It would be a terrible loss for Texas to lose Commissioner Scott; but if he were chosen as the new U. S. Secretary of Education under a Republican President, our entire country would benefit.
I believe the first thing U. S. Sect. of Education Robert Scott would do would be to cut the power and control of the U. S. Department of Education over those decisions that should be made by states and locals.
The next thing U. S. Sect. Scott would do would be to put the USDOE on a “fiscal diet.” Under Gov. Perry and Commissioner Scott, the Texas Education Agency has undergone a complete reorganization and has cut 333 actual jobs — a 32% cut in TEA personnel, yet the Agency is still able to function efficiently.
Below is Rick Hess’ interview with Commissioner Scott, and I have posted my own comments toward the bottom of the page.
Robert Scott has been the commissioner of education in Texas since 2007. Before that, he was interim commissioner from 2003 to 2004 and chief deputy commissioner from 2004 to 2007 until he was appointed commissioner.
Of late, Texas has been in the news for any number of high-profile decisions, including passing on Race to the Top, not signing onto the Common Core state standards, and opting out of the Council of Chief State School Officers.
Especially with Texas Governor Rick Perry now drawing attention as the newly installed favorite in the Republican presidential field, including some harsh words from the Secretary of Education, I thought it’d be a good time to chat with Scott about his take on things. Here’s what he had to say.
Rick Hess: As you know, Secretary Duncan recently criticized Texas’s schools, saying that they have “really struggled” under Governor Perry and that “far too few of their high school graduates are actually prepared to go on to college.” He said, “You have seen massive increases in class size” and that “I feel very, very badly for the children there.” Did Duncan get it right? What was your reaction to his comments?
Robert Scott: I corrected him because he made several glaring errors. He talked about our graduation rates being among the worst in the nation. I pointed out that if you look at the [National Governors Association] rate, which is the rate all fifty governors agreed to, out of only twenty-six states that had reported as of 2009, we were ranked seventh.
And we have an 84.3 percent on-time graduation rate, which is far better than many other states. And I think this year, when you see other states finally having to report that, you’ll notice a significant increase in Texas’ position nationally.
I also pointed out the NAEP scores bear out that our African American students tied Massachusetts for number one on the math NAEP, [and in eighth grade science] our Hispanic students were eighth [and] our Anglo students…were second only behind the Department of Defense schools. And so, I simply pointed out that his generalizations were wrong.
RH: Any idea what prompted Duncan’s remarks?
RS: I can’t speak to motivations. He might have just called an audible himself and decided he was just going to go off and criticize Texas. The unfortunate part about it was the timing. It was three days before we went back to school. I was trying to focus on back to school as a very positive time for kids and parents, and I think when you send that kind of message out right around back to school it’s counterproductive.
RH: Governor Perry’s decision to join the Presidential contest has turned the spotlight on Texas schools. What are one or two things you are most enthusiastic about having the nation see?
RS: I think continually raising standards…and continuing to do that with end-of-course implementation. That will present its challenges, but I think it’s the right thing to do.
We’re implementing a brand new assessment and accountability system so that we are actually starting to evolve beyond what is just happening on a standardized test.
Our new accountability system will reward school districts and acknowledge them for high-quality career and tech programs, high-quality fine arts programs.
Those are the things I’m most excited about. Moving beyond just the core standardized test areas and talking about what else is going on in the school.
RH: So how does that look in practice? How do you do it?
RS: We’re putting together teams of educators in each of the areas that we’re going to have a distinction award in. They will come up with the standards that schools are measured by to show what is a high-quality career and tech program, what is a high quality fine arts program.
We have our state academic competition for the university interscholastically. That may be a component. Making regionals or semi-finals, that might be a standard that we look to for recognition.
One other thing that we just implemented is called Project Share. It’s a statewide portal where educators and students can go online to access professional development and information. We’ve got ties to NASA, the Smithsonian, the National Archives, PBS. We’ve got about 355,000 teachers and 100,000 students with accounts now, and by the end of the year we’ll have one million students with accounts. And they’ll be able to create e-portfolios of their work. So if they are a career tech student or a fine arts student they will be able to document their successes and their work throughout the school year and throughout their academic career. So it will be about what happens [in schools] on every other day besides the test day.
RH: And is the plan that those materials can then be shared with their next grade-level teacher, or for college admissions?
RS: There’s that. And let’s say students get together and design a model of a bridge. The teacher can invite an architect to come in and critique the design. So they can get feedback and encouragement from both educators and professionals.
RH: What have been the biggest challenges for Texas schools?
RS: As with many other states, our changing demographics present a challenge. I also think we present ourselves with challenges by continuing to raise the bar. And the end-of-course exams will be a bit of a shock. They will be very rigorous, so that’s a challenge we’ve created for ourselves. And the big point will be where we set the cut score initially and how fast do we raise that over time.
RH: Some Texas teachers and parents have suggested that budget cuts have had a devastating effect. What do you make of these concerns?
RS: Well, I think the initial budget cut that was proposed was far different from what actually happened at the end of the legislative session. The supposed cut right now is actually a cut to an increase. It’s an age-old question of government, is a cut to a proposed increase actually a cut?
What the legislature actually did was provide enough additional revenue to fill the hole left by the absent stimulus fund. So they actually put more for general revenue in and were able to level [school] funding.
I testified before the finance and appropriations committee that the initial cut was too much, and asked them to restore six billion dollars. I said that was about what you’d need to implement the new assessment and accountability system, and they ended up funding it at that level.
So I think you’re seeing more districts recognizing the cuts were not as severe as they [were expected to be], and across the state I have seen evidence of districts hiring back teachers.
RH: So, how big a cut was this?
RS: For an average district, it is anywhere from three to six percent per year [from what they had anticipated]. So it’s not a monumental cut to the proposed increase, but it’s still a belt tightening exercise for any district in the state of Texas. This is what I know about working in government. Government tends to grow upon itself. And every now and then it is very healthy to prune, just like you would to a tree or bush that’s growing out of control. It is a healthy exercise to occasionally trim back.
RH: Texas’ stance on Common Core has drawn a lot of attention. Can you say a bit about why you have chosen not to sign on?
RS: Initially they asked us to sign on the standards that hadn’t been written yet. Having been involved in standards development for over two decades this seemed crazy to me–signing onto something you can’t see.
And then you look at our law. Our law requires that when we develop standards we include teachers, parents, the business community, and citizens across the state. I could not have fulfilled the requirements of my state law by adopting the Common Core because the people of Texas didn’t get a seat at that table. Parents and teachers and business leaders weren’t at that table to help draft those standards.
I think they have a fine goal…But I also see the downside in that they are going to lock themselves in to a very monolithic system that is going to be very difficult to change and be very costly to change over time.
In essence they are going to be Microsoft. If so, I want to be Apple. I want to be adaptive, innovative. I told [Common Core supporters] to consider us the control group. I have no malice towards any of them; some of my dear friends are working on this project. I just said we were going to sit it out, and then the [Department of Education] came out and said…we have to do this for Race to the Top, and if you want a waiver for No Child Left Behind you have to do this in some way. So I was skeptical of it and remain skeptical.
RH: It raised eyebrows when you opted out of both rounds of Race to the Top. Can you say a little about what your thinking was? And whether it was a decision made by you, by the Governor, or whomever.
RS: It was a decision made by Governor Perry with my full support. And I made the recommendation after reading the application and seeing the things that Texas does really well receiving very little points. And the things we were going to opt not to do, receiving a number of points, including Common Core. It didn’t make sense for us to put that much effort into an application that we would not be favorably viewed upon. And in the end it worked itself out because the only state west of the Mississippi that won Race to the Top was Hawaii.
RH: You’ve expressed some concerns about the Obama administration’s School Improvement Grants strategy. Can you elaborate?
RS: Well, the four turnaround models are basically the same four models we have been using in Texas for years. In some cases they’ll work and in some cases they won’t. The key is flexibility.
In one case in Houston we had a campus that went from five years low performing to the second highest rating you can get in our system within one year. That certainly worked. The key to that, I think, was the change in the atmosphere and climate on the campus. But also having someone in the central office who can cut through the bureaucracy.
And we’ve learned that [it doesn't necessarily work] when you try to lock in a model and say, “This is the model and to implement this model you have to fire the principal no matter what.” We look at that and say, “What if the principal just got there last year? Or we’re seeing pretty significant growth?”
RH: Broadly speaking, why does it seem that you’ve been so resistant to federal initiatives like RTT and SIG?
RS: Having worked in DC I understand firsthand what it feels like. You have access to enormous amounts of information, and I think over time people tend to mistake access to massive amounts of information for wisdom.
And they tend to get that “inside the beltway” mentality. And I think my resistance has been that innovation begins at the local and state level. And I don’t think you can innovate from Austin, Texas, in a school district any more than you can in Washington, DC. I think you have to have local buy from your teachers and parents in order to really affect long lasting education reform.
RH: It sounds like you don’t have a particular problem with the Obama administration’s approach so much as efforts to drive reform from Washington more generally.
RS: That’s right. I even told [Duncan] this, the first time I met him, which was right after he took office and he laid out his four education reform priorities. And I walked up to him and said, “You are right on target, these are exactly the things I want to be working on.” My difference with the administration is how we get there. I think their target was right on for education reform; I just disagree on how we get there.
RH: Last question. During your time as commissioner, are there any big lessons that stand out?
RS: The big thing that stands out for me is that there is no such thing as a magic bullet in education. Anyone that tells you this one thing will change the course of your education system is either delusional or is lying to you. The other idea is that true reform is something that takes place over time and it has to be built upon and it isn’t something that happens overnight. Standards based reform is something that is a destination and it takes a long time to get there. But you have to be patient when you do it. You can’t just say we’re going to pass a ninety percent passing standard in year one and then scrap everything in year two when you don’t get there. You try to build over time. You try to meet the kids where they are today and then raise standards over time and push the system along as you go.
==============================
DONNA GARNER - Educator for 33 years, appointed by President Reagan, Now Activist Writer
As I have said earlier, it would be a huge blow to Texas to lose Commissioner Scott; but I believe the U. S. Department of Education would look completely different under his leadership as Secretary of Education.
Because I have been highly involved with the standards movement for some time (particularly in Texas), I know the type of leadership that Scott has given to our state. It was after Gov. Perry appointed Robert Scott as Texas Commissioner of Education that our state began its intentional trek into authentic education reform.
Texas now has the best English / Language Arts / Reading (ELAR), Science, and Social Studies standards in the United States. Math standards are in the pipeline.
The new ELAR textbooks are making their way into our public schools, and the new supplementary Science materials and Social Studies textbooks are coming very soon.
The newly developed STAAR/End-of-Course exams built upon the new knowledge-based, academic, grade-level-specific, and explicit curriculum standards will be administered statewide in Spring 2012.
Texas now requires 4 x 4 graduation requirements of almost all high-school students (4 years of ELAR, Science, Social Studies, Math plus foreign languages, P.E., Fine Arts, Speech), but the students can choose the remainder of their classes (5 ½ credits) from a wide range of Career and Technology electives.
I support Gov. Rick Perry and Commissioner Robert Scott’s education philosophy. They believe that students who graduate from Texas’ high schools must be well grounded with four rigorous years in the core academic curriculum; but the exciting and innovative thing is that high-school students in our state now get to choose from a wide range of electives for their other 5 ½ high-school credits.
By taking the electives of their choice, our Texas students have the opportunity to experiment with different career/technology fields; and these experiences will help them determine the direction they want to take in the future.
Gov. Perry and Commissioner Scott believe that all students need to be well educated and informed citizens and that all high-school students need to pass their four years of core curriculum and accompanying end-of-course tests.
This is a very different philosophy from the one being espoused by Marc Tucker and those behind the Common Core Standards (CCS). Their philosophy is to have students take twoyears of high school and then head on off as 16-year olds to what is called “community college” courses and/or career/technology schools instead of taking those last two years of rigorous capstone high-school courses.
(Remember that our Texas public schools have new-and-rigorous requirements that freshmen through seniors must satisfy; and to meet the graduation requirements, students must take a full school day of courses during each of the four years in high school.)
Under the Common Core Standards, what kind of citizens and voters will these 16-year olds make who have not been required to take the rigorous capstone courses in their freshmen through senior years?
What if a student decides in the midst of his “dumbed down” CCS plan that he actually wants to go to a top-tier university? He will have missed those all-essential four years of rigorous courses that will help him get admitted to and be successful in a top-tier university. The student will be shackled into a CCS vocational choice that will limit his horizons for the rest of his life.
More importantly, what kind of American citizens and voters will masses of these “dumbed down, CCS” students make?
What kind of judgment will these CCS “graduates” demonstrate in the life-altering decisions that affect the future of the entire United States?
If Congress would vote tomorrow to cease funding for the Common Core Standards, Race to the Top, the national assessments, and the national database, then all states could set about building new academic standards for their public school students; and states could choose to follow the 4 x 4 rigorous model that has been implemented in Texas under Gov. Rick Perry and Texas Commissioner of Education Robert Scott.
While most of us have been focused on the U. S. debt ceiling and the serious implications for the world’s financial markets, meanwhile another country has just fallen to the Islamists: Turkey.
Turkey has been friendly toward the United States for many years, and one of our largest bases is in Incirlik, Turkey. This base is essential to our operations in the Middle East.
This last Thursday (7.29.11) Reuters News Service and the British Broadcasting Company broke the news that the Islamic Prime Minister of Turkey, Tayyip Erdogan, had seized control of the government and the military when Turkey’s top four military commanders (secularists who have stood against Turkey becoming an Islamist state) resigned under pressure.
These four commanders were in charge of the Turkish air, navy, and land forces. Erdogan’s own choice for commander has now been put in charge of the Turkish military.
DISCREDITING MILITARY COMMANDERS
During the two years leading up to last Thursday, Erdogan and his AKP party have put over 400 people on trial in hearings dominated by Erdogan-appointed judges, including 250 military personnel (almost 10% of their military senior commanders).
More than 58 journalists have been detained without due process for speaking out about the Erdogan government.
On 7.25.11, The Committee to Protect Journalists sent a letter to the Turkish Minister of Justice protesting the detainments. The letter specifically objected to the seizure by the Turkish police of a draft of Ahmet Şık’s unpublished book, The Imam’s Army, that details the influence of Islamic scholar Fethullah Gulen on the Turkish state.
Turkish citizens believe the charges are trumped up in order to discredit those who believe in keeping Turkey a secularist (pro-American/pro-Israeli/pro-European) state.
TURKISH PRIME MINISTER ERDOGAN A FOLLOWER OF FETHULLAH GULEN
Erdogan is a follower of Fethullah Gulen. Since Erdogan took over as Prime Minister in 2002, Gulen/Erdogan/AKP have allegedly orchestrated two trumped up plots called “Ergenekon” and “Sledgehammer.”
FIRST REASON WHY AMERICA SHOULD BE WORRIED
The first reason that we Americans should be concerned about the Islamist coup in Turkey is that Turkey is a member of NATO; and on March 28, 2011, our own President, pro-Muslim Obama, placed our coalition military operations in Libya under NATO control.
This means that our U. S. military personnel fighting under the NATO flag are partially controlled by Turkey which has now turned against America and Israel and is well on its way to becoming an Islamic state. Turkey has the second-largest army in NATO.
SECOND REASON WHY AMERICA SHOULD BE WORRIED
Our second reason for concern is that Fethullah Gulen lives in Pennsylvania, runs his $25 billion international network from there, and is tied to hundreds of Gulen charter schools right here in the United States. (Texas alone has 36 of these Gulen charter schools.)
Gulen plans to take America over in almost exactly the same way that he has taken Turkey over — through the indoctrination of our school children; and ironically, we taxpayers are paying for his Gulen charter schools.
FETHULLAH GULEN BEHIND ENROGAN
Who is behind Turkish Prime Minister Enrogan and the AKP? Fethullah Gulen is an Islamist imam who is considered by many to be the “most dangerous man in the world.”
As Ahmet Sik, a Turkish journalist now under arrest, was being dragged away to jail by the Turkish security forces, he yelled, “Whoever touches the Gulen movement gets burned!”
GULENIST BELIEFS
Turkey’s ruling party is the AKP led by Prime Minister Erdogan. He is a Muslim, believes in Sharia law, and is a follower of Fethullah Gulen.
Erdogan was elected in 2003 and was recently re-elected in June 2011 because working in clandestine operations with the Gulenists, he has been able to control and coerce the Turkish masses through fear.
Two of the basic tenets that Fethullah Gulen uses to indoctrinate his followers at an early age are (1) “taquiya” which is an Islam belief that permits them to lie to “infidels” (i.e., anyone who is not a Muslim), and (2) total secrecy — a belief that if a person never shares a secret, then he never has to worry about his secrets becoming known. In fact, secrecy is an obsession for Gulenists. In Pearls of Wisdom, Gulen explains, “The secret is your slave but you become its slave if you disclose it.”
Dr. Aland Mizell, a leading Gulenist researcher, stated:
What Gulenists want is total power and one-man rule; they want a status so that none could dare to object to them or to their leader, because they sincerely believe that Allah has chosen them to disseminate their brand of Turkish Islam to the world, and therefore that everything they do is right and without mistakes.
THE GULENIST PLOT TO OVERTHROW TURKEY
Prior to Gulen/AKP/Erdogan, Turkey was pro-America, pro-Israel, and pro-European. Turkey is one of 28 members of NATO but has the second-largest army.
Now Gulen/AKP/Erdogan have formed close alliances with Russia, Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, and Syria.
Gulen has set the political agenda in Turkey using his followers in AKP.
Gulen controls a worldwide, $25 billion network of media, financial institutions, associations, and foundations.
Gulen is an Islamist imam who considers himself to be a prophet.
His sermons indicate that he intends for Turkey and the entire world to become Islamist and to follow Sharia law. He wants to establish a caliph and the re-establishment of the Ottoman Empire. Several years ago, Turkish television aired footage of Gulen saying:
You must move in the arteries of the system without anyone noticing your existence until you reach all the power centers…You must wait for the time when you are complete and conditions are ripe, until we can shoulder the entire world and carry it…The philosophy of our service is that we open a house somewhere and, with the patience of a spider, we lay our web to wait for people to get caught in the web…
In 1971, Gulen was arrested in Turkey for holding secret religious activities in which he ran illegal summer camps to indoctrinate youth.
Gulen has groomed his image to make him look as if he is a “tolerant” Muslim, but he is actually a follower of Sa’id-I Nursi, the founder of the Islamist Nur (light) movement.
Gulen/Nur intend for Islamists to take over the world and establish an Islamic caliphate that follows Sharia law.
In 1998, Gulen escaped to America to avoid being questioned about his involvement to overthrow Turkey’s pro-American/pro-Israel government.
Bill Clinton was President at the time. Bill and Hillary Clinton and the CIA welcomed Gulen and promoted him as being an outstanding scholar who represented a peaceful, “secular” form of Islam.
When President George W. Bush took office in January 2001 and America experienced the radical Muslim terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the Bush administration (along with Karen Hughes who now promotes the Gulen charter schools) evidently wanted to appear to be “politically correct” and, therefore, fell for Gulen’s lies.
Now the United States has a Muslim-friendly President in the White House who has appointed Dalia Mogahed as his Muslim advisor. Mogahed is a Gulenist.
GULEN’S LIFE IN AMERICA
Gulen lives in eastern Pennsylvania with 100 followers who guard him and tend to his needs. His male followers try to blend into American society by wearing suits and ties, and they do not marry until age 50. Their spouses are expected to dress in the Islamic manner as dictated by Gulen.
Gulen runs his international network from Pennsylvania, and he and his next-in-command (Nurettin Veren) say they control 75% of the schools and universities in Turkey plus hundreds of schools in 110 countries worldwide.
Gulenists have targeted children to indoctrinate them to become the ruling class of the Islamist, Turkish state. Under Erdogan, textbooks have been changed, Islam has been emphasized, and thousands of imams have been placed into positions as teachers and administrators in the schools.
GULENIST-EDUCATED CHILDREN NOW IN HIGH PLACES
In an interview in 2008, Veren said, “Children whom we educated in Turkey are now in the highest positions. There are governors, judges, military officers. There are ministers in the government. They consult Gulen before doing anything.”
Gulenists have also taken over the 200,000 Turkish police force. Veren said, “There are imam security directors; imams wearing police uniforms. Many police commissioners get their orders from imams.”
Those in the police academies who were not Gulenists were dismissed, and the AKP promotes only those officers who are totally dedicated to Gulen.
In 2008 Endogan ordered the arrests of the people who were speaking out against this Gulen takeover.
Wiretapping by Gulenists has penetrated Turkey to the highest levels, and they have managed to restrist technology so that secretly recorded meetings of those opposed to Gulen/AKP/Erdogan have been made public.
Turkish journalists have also had their wires tapped because the head of the police wiretapping unit is a Gulenist.
Anti-AKP demonstrators have experienced violent police brutality, and private citizens who have spoken out about Erdogan/AKP have been abducted and brutalized.
TURKISH INSTITUTIONS FALL TO GULENISTS
Traditionally, the Turkish military has been the guarantor of the Constitution; but now according to Veren (Gulen’s top man), the Gulenists have entrenched themselves within the military also. Veren stated:
The Fethullahist military officers were once our students, who we financially supported, educated, and assisted. When these grateful children graduated and reached influential positions, they put themselves and their positions at the service of Fethullah Gulen…when Gulen students graduate from the police or military academies — as do the new doctors and lawyers — they present their first salaries to Fethullah Gulen as a gesture of their gratitude.
Gulenists have also taken over the Turkish court system because Erdogan replaced thousands of judges and prosecutors with his own AKP/Gulen followers. Anybody applying for judgeships has to pass an AKP review.
In years past, the Turkish media used to be relentless about exposing government corruption; but when Erdogan came to power in his first term, he filed “frivolous” lawsuits against 63 journalists in 16 publications. This successfully dissuaded journalists’ from ferreting out corruption.
During Erdogan’s ten year rule, his government has seized control of Sabah-ATV, which was Turkey’s second largest media group. Then Erdogan made his son-in-law the CEO of the group.
Now nine of the leading TV, radio stations, and newspapers are all owned by AKP/Gulen.
It is no wonder that Erdogan won re-election in June 2011 since he and the AKP controlled most of the media, the military, the security forces, and the courts.
GULEN — THREAT TO AMERICA
Homeland Security and the U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Service tried to deny Gulen permanent residence in the Unites States. In 2008 Gulen brought a lawsuit against Michael Chertoff of Homeland Security. The Department contended that Gulen did not meet the definition of a person with “extraordinary ability in the field of education” but that he was actually a “leader of a large and influential religious and political movement with immense commercial holdings.” The State tried to prove that the acclaim that Gulen touted was actually sponsored or financed by his own movement.
Gulen evidently managed to “pay off” enough institutions and high-profile people to mount pressure to get his status reversed, and the 29 letters of reference that he filed with his motion came from theologians or Turkish political figures closely associated with his Gulenist movement. The judge ruled in Gulen’s favor, and now he can stay in the United States permanently.
SPREAD OF GULEN SCHOOLS IN TEXAS
One of the most disheartening reports has been the connections of former executive director of the Republican Party and trusted advisor to President George W. Bush, Karen Hughes and her close ties to the Gulen/Cosmos Foundation’s Harmony Schools here in Texas. As you can hear in this video Ms. Hughes is very interested in promoting Harmony Science Charter Schools and accessing Texas tax dollars to create competition for public schools by funding the Gulen/Harmony charter schools.
In a bold move, the Gulen/Cosmos Foundation/Harmony Charter Schools have now branched out from their usual “math and science” venues into a brand new school to open soon in Austin, Texas.
This new Gulen school will be called the Harmony School of Political Science. This means that at taxpayers’ expense, Turkish teachers (many of whom are here on H-1 visas and are Muslims) will be teaching our students “American” history. Can you imagine how these teachers who can hardly speak English and are fresh from Turkey will present such historically significant elements as the Holocaust, the Founding Fathers, the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution?
Yes, all teachers in Texas (including those in the Gulen schools) are to follow the state-approved curriculum requirements; but nothing constrains teachers from teaching those requirements with a particular political spin. Since almost all of the terrorists who have declared jihad against Americans are Muslims, then it should make us very skeptical about having Muslim teachers teach our Texas students to love, respect, and appreciate America.
ACTION STEP
A protest rally will be held on the public sidewalk in front of Harmony School of Political Science – Austin, Texas — on Aug. 30, 2011, from 9:00 to 10:00 A. M.
People in the Austin area should definitely commit to be at the rally since this Harmony School of Political Science is being opened right there in your own city.
Please bring signs (without any wooden or metal stakes), wear T-shirts, display “sandwich-type” posters (affixed to front and back of body), or create other visual displays that are in line with the City of Austin laws (posted at bottom of this e-mail).
Winter 2009, pp. 55 – 66 – The Middle East Quarterly – “Fethullah Gülen’s Grand Ambition: Turkey’s Islamist Danger” by Rachel Sharon Krespin, director of the Turkish Media Project at the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Washington D.C.
ACTION STEP: All patriotic American taxpayers should be alarmed over the spread of the Islamist Gulen charter schools. Texans in particular need to contact all their Legislators and alert them to the safeguards (listed below) that must be placed in the charter school bills now making their way through the legislative process.
The free trips to Turkey and the campaign contributions given to our Texas Legislators by the Gulenists are highly troubling and leave taxpayers wondering how objective can our Legislators actually be about their votes on these charter school bills that financially enable the spread of Gulen charter schools. Is this yet another example of “pay for votes”? — Donna Garner
When the New York Times decides to do investigative journalism, they have the resources and staff to find things out that few others can discover. I am sure you will want to go to this NYT link to view the photos and other graphics which will give you more of an understanding about the Gulen charter schools. Charter Schools Tied to Turkey Grow in Texas
The NYT, however, also has shortcomings because of its left-leaning political bias that has kept their reporters from including very important aspects of the dangers of Fethullah Gulen and his Gulen charter schools.
Below the NYT article, I have posted links to other articles that explain the many dangers of Fethullah Gulen and his indoctrination of our nation’s youth into Islam, Sharia law, and anti-Americanism.
Fethullah Gulen is an Islamist imam who has been behind the successful efforts in Turkey to turn that country into an armed camp that is now anti-American. Its security police force has been almost totally infiltrated by Gulenists, and Turkey is on the verge of joining up with the rest of the Muslim world against the United States and Israel.
As we speak, our Texas Legislature is in Special Session and is moving toward providing even more funding for Gulen charter schools. A faithful few, such as Peyton Wolcott, are trying to convince Legislators to look more deeply into the financial “payoffs” that Gulen has given to elected officials.
Please go to this link to see who has taken free trips to Turkey and/or reaped huge campaign contributions from Gulen-controlled entities. Is it any wonder that these Texas Legislators are promoting the establishment of more Gulen schools in our state? “THE ENVELOPE PLEASE”
Peyton Wolcott is presently leading an effort to force the Texas Legislature to include in its pro-charter-school bills three safeguards to protect the Permanent School Fund which by law in Texas is supposed to be used for students’ textbooks. The Legislature is trying to take some of the PSF funds and make those dollars available for charter school bonds, including more Gulen charter schools.
Wolcott has made the case that all charter schools should (1) have to show proof of U. S. citizenship for board members (e.g., ISD trustees) and top administrators; (2) post online the names, titles, and bios of board and top administrators, and (3) post their checkbook registers online so that taxpayers will know how their tax dollars are being spent.
ACTION STEP: If you are a fellow Texan, you must contact your legislators and alert them to the alarming content of this NYT article, to the links posted under the article, and to the safeguards that Wolcott and others are trying to get the Legislators to include in the charter school bills.
Here is a YouTube (Parts 1 and 2) by a TV news station in Pennsylvania that tells of the FBI investigation of the Gulen schools in Pennsylvania and across the country:
The Texas Senate passed SR 85 on Jan. 25, 2011. Guess who was honored: Fethullah Gulen. “WHEREAS, The Senate of the State of Texas is pleased to recognize Fethullah Gˇlen for his ongoing and inspirational contributions to the promotion of global peace and Understanding…”
DONNA GARNER - Educator for 33 years and was appointed by President Reagan, Now Activist Writer
By Donna Garner
ACTION STEP: It does not seem that there is much the grassroots can do to redirect the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) redistricting map now. However, we certainly can have input into Gov. Perry’s selection of the new SBOE chair.
Please contact Gov. Perry’s office (contact information posted further on down the page) and ask him to appoint any of the following SBOE members as the chair: David Bradley, Terri Leo, Barbara Cargill, or Ken Mercer because they have proved themselves to be consistent conservatives on the Board and have been involved in adopting the very significant, new-and-improved English, Science, and Social Studies standards. Charlie Garza is a fine conservative member also, but he has only been on the Board for a few short months. –
“Gov Perry’s Poor Choice Could Hurt Texas for Ten Years” by Donna Garner 6.6.11
Please see the article posted at the bottom of this e-mail in which Gov. Perry explains why he chose not to veto the Texas State Board of Education redistricting map. Gov. Perry stated, “…I’d rather the Legislature deal with that issue rather than the courts, and that was the option there. If I vetoed that bill, then it went to the courts, and it could have been even worse.”
However, this statement is not entirely accurate. It is true that Gov. Perry did have to make a decision on the SBOE redistricting map issue by Wednesday, May 18, 2011; but if he had chosen to veto the SBOE redistricting map, then it would not have gone straight to the courts but would have gone back to the Legislature for another vote to check for an override veto.
In the weeks leading up to May 18, over 5,000 people signed a petition to the Governor; and 24 Republican and/or tea party leaders representing thousands of other Texans had driven to Austin to produce a YouTube shown widely throughout the state and nation. Our message was, “Gov. Perry, please stand with us Texans and veto the SBOE map.”
2nd Video produced….
Because of this public pressure from so many in the grassroots, numerous Texas Legislators had admitted they were having “buyers’ remorse” over previously having voted for Sen. Seliger’s highly questionable E120 SBOE map. (If left in place, E120 would determine SBOE districts for the next ten years.)
In all fairness to the House and Senate members, they never even got to debate E118, the map that the majority of SBOE members preferred. In fact, Pat O’Grady (who drew up E118 and also had drawn up the SBOE map ten years ago that had successfully met all court challenges) was never allowed to present his supportive data on the floor of either the House or the Senate. Various legislators stated that they did not even know there was an E118 but voted for Seliger’s E120 at his behest.
If Gov. Perry had vetoed the SBOE map and it had gone back to the House and the Senate for another vote, we in the grassroots believe there was a good chance the Legislators would have insisted that E120 and E118 both be brought out on the floor for debate. In that scenario, it is certainly possible that E118 would have been approved. If not, at least we voters would have had an up-or-down vote by all Texas Legislators for us to use in the elections of 2012.
One other possibility existed also: If the House and the Senate had not been able to bring the SBOE redistricting map to a final vote before the end of the Regular Session, then Gov. Perry could have added it to the Special Session where the two-thirds majority rule in the Senate is no longer required.
By Gov. Perry refusing to veto Sen. Seliger’s E120 map, a valuable chance for a revote was missed that might have changed the entire future for the next ten years of our 4.7 million Texas public school students.
GOV. PERRY’S ACTUAL OPTIONS
Prior to sending my 5.19.11 detailed report to Gov. Perry about what had led up to Sen. Seliger’s questionable E120 SBOE redistricting map, I called the Governor’s Legislative Office and went word-for-word over the redistricting regulations as referenced in the official source produced by Lt. Gov. Dewhurst and Speaker Straus (Texas Legislative Council). A few important questions had arisen about the details of the legislative process, and I wanted to make sure I had it right.
At the end of our conversation, I sent the person in the Legislative Office the following written statements; and he said they were accurately aligned with the official TLC source:
The rules for Senate and House redistricting maps follow one set of rules. The rules for Congressional and Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) redistricting maps follow yet another set of rules. One big difference between the two sets of rules is that the Congressional and SBOE redistricting maps do not ever go to the Legislative Redistricting Board.
TEXAS STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION RULES
Redistricting bills follow the same path through the legislature as other legislation.
Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) redistricting bills may be introduced in either or both houses.
Following final adoption by both houses, the SBOE redistricting bill is presented to Gov. Perry for approval.
(1) Gov. Perry may sign the bill into law.
(2) Gov. Perry may allow it to take effect without a signature.
(3) Gov. Perry may veto it.
If the SBOE bill is vetoed and cannot be overridden with a 2/3 majority in each of the two houses, Gov. Perry may call a special session to consider the matter; or the matter may be taken up in state or federal district court.
The final SBOE plan is filed with the Texas Secretary of State and is subject to federal preclearance under the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The plan adopted, in most cases, becomes effective for the following primary and general elections, pending preclearance and judicial review.
=====================
To learn what actually happened behind the scenes that led to the demise of Gail Lowe as chair of the SBOE, please read the following. Then please contact Gov. Perry and ask him assertively NOT to appoint Bob Craig as the Chair:
On a conference call with bloggers today, Gov. Rick Perry explained his decision to allow the State Board of Education redistricting map to become law without his signature. Many conservatives are upset about how the map treats some of the more conservative members of the State Board of Education.
“I wasn’t particularly happy with that piece of legislation,” Perry said. “I think there was some clear evidence from my perspective that the Legislature was engaged in some gerrymandering – I’ll use that term – against some of the more conservative members of the State Board of Education. As disappointed as I was in that map, I’d rather the Legislature deal with that issue rather than the courts, and that was the option there. If I vetoed that bill, then it went to the courts, and it could have been even worse.”
The reason the Texas State Board of Education has been able to move forward with the adoption of new-and-improved curriculum standards (English / Language Arts / Reading, Science, Social Studies, and now Math) has been made possible by the person in charge — the chair of the SBOE. That is Gail Lowe.
Gail Lowe has not yet been brought before the Senate Nominations Committee for confirmation. If this does not occur before midnight on Monday, May 30, her term will expire.
Unless Gov. Perry is immediately ready with a new appointee (which would not require Senate confirmation during this session), then Bob Craig would automatically become the new chair since he is presently vice-chair of the SBOE.
Bob Craig is one of the biggest left-leaning Republicans on the SBOE. He and Thomas Ratliff share a common agenda, and the SBOE would be doomed. All progress toward authentic academic reform would stop under Bob Craig.
Bob Craig’s agenda is tied to the “education blob,” the progressivists, the constructivists, the whole-language lovers, the leftists, Texas Freedom Network, and those who are satisfied with the miserable status quo in our public schools.
Gail Lowe is respected by both sides of the SBOE aisle. She is fair, treats everyone with respect, is a great communicator, is organized, is logical-minded, knows her Roberts’ Rules of Order, does not fall apart or get flustered in the most emotion-packed meetings, follows through with her responsibilities, and gives wise but knowledgeable statements to the news media.
Gail Lowe and the conservative leaders on the SBOE know Texas schools can do better, and they have adopted new standards with new curriculum and new tests to follow. These are in the process of being implemented right now, and the future of Texas’ public school children has never looked brighter!
The SBOE’s steady push to put our public school children on the road to education reform would cease if Bob Craig becomes the chair.
Bob Craig is everything that would destroy the good work of the conservative leaders on the SBOE. He is an attorney from Lubbock, and the conservatives in that area know he talks out of both sides of his mouth.
Thomas Ratliff - Registered Lobbyist - SBOE Rep.
It was Bob Craig and Thomas Ratliff who decided to rewrite the Texas Constitution by raiding the Permanent School Fund. (Please see SBOE Ken Mercer’s article posted further on down the page.)
Bob Craig and Thomas Ratliff have spent a great deal of time in Austin this legislative session, and they have been frequently seen glad-handing with legislators. It is no coincidence that the SBOE redistricting map drawn up and passed by the legislature gives obvious favoritism to Craig and Ratliff!
We who care about the future of our public school children cannot sit idly by and allow the clock to run out on Gail Lowe.
I am begging you to call each one of the Senate Nominations Committee members today. E-mails probably won’t work because of the shortness of time left for action in the legislature. Tell each one of them that you absolutely will remember in 2012 what they decide to do on this confirmation of Gail Lowe.
I went to see Sen. Deuell over a month ago and asked him to confirm Gail Lowe. He mumbled something about “not yet having the votes to confirm her.” I told him then how critically important Lowe is to have as the chair of the SBOE and that if SBOE members on both sides of the aisle respect her and want her as the chair that the least he, his committee, and the Senate could do was to honor those who work most closely with her.
It also would be a good idea to call Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst’s office (512 463-0001) because he is the one who nominated Sen. Deuell for this chair.
The Senate Nominations Committee confirms multiple-hundreds of confirmations each session. Most people’s confirmations do not even require any discussion. The idea that Gail Lowe’s confirmation has been kept sitting on the shelf all this legislative session speaks worlds about the left-leaning agenda that has pervaded this legislative session.
The truth is that the Senate Nominations Committee should be commending Gail Lowe for her excellent leadership of the SBOE — not making her sit there holding her breath and watching the clock all session.
SENATE NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE (*with Young Conservatives of Texas ratings)
Deuell, Chair — 41% — (512) 463-0102
Hegar, Vice-Chair — 67% — 512) 463-0118
Fraser — 82% — 512) 463-0124
Nelson — 78% — (512) 463-0112
Nichols — 63% — (512) 463-0103
Rodriguez — new this session — (512) 463-0129
Mercer Opposes $2 Billion Raid of Children’s Fund!
I strongly disagree with two of my colleagues on the State Board of Education – Bob Craig (R – Lubbock) and freshman Thomas Ratliff (R – Mt. Pleasant) – who led an effort to change the Texas Constitution and take $2 billion away from the principal (e.g., corpus, assets) of the Permanent School Fund (PSF).
Ratliff — believed to be the only elected state official who is also a registered, full-time professional education-related lobbyist to the Texas Legislature — testified before the April 19 Senate Finance Committee on the proposal. He stated that “we” (meaning the SBOE members) had discussed this item.
As a matter of public record, that proposal to raid the PSF of $2 billion was never posted as an official agenda item for the April 13 – 15, 2011, SBOE meeting; there was no public comment; and it was never publicly discussed or debated by the full membership of the SBOE. The proposal lobbied to the Senate Finance Committee was an initiative discussed and signed behind closed doors.
I believe the closed-door meeting of SBOE members to discuss the $2 billion raid of the PSF may be a direct violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act.
The PSF is commonly known as the “children’s textbook fund.” The state’s early-day founders created the endowment to help fund public education; and since 1919, the PSF has been used to ensure that Texas schoolchildren receive free textbooks.
However, because of the economic downturn after the Civil War, the original fund was raided and depleted by the 1865 Legislature.
Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson reminded the Senate Finance Committee at its April 19, 2011, meeting that in 1876 Texas changed its Constitution to forever protect the children’s textbook fund from any future raids. That is why the legal term today is the “Permanent” School Fund.
When I took my oath of office as a State Board of Education member, I promised to uphold the Constitution, which demands that the SBOE protect and preserve the PSF for future generations, and use any proceeds to provide free textbooks for our 4.8 million public schoolchildren.
The Texas Constitution provides a key tenet of American exceptionalism: the separation of powers. Permanent funds are managed by the executive branch, separate from those who appropriate funds, i.e., the Legislature. This Constitutional separation should prevent any attempt to raid an endowment fund meant to be permanent.
I firmly agree with Sen. Kevin Eltife (R -Tyler) who correctly painted the PSF proposal as both a “raid “of the children’s fund and “bad public policy”!
In the Senate Finance discussion, Sen. Florence Shapiro (R – Plano) and Sen. Dan Patrick (R – Houston) both correctly noted that such a “one-time” $2 billion proposal would move authority for PSF spending decisions away from the executive branch (the SBOE) to the legislative branch. That is a bad precedent to set.
Sen. Ed Lucio (D – Brownsville) also expressed a concern that the proposal, if passed, could impact the rating of guaranteed school bonds that are backed by the value of the fund.
Thomas Ratliff, with just three months of SBOE service, concluded his testimony to the Senate by stating, “We could not sit back and not do anything.” I take exception to Ratliff’s comment.
In 2010, under the leadership of SBOE Chair Gail Lowe (R – Lampasas) and then-PSF Committee Chair David Bradley (R – Beaumont), critical discussions were held with Lt. Governor David Dewhurst and Land Commissioner Patterson to help ensure the SBOE could pay out the most PSF funding possible while still being prudent in managing the endowment for the long term.
The results were a payout from earnings, as allowed by the Constitution, of $1.2 billion for the current budget and another commitment of $1.8 billion for education for the upcoming biennium. The careful management by the members of the SBOE had resulted in protecting the principal (e.g., corpus, assets) of the fund. This was a major accomplishment by the SBOE.
Next, conservatives on the SBOE joined with Gov. Rick Perry and the Texas Republican Congressional delegation to call for a repeal of the federal budget amendment authored by Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D – Austin) that withheld $830 million from Texas schools.
Texas now has that $3.0 billion from the PSF payout from earnings plus the $830 million that the Doggett amendment held back from our Texas schools. This adds up to $3.8 billion in new education funding. Thomas Ratliff’s public comment to the Senate Finance Committee in which he accused the past SBOE members of sitting back and doing nothing was truly out of line.
The proposal led by Craig and Ratliff to raid $2 billion from the principal of the Permanent School Fund to meet a budget deficit is both bad public policy and bad precedent. The unprecedented promotion of the idea of robbing $2 billion from the PSF without the issue being posted on the SBOE agenda, without public comment or debate, and without any advice from legal or investment counsel, may be a direct violation of the Open Meetings Act and an unauthorized, if not outright illegal, action.
Ken Mercer (R – Bexar) is a current Member of the State Board of Education and a former State Representative. Mercer now represents 1.85 million constituents in twelve counties including Blanco, Burnet, Caldwell, Comal, Gillespie, Guadalupe, Hays, Kendall, Llano and parts of Bell, Bexar and Travis.
.jpg)
Please attribute to Alice Linahan with Voices Empower
