Texas we have a BIG Problem~ Congressman Culberson’s Language in H.R. 5 the ESEA/NCLB Reauthorization

The language in H.R. 5 on Parental Rights was written by Texas  Rep. John Culberson. We need to pressure him and every other Congressmen to VOTE NO on H.R. 5 completely! He very well may not know what the reality is of this language. They may vote this week!   TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!



HOUSTON OFFICE- Phone: (713) 682-8828 Fax: (713) 680-8070

WASHINGTON, DC OFFICE- Phone: (202) 225-2571 Fax: (202) 225-4381

Call your Congressmen NOW AND SAY #STOPHR5 Vote NO on H.R. 5

House – 

This language may be detrimental to the rights of a Mother and Father of a child. Pages 552-555. When putting the language that says the state has authority over parental rights in federal statute, that INDEED removes the unalienable right of the parent to a lower level -to the state. Parents have the ultimate authority over their children. The federal government nor the state has that authority over parents and we MUST not give it to the state. The redefinition on parent also included in the language is on page 488… a person standing in “loco parentis.” This strips parents of their rights and gives it to the school.  Culberson’s File~ 

Please listen to the two audio clips below from this week’s Women on the Wall Conference Call for a clear understanding of the reality on the ground for parents and our children. 

HR 5 (a.k.a., Student Success Act) – The House Committee on Education and the Workforce approved this bill on a vote of 21 to 16 on 2.11.15:

Bill Information:

Bill Text:

Page 552 – 553:

‘‘SEC. 6561. STATES TO RETAIN RIGHTS AND AUTHORITIES THEY DO NOT EXPRESSLY WAIVE. ‘‘(a) RETENTION OF RIGHTS AND AUTHORITIES.— No officer, employee, or other authority of the Secretary shall enforce against an authority of a State, nor shall any authority of a State have any obligation to obey, any requirement imposed as a condition of receiving assistance under a grant program established under this Act, nor shall such program operate within a State, unless the legislature of that State shall have by law expressly approved that program and, in doing so, 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.

‘‘(b) AMENDMENT OF TERMS OF RECEIPT OF FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.—An officer, employee, or other authority of the Secretary may release assistance under a grant program established under this Act to a State only after the legislature of the State has by law expressly approved the program (as described in sub-section (a)). This approval may be accomplished by a vote to affirm a State budget that includes the use of such Federal funds and any such State budget must expressly include any requirement imposed as a condition of receiving assistance under a grant program established under this Act so that by approving the budget, the State legislature is expressly approving the grant program and, in doing so, waiving the State’s rights and authorities to act inconsistently with any requirement that might be imposed by 16 the Secretary as a condition of receiving that assistance.

Here is the gift from Anita Hoge that may just surprise Parents, Grandparents and Tax Payers. 

“Below is a link to retrieve your state contracts for your state longitudinal data system. This link will give you access to your state grant with the National Center for Education Statistics so that you can see how your particular state fits into the national data collection scheme. Each state can find their grant at the link below. You can identify how your state established a “national unique ID” for each and every student in your state. You can connect the “womb to workplace” data system and prove how this workforce data collection tracks individuals, including wages. Your “national unique ID” identifies your child through mazes of data trafficking that is supplied to the federal government. Outside contractors have access to personally identifiable information on your family for free.

Please see the link below. Scroll down to your state. Click on your state. Click on each of the PDF’s under each grant application. In some instances there are more than one. Enjoy!

National Center for Education Statistics Grants for State Longitudinal Data Systems

Texas Took the Money ~ 

Texas Longitudinal Data Base System

President Obama’s Executive Order (EO 12866) has allowed personally identifiable information to be collected, dispersed for research, and given to third party contractors by “unlocking” the Family Education Rights in Privacy Act, FERPAYour state is no exceptionThis is the collection of information on your “whole child.” If your child is about 28 years or younger, they have a national ID and a federal dossier. This data system has been announced by the National Assessment of Educational Progress as a prototype for a new kind of Census – a psychometric dossier, on every child, adolescent, and adult including information on their child’s attitudes, values, opinions, and beliefs, “womb to workplace.”

The three following federal initiatives have nationalized education in the United States which were initiated without the authorization of Congress and done by Presidential Executive Order or by fiat through Secretary of Education Duncan:

  1. The Common Core copyright that standardized a “model” curriculum and standardized the standards in a 50 state strategy creating a national curriculum and a national test.
  2. The “unlocking” of data through FERPA opening the floodgates of personally identifiable information (PII data) to be released to researchers, foundations, testing companies, curriculum and software designers, etc., and allowing the identification of individuals in a longitudinal data bank housed in the National Center of Education Statistics with a “national unique ID.” The data system will be used to monitor compliance to Common Core birth through retirement, called a student “snapshot.”
  3. ESEA ~ The illegal waiver for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Flexibility Waiver, the Flex Waiver for No Child Left Behind lowers poverty guidelines to 0% so that ALL children would qualify for Common Core remediation under Title I that blankets a school. It changes the funding criteria of Title I to follow the child. It initiates teacher evaluations and teacher training to monitor whether teachers are teaching Common Core. And it expands Common Core to include dispositions, non-academic standards, and social and emotional learning in the affective domain, which are attitudes, values, opinions, and beliefs referred to as character or grit.

    Remediation or Interventions in Your “Whole Child”

    By using Special Education funds called IDEA (Individuals With Disabilities Education Act), the interventions in Common Core – both “academic and behavioral” remediation of individual students – are used to be sure each student achieves these Government desired attitudes and values. These interventions are called Response to Interventions, or RTI or multi-tiered system of support. This is the real issue of government interventions into the thoughts, feelings, attitudes, dispositions, and beliefs of American children. By using Special Education teams that are funded to go into the regular classroom they will screen ALL students. The controlled literacy piece of this agenda uses behavioral scripts, researched from BF Skinner’s operant conditioning and individually prescribed instruction, programmed into computer courses, to prepare the future workforce for “functional” literacy. This is the science-based research that the government touts as being “effective.” Parents are not truthfully informed of this process, and the behavioral interventions will proceed on ALL students without your knowledge and without parental consent. Your child will be observed, screened, tested, remediated, and repeated until they meet the government Common Core Standards. Period.

    This is NOT the Special Education that you think it is. This is NOT about an IEP. This has nothing to do with truly educating your child. It’s mental health screening, America. This data is being fed into state and national data banks as soon as your child is identified with a “national unique ID.” Where your state is in the process will depend on when your state applied for these federal grants in order to come up to speed with the technology and teacher training. The Early Learning grants identify infants and pre-schoolers, and also mandate screening the social and emotional development or affective domain.

    This psychological or mental health data on personalities, attitudes, values, opinions, beliefs, and social and emotional learning that a teacher is subjectively monitoring is scored on a template. The intervention team sets up a plan to remediate your child’s values, opinions, or beliefs. What are the government’s criteria for interpersonal skills, or values, or attitudes? How will proficiency be attained? How do you measure a proficiency in “cooper-ability” in toddlers? 


 To listen to the full interview with Anita Hoge please click below.

Sign In