  The federal government was (and still is) doing little to nothing about our porous borders, and the costs were (and still are) passed down to state and local governments.  Arizona, being a border state, is one of those especially affected.  Echoes of the grievance in the Declaration of Independence, “He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection,” seem to rise throughout Phoenix, Tucson and other cities throughout the state.

The federal government’s response was to sue the state of Arizona, essentially saying, “You can’t enforce the laws we have on the books!”  Why isn’t that applied to the NDAA or drug laws?  The Obama Administration and the State Department even reported Arizona to the United Nations!  While appalling, this should not be surprising from a President who seeks UN and NATO approval for military action, but not from Congress. Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Arizona State Sovereignty Amendment Back from the Dead!

By on April 30, 2012 in Sovereignty Movement, State Sovereignty, Tenthers, Uncategorized 2

UPDATE: The Arizona Senate passed HCR2004 16-14 the second time around 0n April 30.

HCR:2004 unfortunately failed to pass in the Senate on the third reading of April 24, 2012, with a vote of 14 “Ayes”, 14 “Nays”, and two who did not vote (Steve Gallardo and Frank Antenori). Supporters thought the bill was dead.

However, Senator Yarbrough (who voted no) put forth a motion to reconsider, and the motion carried. To view the vote detail, and to see the breakdown of who voted for or against HCR: 2004, please Click Here.

As Joel Poindexter wrote in the previous Tenth Amendment Center story Arizona Moves to Regain Sovereignty, “The proposed amendment, HCR:2004, is intended to reassert Arizona’s sovereignty as a state, and regain control over much of the state’s lands and resources. According to Section C. of the proposal: “The State of Arizona declares its sovereign and exclusive authority and jurisdiction over the air, water, public lands, minerals, wildlife and other natural resources within its boundaries….” The authors made exceptions for existing military posts, Indian reservations, and federal property, pursuant to the US constitution’s Article I, Section 8, Clause 17.” Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Discussion: Original Jurisdiction

By on August 3, 2010 in Judiciary, Law 1

All of the information below is referenced by Publius-Huldah’s Blog, which uses it to conclude,

ONLY the US Supreme Court has Constitutional Authority to Conduct the Trial of the Case Against Arizona & Governor Brewer.

US Constitution, Article 3, Section 2

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. (emphasis added)

Federalist 81 (Hamilton)

Let us now examine in what manner the judicial authority is to be distributed between the supreme and the inferior courts of the Union.   The Supreme Court is to be invested with original jurisdiction, only “in cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls, and those in which A STATE shall be a party.  ” Public ministers of every class are the immediate representatives of their sovereigns.   All questions in which they are concerned are so directly connected with the public peace, that, as well for the preservation of this, as out of respect to the sovereignties they represent, it is both expedient and proper that such questions should be submitted in the first instance to the highest judicatory of the nation.   Though consuls have not in strictness a diplomatic character, yet as they are the public agents of the nations to which they belong, the same observation is in a great measure applicable to them.   In cases in which a State might happen to be a party, it would ill suit its dignity to be turned over to an inferior tribunal. (emphasis added)

US Code: TITLE 28 > PART IV > CHAPTER 81 > § 1251

§ 1251. Original jurisdiction

(a) The Supreme Court shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all controversies between two or more States.
(b) The Supreme Court shall have original but not exclusive jurisdiction of:

(1) All actions or proceedings to which ambassadors, other public ministers, consuls, or vice consuls of foreign states are parties;
(2) All controversies between the United States and a State;
(3) All actions or proceedings by a State against the citizens of another State or against aliens. (emphasis added)

Federalist 78 (Hamilton) Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Would It Be Ok For A State To Repel An Invasion If The Feds Refused To?

By on May 17, 2010 in Constitution, Foreign Policy 3

After considering the new, much maligned Arizona Immigration Bill, I have decided that it is appropriate and necessary.

After all, if the Mexican Army was to invade Arizona and try to take it as a Mexican providence, and the US Army was busily building our empire overseas, we would expect any remnants of the Arizona National Guard (any which have not been illegally nationalized for a foreign, undeclared war) to defend her sovereign territory wouldn’t we?  Well this is really the same sort of issue.

The Federal Government is in charge (per the Constitution) for the common defense of the union, and they are similarly placed in charge of determining immigration laws.  When they steadfastly refuse (or are unable, or incompetent) to fulfill those duties, it falls on the state government to step in and protect the security of their citizens.

America has been struggling with this issue at the federal level since I was a small child,  and now it has become clear to the citizens of Arizona that they are incapable (or more likely unwilling) to enforce to laws already on the federal books.  The state of Arizona is not (by virtue of her status as a State of the Union) in a suicide pact that requires her to take limitless slings and arrows of welfare state abuse and crime while the Federal Govt. looks on with disinterest.

National Defense

It is indeed hard to believe the stated purpose of the wars in the Middle East is sincere, when the Government refuses to secure our borders!  After all, if they don’t know who is coming across the borders on a daily basis, how can they claim to be conducting war? In reality, the terrorists who were operating in Afghanistan could easily be in strategic cities in America by now and the Federal Government would be none the wiser, yet we claim to be conducting a “War on Terror” by invading foreign lands.

It really makes no difference if you were a cheerleader or a peace protester during the run-up to these wars, this doesn’t pass the laugh test.  Imagine you have a terrible threat to your home- and to defend it, you leave your wife and children there, alone and unarmed……. to go beat the tar out of your neighbor (for a couple of years – while your home and loved ones are being ravaged).  What we are doing is no less ridiculous.

Federalism

What Arizona is doing is actually the way a properly functioning federalist system works. If this law works for Arizona other states will follow, and unlike most issues- once a system arises that works well and is not overly intrusive, the Federal Govt. can follow on with federal legislation without the usual sticky issues such as “unconstitutionality.”

Civil Liberties

I would be remiss not to mention civil liberties.  The legislation has been improved to specifically ban racial profiling, so it is simply a check on people who have committed a “primary infraction.”  In other words, if you get pulled over for speeding they can check your immigration status, but you cannot be pulled over for “driving while brown.”  Now that the law has passed……… being an Illegal immigrant is actually “illegal,” imagine that!

cross-posted from the Oregon Tenth Amendment Center

Continue Reading

New Group: Flagstaff 10th Amendment Meetup

By on July 21, 2009 in Announcements, Groups

Launched on July 20, and based in Flagstaff, Arizona, the Flagstaff 10th Amendment Meetup Group is organized by Blake W. Bowen.

Here’s an introduction from Blake:

This a grassroots group to organize and support our State Sovereignty from an overbearing, usurping Federal Government. We are standing up for the Jeffersonian principles laid out in the Kentucky Resolve of 1798.

If you are fed up with not being heard by our non representing representatives; if you are fed up with a Federal dictatorship spending, printing and borrowing trillions of dollars; if you want the freedom to choose what is best for you and your family then this is a group for you.

The Federal Government looks on us as tools in which to gain more power and control. The American people need to stand up and support the rights of the people to have government that stays within the confines of the Constitution.

Get involved today!

Continue Reading