Common Core Constitutional Cut Up

Sixth Grade students in Bryant, Arkansas were given a curious assignment as part of theCommon Core curriculum.   The History class at Bryant Middle School had an assignment aimed at inspiring persuasive and engaging presentations.  All the groups of eleven year olds had to do was prioritize and revise the Bill of Rights.

 The History class work is premised on the idea that the government of the United States has determined that the Bill of Rights is outdated.  The assignment asked students to assume the persona of an excerpt on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights named to the "National Revised Bill of Rights (NRBR) Task Force, which is charged with ensuring that the "pursuit of happiness remains guarded in the 21st Century".   The substantial objective of this exercise was to excise two Amendments and add two Amendments.

This exercise was fundamentally flawed on its substance.  This faux NRBR task force was supposed to protect the "pursuit of happiness".  But that phrase is in the Declaration of Independence (1776) not the Bill of Rights.

These middle school students had not been schooled on the reasons why the Bill of Rights was introduced by James Madison in 1789 and ratified in 1791.  They have no idea that the Constitution would not have been ratified by several of the States without the prospect of a Bill of Rights.   Obviously, the arguments by the Federalists and Anti-Federalists would be far beyond their ken in civics. 

Then there is the inconvenient truth that the Federal Government does not dictate which Amendments are outdated and need to be pruned.  The United States Supreme Court does not inherently decide if laws are outdated, they are tasked with declaring what is constitutional.   Justices do not turn to task forces for their opinions. 

There are mechanisms to revise the Constitution, either through a cumbersome Amendment process ( 2/3rds vote of the House and Senate and 3/4ths ratification by States), a Constitutional Convention or an Article V  Amendments stemming from the States as has been elucidated by Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments (2013) as well as the Madison Coalition.  A federal NRBR task force does not fit into this real life civic scenario, much less deciding what is outdated.

In addition, Amendments are not "pruned",  but they may be superceded by later Amendments. Consider the Eighteenth Amendment (1919) establishing Prohibition of Alcohol and the Twenty-First Amendment (1933) which repealed it.  As Glenn Beck opined: "[T]his document (the Constitution) is great for one reason: they left in the scars."  That way we can remember our mistakes as well as our growth.

But the Bill of Rights Bill of Rights are understood to be to inalienable rights, which are not granted by government but flow from Divine Providence to "We the People".    They ought not be deemed outdated.

Years ago I remember a civics exercise which was part of my secondary school education that somewhat related to this assignment.  Groups of students were told that they were abandoned on a remote island and needed to draw up rules for living together.  The educational objectives may have involved analyzing a situation, group interaction and forensic presentation.   For me, the exercise underlined the genius of the American Constitutional system for ensuring freedom of individuals while living in a larger society, and whet a lifelong interest in public policy.  But it did not presuppose that we were Constitutional experts or ignoring our established norms of our polity.

The Bryant School District is proud to embrace the Common Core standards to improve students literacy and math skills.   Common Core seeks to augment these skill sets through interdisciplinary learning.  Thus this History assignment was supposed to test reading, writing and language skills on informational texts.

A recent rhetorical rumble at the CATO Institute had Chester Finn, Jr. from the Fordham Institute defending Common Core Standards     One of the supposed virtues of Common Core is teaching skill sets not particular knowledge, allowing communities and educators to have subject matter which they deem important.  As this Bryant Middle School 6th grade History exercise shows, it was nominally about the Constitution but had little reference to understanding it while perpetuating the progressive conceit of the Constitution being a Living Document.

Unfortunately, this History exercise was premised on the Patriot Act debate, which is asking a lot of middle school students, particularly without the background knowledge of history or civics.  Moreover, the instructions of the exercise circumvents the Constitution Amendment process in trying to prune and update it.  The subject matter is so cutting edge, it is hard not to believe that the teacher will not color the debate and the student presentations.  Such shaping of opinion in the guise of education shows why some conservatives are so chary about Common Core. 

Reporting Limitations on the Freedom of Speech

Last spring, eporters in Chicagoland have been informed by police that “You (sic) first amendment rights can be terminated if you create a scene…Your first amendment rights have limitations.”

The Media covering the fatal  shooting of a six year old at Mount Sinai Hospital on the west side of Chicago.  WGN-TV reporter Dan Ponce and photographer Donte Williams were taken in handcuffs when they refused to move further away from the hospital for their coverage. 

The reporters were standing on the median sidewalk  halfway across the street from  Mount Sinai Hospital as they were doing their reporting.  The officer yelled at them to move further away and the journalistics refused to comply as they did their jobs.  It should be noted that the area was not a crime scene.  The officer exclaimed:  “F*** news affairs, I don’t care about news affairs. Forget news affairs.”.

According to the police, the reporters tried to enter the hospital and were removed at the request of hospital security, but their guards declined to press charges and the individuals were released.  However, the police maintain that the reporters very presence around grieving family members created a scene.   The official police statement proclaimed: Our members were attempting to protect and respect both the grieving family members of the child, and the memory of the child herself during a very stressful time for all parties involved.

While it might be the case that the aforementioned journalists pressed the edge within the hospital in pursuit of the story (which they deny),  the offending officer's ejaculations paired with the official police statement reveal a rationale that the authorities think it is OK to limit the First Amendment when they want.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)

Recently, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) proposed an amendment to the Reporter Shield bill in the Senate Judiciary committee which limits coverage to journalists whom she describes as:  “real reporters.” Feinstein was worried that protections might apply to: “people who aren’t really reporters at all, who have no professional qualifications.” Feinstein's definition of a real reporter is “a salaried agent” of a media company such as a newspaper, broadcast news station, news website or another type of news service. Of course, powers authorizing "real reporter" licensure can sway coverage.

Curious that Congress thinks that it can regulate Free Speech, especially considering that the First Amendment starts with the phrase: "Congress shall make no law…"  But considering the age when Supreme Court majority opinions on Obamacare contort arguments to make it a tax to be constitutional, maybe a clarifyng amendment could be added to impose a tax for "real reporter" licenses presumably passing SCOTUS muster.

The First Amendment is the fundamental freedom which prohibits the federal governement from encroaching on natural right to the freedom of speech.  The Freedom of Speech clause prohibits thegovernment from  banning speech because it does not agree with its message.  In Federalist Paper no. 10, James Madison pointed to the Freedom of Speech as being a vital element of a healthy Republic. 

Considering the sentiment to censor in Chicagoland and the Feinstein's "real reporter" amendment, one may question if the United States is civically healthy, much less a Republic. 

Celebrating The Bill of Rights Day

On this date in 1791, the Commonwealth of Virginia was the 12th State to ratify the ten amendments that were then incorporated into our Constitution.

 During the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia , the framers were more concerned about how power would be distributed by the national government.  Some of the delegates were concerned that the Constitution did not spell out how the people would be protected from the government’s abuse of power.  So James Madison, the “father” of the Constitution and the author of the Federalist Papers, championed the inclusion of a Bill of Rights, that was modeled after an English Bill of Rights as well as similar Bill authored by Virginia George Mason.

The original resolution presented to Congress included twelve amendments which were not as sharply focused on individual rights.  One provision involved the number of delegates per the population.  The other seemingly stillborn amendment involved Congressional compensation:

No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.

Although this amendment was not ratified as part of the Bill of Rights, this provision was ratified by 3/4ths of the states by Michigan in May, 1992.  Later it was discovered that the Commonwealth of Kentucky’s General Assembly had ratified it in its first month of statehood in 1792 but it had not been applied for 200 years.

As for the Bill of Rights:

The First Amendment says that “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech.”

The Second Amendment says the people have the right “to keep and bear arms.”

The Third Amendment says soldiers may not be quartered in our homes without the consent of the owners.

The Fourth Amendment says the people have the right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures..

The Fifth Amendment says that private property shall not be taken “for public use without just compensation.”

The Sixth Amendment says that in criminal prosecutions, the person accused is guaranteed a right to trial by jury.

The Seventh Amendment guarantees the right to a jury trial in civil cases where the controversy “shall exceed twenty dollars.”

The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishments.

The Ninth Amendment says that the enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights should not be construed to deny or disparage others “retained by the people.”

The Tenth Amendment says that the powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states, or to the people.

These are not arcane relics of history.  Every day, Americans practice their freedom of speech and peaceful assembly.  Americans depend on access and the fairness of the judicial system. Our property rights can be challenged by eminent domain abuse.  And ultimately, citizens need to protect their right to bear arms–it’s not about hunting but the ultimate safeguard against the abuse of a tyrannical government.