|
We are listed as a
Family Friendly site
by The Old
Schoolhouse
Magazine
If you would like
to be notified by
email when the new
Homeschool
HeartBeat issues are posted,
subscribe
for free with a blank
email.
Unsubscribe from
the HeartBeat
| |
|
The Arizona HOMESCHOOL HeartBeat
Monthly E-letter
May
2008
Volume 9, Issue 5
Even though Arizona is in our name,
we also cover news items of interest across the nation.
LEGISLATIVE LOOKOUT
State of Arizona Clean Elections Fund--What is it and how does it work?
Homeschooling Illegal?
3 Minute Video on Parental Rights
Court of Appeals Grants Petition for
Re-hearing in California Case
Center for Arizona Policy Action Alert
Key dangers of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
(UNCRC) - Part 1
Getting to Know the Candidates
Linda Gray--Pro-homeschool state senator
State of Arizona Clean Elections Fund:
What is it and how does it work?
What is a Participating Candidate?
A participating candidate is an individual who has decided to run in 2008 for the Corporation Commission or the Legislature and agrees not to accept special interest monies and adhere to the Citizens Clean Elections Act and Commission Rules in return for receiving funding from the Citizens Clean Elections Fund. In order for a candidate to receive funding, the participating candidate must collect a specified
number of $5 Qualifying Contributions from registered voters within his or her district.
$5 Qualifying Contributions
(Collected During 1/1/08 – 8/21/08 for candidates for the - Legislature and 8/1/07 – 8/21/08 for candidates for the Corporation Commission)
- Candidates must collect a minimum of 220 qualifying contributions for candidates for the Legislature and 1,650 for candidates for Corporation Commissioner and submit them to the Secretary of State’s office.
Expenditures
- A participating candidate must adhere to expenditure limits, and may not make expenditures in excess of the cash on hand. This includes both early contributions received and candidate funding.
Candidate Funding
- In 2008, candidates running for the Corporation Commission and the Legislature are eligible to apply for Clean Elections funding.
|
Office
|
Primary Election Funding
|
General Election Funding
|
Independent Candidate Funding
|
|
Corporation Commission
|
$82,680
|
$124,020
|
$144,690
|
|
Legislature
|
$12,921
|
$19,382
|
$22,612
|
Additional information:
Running for office
Funding Sources for the Clean Elections Fund
Details of Qualifying Contributions Funding
|
Home Schooling Illegal?
Part I of an In-depth Look at Article 13 of the UN Convention on the
Rights of the Child
This
week, we continue our
series on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) by
considering Article 13, which states that "the child shall have the
right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to
seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless
of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art,
or through any other media of the child's choice."The crux of this
article is the child's "right to information." Children access
information through what they are taught and what they discover on their
own. This week, we will consider the Convention's implications on what
children are taught.
Read the full article
here.
What's New on the Blog
To read
the latest headlines, visit the ParentalRights.org
blog today.
Tell Your Friends
Spread the word about the Parental Rights Amendment. And don't
forget to forward this email to contacts that are interested in
protecting and preserving the child-parent relationship.
Thank
you for your ongoing support!
Kristin Wright
ParentalRights.org |
|
Welcome to all of the new Citizen Co-Sponsors who
have joined us in recent weeks! We're glad to have you on board as we
move forward in our campaign to amend the Constitution to protect the
rights of parents. We will be sending this email newsletter out on a
weekly basis to keep you informed about what is happening with the
campaign.
Introducing... a New 3-Minute Video on Parental Rights
This week we would like to introduce you to a great resource for
spreading the word about protecting parental rights -- a new,
fast-paced,
3-minute video that describes the threat to parental rights, as well
as the solution. If you are interested in engaging your friends,
neighbors, and community in this crucial issue, you should take
advantage of this free downloadable video. It's perfect for community,
church, and school functions. Preview the video
here, and download the version that works for you.
Additional Downloadable Resources
Interested in collecting signatures for the Parental Rights Petition?
Download our
Printable Petition Sign-Up Form and print as many copies as you
need. To learn more about the need for the Parental Rights Amendment,
download our memo on the issue, titled, "Parental
Rights: The Fight of Our Lifetime."
|
Court of Appeal Grants Petition
for Re-hearing
On March 25, the California Court of Appeal granted a motion
for rehearing in the 'In re Rachel L.' case--the controversial decision which
purported to ban all homeschooling in that state unless the parents held a
teaching license qualifying them to teach in public schools.
The automatic effect of granting this motion is that the prior opinion is
vacated and is no longer binding on any one, including the parties in the
case.
The Court of Appeal has solicited a number of public school establishment
organizations to submit amicus briefs including the California Superintendent
of Public Instruction, California Department
of Education, the Los Angeles Unified School District, and three California
teacher unions. The court also granted permission to Sunland Christian
School to file an amicus brief. The order also indicates that it will
consider amicus applications from other groups.
Home School Legal Defense Association will seek permission to file such an
amicus brief and will coordinate efforts with a number of organizations
interesting in filing briefs to support the right of parents to homeschool
their children in California.
"This is a great first step," said Michael Farris, chairman of HSLDA. "We are
very glad that this case will be reheard and that this opinion has been
vacated, but there is no guarantee as to what the ultimate outcome will be.
This case remains our top priority," he added.
Editor’s Note: “Watch
California, for its policies will soon be copied throughout the nation.”
During this election year, please keep in mind the EXTREME importance of
doing some good research on the candidate’s positions on homeschool and
family issues, and getting everyone you know to support our advocates and
VOTE for them. It is especially crucial to know who will be appointing
judges who may have a huge impact on policy decisions for years to come.
Most judges are appointed for life or as long as the people don’t vote
against them, and often there is no place for the constitutional checks and
balances if the judiciary begins to make their own laws.
J
|
It's Okay to Pray |
|
 |
|
It's
okay to pray in public schools. There's a lot of confusion about what the
Constitution means for the individual faith of public school students.
Sadly, that confusion has led to suppression of students' rights. Here in
Arizona, educators have censored the word "God" from school yearbooks and
decorative tiles and refused student religious clubs the opportunity to
advertise their meetings like any other club. But public schools are not
"religion-free" zones. This year, CAP initiated legislation, sponsored by
Rep. Doug Clark, to address some of these issues. HB 2713, the Students'
Religious Liberties Act, lists the religious rights of students. There's
a big difference between schools promoting religion and students
promoting religion. It is unconstitutional for schools to single out the
religious views of students for negative treatment.
On
Wednesday, the House Education Committee passed HB 2713 by a razor thin
5-4 vote. CAP legal counsel Deborah Sheasby provided excellent testimony
in support. To get a real-world picture of how committee debates go and
how some legislators view religious liberty, I urge you to take time to
watch the committee hearing and Deborah's testimony
here. |
|
(3) Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Advances |
|
|
SB 1048
Partial-Birth Abortion Ban
(Senator Linda Gray)
|
Places a partial-birth abortion ban in Arizona statute. This bill addresses the concerns mentioned by the Governor in her veto letter of HB 2769
|
This bill passed the House by a vote of 31-24 with 5 members absent on April 22. It now goes to a conference committee for an amendment.
Last Updated: 2008-05-01 09:21:32
|
|
|
(4) Marriage Amendment Referendum |
|
|
SCR 1042
Marriage Referendum
(Sen. Ron Gould/ Rep. Eddie Farnsworth)
|
Places a measure on the ballot to amend the constitution to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
|
This bill passed out of the House Judiciary Committee 6-3 on April 21. The bill passed the Rules Committee and Committee of the Whole. It is now ready for a vote by the full House.
Last Updated: 2008-04-22 12:44:29
|
|
To find the current bills and their status: http://www.azpolicy.org/legislation.php#3
|
(5) Scholarship Tax Credits |
|
|
|
Legislators continue working on the state budget. Money is tight.
Conservative projections show a $3 billion shortfall. But that hasn't
stopped teacher's unions from their usual attacks on school choice in
Arizona. Today, over 25,000 students attend the school of their parents'
choice through one of Arizona's two scholarship tax-credit programs. It's
a good thing when students receive the education their parents want them
to have, but it's even better when it saves the state money. Rep. Steve
Yarbrough's
commentary in this week's East
Valley Tribune explains that if these scholarships are
dismantled, it would cost Arizona an additional $100 million to educate
these kids. School choice in Arizona means more options for parents and a
much more efficient use of educational resources.
To keep up to date on legislative activity, visit CAP's website, www.azpolicy.org , throughout the week. CAP Legislative Coordinator
Jennifer Clark regularly updates bill status. We've also posted Fact
Sheets providing summaries on bills we support and a few we don't. |
|
The Center for Arizona Policy |
|
|
 |
|
|
 Action
Alert
From: Cathi Herrod, President
Let Your Voice Be Heard!
We need you! It's critical for legislative leadership and your own
legislators to hear from you this week in support of the Arizona
Marriage Referendum! Opponents of marriage between one man and one
woman are flooding legislators with emails and phone calls asking
them to block you, the voter, from deciding the future of marriage in
our state.
From coast to coast there are ongoing challenges to marriage. It's
only a matter of time before another attack on marriage begins in
Arizona. Until marriage is defined in our state Constitution as the
union of one man and one woman, a state court or even the state
legislature could act to redefine marriage. Opponents of marriage
know this - that's why they want to stop you from voting.
Take Action
-
Take
time today to email or call
House Speaker Jim Weiers and
Senate President Tim Bee. Thank them for their leadership in
sponsoring the referendum. Ask them to move the referendum quickly
through the legislative process.
-
Take
time also to let your own state senator and two state
representatives know you support the marriage referendum. You can
use our
easy online form to contact your legislators on this critical
issue.
-
And -
most importantly - join with us in praying that the marriage
referendum would go to the voters in November and be approved so
that marriage stays the union of one man and one woman in Arizona.
The time to speak up is now
- and your voice can make the difference! Please forward this
important action alert to your friends using the link below.
Click here for print version
|
The Center for Arizona Policy
email:
info@azpolicy.org
phone: 602-424-2525 or 1-800-FAMILY-1 |
|
www.azpolicy.org |
|
|
|
February 19,
2008
Whether you've
been a member for awhile now, or have just joined ParentalRights.org, we would
like to thank you for your dedication to protecting the child-parent
relationship. Today's email is Part 1 of a series highlighting the key dangers
of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). It's designed to
equip you to understand and answer key questions related to the UNCRC and
parental rights.
Introduction: What's Wrong with the
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child?
It's usually looked upon as a
positive means of holding countries accountable to protect children. But the
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) is so much more
than that.
When the UNCRC was brought up for
ratification in 1995, the core group of Senators in opposition concluded that
this treaty marked a significant departure from the originally constituted
relationship between state and child. They found, in fact, that it was
literally incompatible with the right of parents to raise their children, as
well as a wholesale giveaway of U.S. sovereignty.
But why?
Widespread concerns about the UNCRC
stem from the treaty's repeated emphasis on one key principle used to guide
all decisions affecting children: consideration of the "best interests of the
child." This principle underlies all of the rights found in the Convention.
Dangerous Wording
Article 3 of the CRC provides that
"in all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private
social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or
legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary
consideration."
In other words, policies affecting
children at all levels of society and government should have the child's best
interest as the primary concern.
The problem occurs when this
principle appears as a guiding principle for parents in article 18(1), which
states that "Parents or, as the case may be, legal guardians, have the primary
responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child. The best
interests of the child will be their basic concern."
Who knows best?
The Convention's emphasis on the
"best interests" principle is a sharp break from American law.
In the 1993 case of
Reno v. Flores, the U.S. Supreme
Court held that "the 'best interests of the child' is not the legal standard
that governs parents' or guardians' exercise of their custody." In the 2000
case of Troxel v. Granville,
the Court struck down a grandparent visitation statute because decisions about
the child were made "solely on the judge's determination of the child's best
interests," without regard to the wishes of the parent.
The Court's decisions in
Reno and
Troxel reflect a fundamental tenet
of American family law, which recognizes that
parents typically act in the best
interests of their children. Indeed, "United States case law is replete with
examples of parents fighting for the best interests of their children,"
ranging from a child's right to an education to the right of personal injury
compensation. Except in cases where a parent has been proven to be "unfit,"
American law presumes that the parent is acting in the best interests of the
child, and defers to that parent's decision.
The UNCRC's Brave New World
But the UN Convention on the Rights
of the Child changes all of that. The treaty supplants this traditional
presumption in favor of parents
with a new presumption in favor of the
state.
According to Geraldine van Bueren,
an international scholar who assisted in the drafting of the CRC, the language
of "best interests provides decision and policy makers with the authority to
substitute their own decisions for either the child's or the parents',
providing it is based on considerations of the best interests of the child."
So instead of placing the burden of
proof on the government to prove that a parent is unfit, the Convention places
the burden of proof on -- yes, parents. Any parent who claims that other
interests might just be more important than the state's characterization of
the "best interest" of the child could end up battling the state to protect
their rights as a parent.
Where do we go from here?
There is a solution to this
dilemma. The strongest, most effective way of protecting children and parents
from an alarming state-based agenda is to amend the Constitution to protect
parental rights. This can only take place through the concerted efforts of
millions of dedicated parents across the United States.
Two immediate action items
Maybe you've already signed the
petition to protect parental rights. If so, we encourage you to take the next
step of
telling your friends
about this important issue. And if you haven't yet joined the campaign,
consider
joining today.
For a gift of $25 or more, you and your family can take a firm stand in the
battle to protect and preserve parental rights.
Thank you for your ongoing support
'
|
|
GETTING TO KNOW THE CANDIDATES
The
Arizona HOMESCHOOL HeartBeat
would like to be a place for getting information on the positions of all
the candidates for the upcoming elections. Please
send us the links to websites giving
factual information on
candidates’ positions, voting records and goals, etc. and we will post the
links. PLEASE, no
character assassination sites, demeaning messages or unfounded
assertions. They will not be posted.
Back to top
If you would like to be notified by email when the new issues are posted,
subscribe for free by sending a blank email to: HSHeartbeat-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
05/07/08
|
| | Watch Ben Stein's Movie Expelled
and benefit home education
Curriculum
Specials NOW through the end of April!
May SPECIALS:
Curriculum
Specials!
One
day sale is May 14th!
|
