Posted on 01/13/2004 8:15:17 PM PST by StarCMC
SUMMARY OF REASONS WHY HR2732/SB1562 AND ANY OTHER FEDERAL LEGISLATION SHOULD BE DEFEATED
Any empowerment of the federal government to "regulate" homeschooling, even if such "regulation" seeks to assist homeschoolers, is improper and impermissible under the U.S. Constitution. The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution clearly states that any powers not specifically delegated to the federal government within the Constitution are reserved to the States and to the people. The Constitution does not specifically delegate the power to regulate education in any aspect to the federal government. Any power to regulate education is reserved to the States and to the people. The federal government, therefore, has no authority to regulate homeschooling and should not be allowed to do so.
Each time homeschoolers are included in any federal law, the federal government has usurped its authority under the Constitution and is effectively, yet improperly, declaring that it can regulate homeschooling.
Acceptance of federal funding by public and private schools provides the primary basis in law in which the federal government is able to "regulate" the activities within public and private schools. Homeschoolers who do not accept federal funding are not subject to federal "regulation". However, this bill, and any others like it, unconstitutionally will empower the federal government to implement "regulation" of homeschoolers even though they do not receive federal funding, by defining homeschoolers and the criteria under which they may receive perceived federal "benefits". Homeschoolers who do accept federal funding by means of any federal "benefit" arguably could become even more easily "regulated" by the federal government.
Unconstitutional laws are often passed and remain in place until and unless new legislation is proposed changing the old, or an aggrieved party files a lawsuit challenging its constitutionality.
Implementation of any federal law inevitably leads to enforcement of that federal law. Enforcement of that federal law may lead to litigation and judicial interpretation of that law. Judicial interpretation of any law may change the rights of those affected by the law. Some interpretations may work to undo state homeschool laws. The risk of an intolerable interpretation of the law or the setting of bad precedent for future regulation or litigation outweighs any perceived benefit of federal legislation.
Homeschoolers in some states may suffer "unintended consequences" because of this and other federal legislation. Certain states, such as Connecticut, have little or no state government regulation of homeschooling. This bill will impose regulation over homeschoolers where there was no regulation before.
It is unknown how each state's homeschool practices and laws will be affected. Do you know exactly how each piece of HR2372/SB1562 or of any other federal law that refers to homeschooling will affect your state's homeschool practices and your current state laws?
The bill inserts a potential definition of homeschooling into several federal laws where there is no previous definition. It is possible that such a federal definition could be interpreted to override the definition of homeschooling that exists independently in each state under state law. This also may invite further legislation and regulation in the future.
Additional legislation may be enacted to manage not only this federal law but also any other laws affected by this legislation.
Congressional members, who may or may not understand home education, may choose to insert amendments or add changes to the bill that would further restrict homeschooling.
What need has been demonstrated for this kind of federal law regarding homeschooling? Have there been enough homeschoolers complaining of unfair treatment to warrant federal remedies? Problems encountered by homeschoolers in accessing any of the "benefits" listed in this bill can and should more easily be resolved at the state level through education of the uninformed and negotiation, rather than through implementation of federal legislation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANALYSIS OF WHY H.R. 2732/SB1562 SHOULD BE DEFEATED
**By: Attorney Deborah G. Stevenson, Executive Director of Home Education Legal Defense of Connecticut. November, 2003
While I recognize that the proponents of this bill may be attempting to resolve certain problems encountered by homeschoolers, I find passage of federal legislation unnecessary and detrimental. I believe that any federal legislation regarding home education effectively implements regulation of homeschooling by the federal government and is wholly unconstitutional.
Contrary to popular belief, the United States Constitution does not allow the federal government to regulate education of any kind. The tenth amendment to the Constitution plainly states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." In other words, if it is not clearly specified in the Constitution that the United States government has the power to do something, and as long as the Constitution does not prohibit the states from utilizing that power, then that power is left up to the States and to the people alone. The Constitution does not specify that the United States government has any power to regulate education of any kind. Consequently, the power to regulate education is left to the States and to the people.
Yes, there are many federal laws regulating education. However, the primary means that the federal government uses to regulate education is through its power enumerated in the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
Until recently, most federal laws have not affected the rights of homeschoolers. When the popularity of homeschooling grew in the 1980's, some urged homeschoolers to consider themselves as private schools under state laws. Connecticut homeschoolers rejected that appellation fearing that state governments, already having some laws in place regulating private schools, would include homeschoolers among those regulated. Homeschoolers in other states, however, were persuaded to consider themselves private schools and, for the most part, those homeschoolers are regulated to some extent by their state governments. Still, no homeschoolers were regulated by the federal government. Until now.
There is much about H.R. 2732 and SB 1562 that is objectionable, as I will outline below. Most, if not all of the objections, are directly related to one central fact: each time homeschoolers are included in a federal law, the federal government has usurped its authority under the Constitution and is effectively declaring that it can regulate homeschooling, even if the legislation appears to be "beneficial". I recognize that homeschoolers do encounter problems from time to time among people who are unfamiliar with or who oppose homeschooling. However, the resolution to those problems is not necessarily found in newly amended federal law. Those problems quite often are resolved through other means such as education of the uninformed and negotiation. In Connecticut, we have been very successful at resolving problems through means other than state government regulation, and nationwide problems can be similarly resolved.
The following is a preliminary analysis of the potential effect of the proposed legislation. It may provide the reader with at least some insight into how the language of each section of the proposed bill may create severe unintended consequences for homeschoolers now and in the future. Below each quoted portion of H.R. 2732 are the author's comments.
"H.R. 2732 A BILL To amend selected statutes to clarify existing Federal law as to the treatment of students privately educated at home under State law."
Comment: Previous to recent events, there existed no federal laws regulating homeschooling. Constitutionally, there should be no federal laws regulating homeschooling.
What is the definition of "privately educated"? Who will define "privately educated"? Are "privately educated" students those students who are educated in homeschools that are consideredto be private schools? If so, does this exclude other homeschoolers from the impact of the legislation or not? Consider the term,"under state law" - does this mean that the federal government may now determine whether students are being homeschooled in accordance with "state law" for purposes of this legislation?
(Excerpt) Read more at nheld.com ...
Interesting that they used a word picture taken from the Bible!
There is a homeschool ping list somewhere. I was hoping hsmom could help us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.