Did you know that among the many
things Congress is considering, it is considering changing the
That’s the
gist of House Joint Resolution 29.
That
resolution was proposed on March 2, 2005 by Representative Jesse L. Jackson,
Jr. of
That
resolution specifies the following:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HJ00029:@@@L&summ2=m&
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. J. RES. 29
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the
IN THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois (for himself, Ms. CARSON, Mrs.
CHRISTENSEN, Mr. CLAY, Mr. CLYBURN, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. FATTAH, Mr.
FORD, Mr. GUTIERREZ, Mr. JEFFERSON, Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Mrs.
JONES of Ohio, Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island, Ms. KILPATRICK of Michigan, Mr.
KUCINICH, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. MEEK of Florida, Mr. OWENS, Mr. RUSH, Mr.
SCOTT of Georgia, Mr. SERRANO, Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi, Ms. VELAZQUEZ, Ms.
WATERS, Ms. WATSON, Mr. WATT, Ms. MCKINNEY, Mr. CLEAVER, Mr. RYAN of Ohio, Ms.
MILLENDER-MCDONALD, and Mr. AL GREEN of Texas) introduced the following joint
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the
Resolved by the Senate
and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following
article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States,
which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution
when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:
`SECTION 1. All
persons shall enjoy the right to a public education of equal high quality.
`SECTION 2. The
Congress shall have power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation.’
So what’s the difference between a
resolution and a bill?
You can
find out by reading the articles written by Charles W. Johnson,
But basically,
it’s like this:
“The
work of Congress is initiated by the introduction of a proposal in one of four
forms: the bill, the joint resolution, the concurrent resolution, and the
simple resolution. The most customary form used in both Houses is the bill…
Joint
resolutions may originate either in the House of Representatives or in the
Senate…
There
is little practical difference between a bill and a joint resolution and the
two forms are often used interchangeably. One difference in form is that a
joint resolution may include a preamble preceding the resolving clause.
Statutes that have been initiated as bills have later been amended by a joint
resolution and vice versa. Both are subject to the same procedure except for a
joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution. When a joint
resolution amending the Constitution is approved by two-thirds of both Houses,
it is not presented to the President for approval. Following congressional
approval, a joint resolution to amend the Constitution is sent directly to the
Archivist of the
In
other words, a resolution is pretty much the same thing as a bill. It must be acted upon in committee and on the
floor.
H.J.
Res. 29 is a resolution that proposes to amend the United States
Constitution. As such, if approved by
Congress, it would not be presented to the President for approval. It would be sent to the Archivist for
submission to the states for ratification.
Only if ratified by three-fourths of the states within a specific time
period would the resolution then become law as part of the Constitution.
This is
a formidable task. The Constitution is
not easily amended.
H.J. Res. 29, if adopted,
essentially would amend the Constitution in a way the framers never
imagined. It would allow the federal
government, by yet to be adopted legislation, to compel that everyone receive
identically equal education.
H.J. Res.
29 effectively would eliminate the right of states under the tenth amendment to
maintain regulate or control the education of children.
H.J. Res.
29 effectively would eliminate the right of parents to control the education of
their children.
H.J. Res.
29 would grant the authority to the federal government to regulate and control
the education of children and to compel that the education of all children is
equal.
What does “equal” mean under this
resolution?
That’s left
up to Congress to figure out after the resolution is adopted and the
Constitution is amended. It could mean identical. It could mean substantially equivalent. It could mean anything that Congress wants.
It will
mean that state laws regarding education are meaningless and void, unless those
state laws mirror the federal laws or implement the federal laws.
That is a
huge change from existing constitutional law.
As the
Tenth Amendment of the constitution reads now, “The powers not delegated to the
The
Constitution does not specifically delegate to the
The federal
government has the constitutional authority to spend money and so it spends
money for education by granting the money to the states if the states, in turn,
adopt state laws that mirror the federal laws.
That’s how all of our current federal “education” laws are adopted
constitutionally.
Right now,
the states are not required to adopt any law that mirrors a federal law. The states can refuse the money and educate
children in any way they so choose. Most
states have accepted the money and therefore, become required to do as the
federal government desires. The point is,
now our individual states still have the right to say no to the federal government.
That right
could cease to exist if H.J. Res. 29 is adopted and ratified.
H.J. Res. 29 amends the Constitution
to say: “. All persons shall enjoy the right to a
public education of equal high quality.”
While it
sounds laudable, the problems are many.
First and foremost, by stating that “all
persons shall enjoy the right”, the Constitution would grant a
constitutional right to all persons regarding education.
The Constitution would delegate the power of
education to the federal government.
How would it do that? It would do that because the second part of
the resolution says: “The Congress shall have power to enforce and implement
this article by appropriate legislation.”
This is a huge change.
Congress would have the delegated power to adopt, to implement, and to enforce laws
ensuring that “all persons” “enjoy the right” to a “public education” of “high
quality.”
In
addition, there is the problem of the term “equal high quality”. What exactly does that mean?
It’s pretty clear what the proponents mean by
“equal”. One would presume they are
endeavoring to achieve “identical” education. The question remains, “equal” to
what? What is the standard to which they
strive to achieve? What does “high
quality” mean? Is it high quality
according to the subjective opinion of a particular Board of Education? Is it high quality according to the
subjective opinion of a testing company?
Is it high quality according to the parents of the children in the
school? Is it high quality according to
the teachers in the school? What exactly
is the standard to be met and who decides what that standard is? Apparently, all of that is left up to
Congress to decide as well.
What if a
child did not want an identically equal education? What if a child wanted to pursue his own
ideas? What if a child was totally
fascinated by science, but could care less about literature? Would those children be compelled to receive
an education identical to their peers, in spite of their interests, desires,
and their own way of pursuing happiness?
What
role will your state’s legislature or executive branch have in this? Absolutely none.
What happens to your existing state laws
regarding education? Well, the United
States Supreme Court, in 1824 in a case called Gibbons v.
What does
that do to your right to homeschool?
That depends on what laws the federal
government adopts, or already has adopted.
It also depends on what your state’s laws
say. If your state’s laws are in
conflict with the federal laws, your state’s laws may become null and void.
If the federal laws say that “all persons”
shall “enjoy the right” to a “public education” of “high quality”, and that
homeschoolers are to “enjoy” the right to an education “equal” to that of a
“public education”, then homeschoolers may have to instruct their children
using an “education of high quality” “equal” to that in the public school.
Suffice it to say that a constitutional
amendment delegating the power of education to the federal government would
eviscerate the tenth amendment protection under state law that parents and
state legislatures currently enjoy. They
could no longer say “no” to the federal government.
There
remains another question: Do the
co-sponsors of this resolution understand the implications of this legislation?
If they do, and they still want to propose it,
that’s considerably worrisome.
If they do not, and they think they are trying
to be helpful to parents, there is room for hope that they can be “educated” as
to the error of their ways.
It is doubtful that many truly understand the
implications this will have for state legislatures regarding their right to do
anything about public education.
What
should be done about this?
The good news is that this resolution was
introduced on March 2, 2005, was referred to the Judiciary Committee, and no action has taken place on it to date.
Should
we remain complacent?
No. A
resolution, like any bill, could be acted upon at any time; or, it could be
reintroduced in the next session of Congress.
What is
the solution?
As always, it is important to get to know your
Congressmen, Senators, and their staff.
Call, write, and email them periodically to discuss your opinion about
these pieces of legislation as they are proposed. Explain the unintended consequences and how
your life will be affected by them. Even
if you only speak to staff, they can and will express your sentiment to your
Congressman and Senator. They will
remember there are constituents who care about these issues and the Congressmen
and Senators may have second thoughts about co-sponsoring and voting for this
type of legislation. Contact the staff periodically even when no legislation
threatens you, just to ask if anything is new, or just to thank them for being
there to listen to your concerns. Also, go online and watch what bills are
being proposed. The more eyes we have
watching these government officials and what they do, the more empowered we
will become to act when, and if, necessary.
Attorney
Deborah Stevenson - Executive Director of National Home Education Legal
Defense. – www.nheld.com or email : info@nheld.com
Judy Aron -
Director of Research, NHELD – imjfaron@sbcglobal.net