Legislature(2015 - 2016)CAPITOL 106
02/06/2015 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HCR2 | |
| HB30 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HCR 2 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 30 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 30-CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY CURRICULUM
8:28:34 AM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 30, "An Act requiring school districts to develop
and require completion of a history of American
constitutionalism curriculum segment; and providing for an
effective date."
8:28:48 AM
CHAIR KELLER recapped HB 30, stating that this bill would
require school districts to include a segment of curriculum as a
history requirement that teaches the values the founding fathers
had in mind at the time that the Declaration of Independence was
written, such as the Articles of Confederation and early
founding documents that were written in an approximate 15-year
period. He clarified that this bill does not require that
teachers advocate for the values, but that the curriculum review
and understand the values when our country was founded. It
would be inappropriate to go beyond that, he said. He offered
his belief that understanding the values that caused our country
to happen is very important and should be part of every child's
education.
CHAIR KELLER said he personally believes that American
constitutionalism provides a level of freedom for mankind, which
he finds to be the biggest gift to the world, emphasizing the
importance of rights and responsibilities. Although this is
very important, he also does not want to imply that the schools
and school districts are not currently doing this. He corrected
this saying he actually believe the schools aren't doing an
adequate job or he wouldn't bring the bill forward; however, he
is quick to acknowledge that there are super schools that are
addressing this. He recalled a class called in from Houston,
Alaska, last year, who were very knowledgeable on the subject.
The implication is that the legislature should monitor this to
ensure that this curriculum is taught in all of our schools so
students have an understanding of how government works. He
didn't think anyone would argue that somehow [the schools] have
lost some basic civics and the general public is sometimes
apathetic, not being able to identify their elected officials.
8:32:09 AM
CHAIR KELLER referred members to Section 3 of HB 30, which read,
as follows:
(a) The chief school administrator of a school
district shall develop and submit to the governing
body of a school district for approval a syllabus for
a curriculum segment in the history of American
constitutionalism to be taught to all students [in the
enrolled in the district. An approved syllabus must
ensure a student's understanding of the history of
American constitutionalism as portrayed in the
Declaration of Independence, the first state
constitutions, the Articles of Confederation, the
Constitution of the United States, the Federalist
Papers, the Bill of Rights, and other historical
documents produced in the founding of our
constitutional republic model of government.
(b) A district may not issue a secondary school
diploma to a student who does not successfully
complete the course in which the curriculum segment
described in (a) of this section is contained. A
school district may not grant a waiver of this
requirement.
8:33:28 AM
CHAIR KELLER emphasized that the curriculum segment can be
inserted in existing courses. As sponsor, his intent is that
the district has the option to include the curriculum segment in
a history, civics, or other course, but must contain a
curriculum segment in the history of American constitutionalism.
The state would not require testing, he said. Instead,
districts must put the curriculum in place and be satisfied that
students have successfully completed the curriculum to the
district's standards so it does not create an imposition on the
testing program. He said this would be considered a mandate
since the statute will require every student to receive and pass
the curriculum segment in the history of American
constitutionalism.
8:35:04 AM
CHAIR KELLER said that Commissioner Hanley brought to his
attention that under the bill a waiver may not be granted as to
whether a student has successfully completed the curriculum;
however, it leaves authority with the district. He recalled
that [waiver language] was in prior bills on this subject.
8:35:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to page 2, line 16 of HB 30, and
asked whether any other provisions in statute require the chief
administrator to develop the curriculum and syllabus. He did
not think this represents the normal method of developing
curricula in schools. He asked whether bill will create a
different model for local schools in terms of their ability to
have local control over their curriculum to teach the standards.
8:36:47 AM
CHAIR KELLER, as sponsor, said the intent is to have the
curriculum segment developed like any other curriculum segment,
and the legislature has given the districts the responsibility.
He said some districts use committees to evaluate their
curriculum. He did not envision that a new model would be used
to implement the American constitutionalism segment in a
district's curriculum. The language is designed to ensure that
the superintendent is responsible for getting this done, but in
his view the superintendent could delegate this to an
appropriate entity within a committee.
8:37:49 AM
JIM POUND, Staff, Representative Wes Keller, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of one of the joint prime sponsors,
agreed that most districts operate from their superintendent or
school administrator who provide the curriculum. He offered
that saying one individual writes the curriculum is like saying
one person writes a bill and that doesn't really happen.
Instead, it is a delegated authority, he said.
8:38:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON stated his interest is for the structure
of the bill to parallel the current process. Currently, local
school boards control curriculum, but the bill elevates that
specific charge to a school chief administrator who will develop
the curriculum segment and submit it to the school board for
approval. He asked whether the sponsor will consider another
process, such as the school board approving what the chief
administrator has developed instead of requiring the local
district as the school board to develop the curriculum for the
school. He pointed out the language in the bill doesn't seem to
parallel the current process.
8:39:36 AM
CHAIR KELLER, speaking as sponsor of HB 30, said it is not his
intent to develop a new process for this bill. While it states
the "chief school administrator shall develop" it also adds "and
submit to the governing body of a school district for approval a
syllabus for a curriculum segment in the history of American
constitutionalism ...." The pattern exists, he offered, and he
believes it's appropriate to place the responsibility on the on
the superintendent, but he would consider a suggested change to
the language.
8:40:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND said she was a little confused since
Section 3 of the sponsor's memorandum [of January 21, 2015
provides a sectional analysis for HB 30] and reads, "Local
school districts will establish a one semester course and final
exam that represents one-half credit during the senior year of
high school ...." She referred to page 2, line 15 of HB 30, [to
proposed Sec. 14.14.095], that refers throughout to a curriculum
segment and the course. She referred to page 2, line 26, which
read, "the course in which a curriculum segment described in (a)
of this section is contained." Thus, the memo does not appear
to represent the language in HB 30 in its current form. She
related her understanding that the sponsor's intent is to simply
add to the existing history curriculum that the school districts
are already presenting, but it would not add a one semester
course.
MR. POUND answered that it was an error on his part and the
language has been deleted from new sectional. He acknowledged
that members did not yet have the new sectional analysis, but
the language relating to the senior year has been deleted.
CHAIR KELLER appreciated his staff taking responsibility;
however, he characterized this bill as being "a perfect bill"
since it has been previously vetted. He remarked that the
paperwork just hasn't kept up with the vetting.
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND wanted to be sure the memo is not part
of the record. She related her understanding that that the
sponsor's bill recommends a curriculum segment related to the
history of the country as part of the curriculum.
CHAIR KELLER responded that the sectional analysis will be
updated to match the language in the bill.
8:43:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND referred to line page 2, line [16-17],
which read, "the chief school administrator of a school district
shall develop and submit to the governing body of a school
district for approval a syllabus for a curriculum segment in the
history of American constitutionalism ...." She asked for
further clarification on what will happen if the governing body
chooses not to approve it.
CHAIR KELLER remarked that the bill doesn't get to that level.
He assumed local school district would work it out. He did not
think this introduces confusion. He agreed that if the syllabus
wasn't approved there will be trouble under subsection (b),
since the district can't issue a diploma unless the district can
establishing that the requirement has been met. He offered that
the school district will likely be motivated to go through the
process required to get the approval.
8:44:46 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD stated that she had a couple questions
on the resolution, but she had issues with the audio. She said
she is listening to the hearing.
8:45:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to page 2, line 19, which read,
"An approved syllabus must ensure a student's understanding of
the history of American constitutionalism ...." On page 2, line
27-28, reads, "A school district may not grant a waiver of this
requirement." He was trying to understand how these
requirements will be met without requiring an assessment. He
recalled the sponsor indicating each school district did not
need to grant a waiver because there isn't any requirement for a
test. He surmised that that teachers ensure students understand
the history by using the syllabus; however, he also recognized
that this provision adds a "high stakes" graduation requirement
that cannot be waived. He envisioned a district would provide a
one week or other segment of the aforementioned curriculum,
verify that all students attended the class, and thereby satisfy
the criteria and be eligible for graduation. He said the
parameters seem to be somewhat in conflict.
CHAIR KELLER answered that the syllabus outlines the course. He
said, the language will "ensure a student's understanding of the
history" is written from a perspective of a teacher. He
envisioned that teachers will give an initial oral or written
test, use lesson plans, and test students to determine if the
teacher has been successful or not. He referred to page 2, line
26, to the standard for the district, which requires successful
completion of the course. He offered his belief the language in
HB 30 is clear, but was open to considering language that would
further clarify the bill.
8:48:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked whether the syllabus is required to
ensure that the student has had access to material for that
portion of the course. Since districts cannot grant waivers, it
means that students must successfully complete or attend the
course but won't be required to demonstrate any particular
knowledge related to the syllabus.
CHAIR KELLER replied that he couldn't imagine any caring teacher
wanting to [pass students who don't understand the material] but
it's possible in any program to fill out forms or reports to
slide through requirements in state law; however, he is
operating under the presumption that teachers, students, and
parents, in good faith, want [American constitutionalism] to be
taught in Alaska's schools. He said he is not concerned that a
district might just "check a box" that the student attended the
class every day, but of course, it is possible.
8:50:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON expressed concern, in part, due to the
number of special education students. Since HB 30 has an
explicit provision that districts cannot grant waivers to this
section, he wanted to ensure that the sponsor's intention is
that all students must demonstrate a certain level of
understanding of the material, including special education
students and English [as a second] language students. He
understood the sponsor's intent is to allow districts the
latitude to determine how students demonstrate completion of a
course, which is acceptable within the parameters of this bill.
CHAIR KELLER said that is the way he understands it.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD, in response to a question, said she did
not have any questions.
8:51:37 AM
CHAIR KELLER opened public testimony on HB 30.
8:52:13 AM
STUART THOMPSON read his testimony, as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Greetings to the Chairman and all members of the House
Education Committee. I speak for myself, a District 8
citizen, for passage of HB 30 Constitutional History
Curriculum. I pray for committee compassion. Despite
hours of struggle, my prepared testimony still lasts 3
and a half minutes. Hearing Chairman, may I still
testify? Thank you. Start of my testimony.
8:52:47 AM
MR. THOMPSON continued reading his written testimony, as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
It's a well known concept that knowledge enables
competent change and problem solving. It follows that
chronic state and national problems, or propaganda-
driven solutions that rebound with grosser problems,
or no verifiable/satisfactory results from using
public money, all expose poor or no education.
I've followed the debate on Rep. Wes Keller's bill for
some years. Educational special interests claim that
necessary civic education is provided in segments
within a couple semesters of social studies. Further,
they say, an educational mandate would generate extra
labor Alaska can ill-afford. These rationalizations
for continuing inadequate citizen education make me
want to puke. Here's a simple elaboration.
Contrary to the propagandized portrayal of America
having government of, for and by the people, what
actually gets conducted now is benevolent elected
aristocracy (government by an elite). This is well
revealed by the chronic vulnerability of American
politicians to lobbyists and campaign donation
blackmail - typical of highly centralized forms of
government. Naturally, politicians think it's best to
make the hard decisions, as elected agents or
officials, on behalf of everyone. This political
definition of "represent" is supported by being in
modern college-level dictionaries.
8:54:12 AM
MR. THOMPSON continued reading his written testimony, as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
But there lies the problem. This definition of
"represent" isn't the one that was used by US founding
fathers! Nor does it align with the Alaska
Constitution's Article I sections 1 & 2! The proof is
simple. There were no English dictionaries available
to people in America's formative years. Educated
people then were also conversant with Latin and Greek.
Therefore, their understanding of English words for
use in important writings arose from the Latin or
Greek derivations of those words. So what is the true
meaning of "represent" on that basis? It is to "show
or put forth again". If you represent people that way,
politicians are supposed to relay the fruits of their
constituent's minds. That means elected officials are
duty-bound to actually lead their constituents so they
supply an organized body of comprehensive viewpoints
for legislative use. That also means a political
leader has to handle constituent laziness or ignorance
or immaturity so he can represent something.
8:55:19 AM
MR. THOMPSON continued reading his written testimony, as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
Let me note here that elected officialdom is our
country's only major profession that doesn't compel
continuing education. The pride in this is so arrogant
that about 10 years ago I was refused even a hearing
before the House Rules Committee about making
legislator continuing education about government a
legislative rule. This is despite existing Legislative
Rules that legitimize doing so.
Not knowing true representative government methodology
well-easily a consequence of not understanding the
basic word underlying all of our political heritage-
makes politicians and citizens alike reach for the
methodologies of other forms of government. For
example, how most elected officials now treat
constituent concerns, and how constituents now
approach elected officials, is quite similar to the
political relationship of nobles & peasants in the
Middle Ages. Research the word assizes-the town hall
meeting/public hearing of that era.
8:56:18 AM
MR. THOMPSON continued reading his written testimony, as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
Pass HB 30. Let's give our youth a start at learning
the true philosophy and methods of self-government-
which channels organized liberty with true justice in
the pursuit of happiness.
Thanks for your attention. By the way, Mr. Chairman,
after all other citizens have had their say, will you
give me special permission to speak for another
minute? I would like to simply state what is arguably
the most fundamental principle of government known to
history-that is apparently not being taught. This
omission is arguably hurting Alaskans and their
teachers.
Alaska Constitution Article 7's prohibition against
sectarian control of education should compel your
interest in the fact that the following principle is
not directly taught in Alaskan schools - evidenced by
citizen and government conduct.
All types of government fall somewhere on a spectrum
as follows: 1) Government of the people (examples:
dictatorships, monarchies, and theocracies, shading to
elite oligarchies/aristocracies); 2) Government of and
for the people (examples: benevolent ruler-ships like
nobility-counseled or parliamentary-backed monarchies,
shading to elected aristocracies that honor Rule of
Law); and 3) Government of, for, and by the people
(examples: real constitutional republics and
parliamentary democracies, shading to ethics-driven
democracies and anarchies). You can judge the type of
government being used by the types of devices that get
utilized to rule, the attitude towards citizen
potential (i.e. Obama's "people are too small minded
to govern themselves" versus Thomas Jefferson's
convictions), and how much a government harvests the
fruits of people's minds to govern.
8:56:32 AM
MR. THOMPSON continued reading his written testimony, as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
Thanks again for your attention. I shall leave you
with something to think about for the rest of your
legislative careers. Consider. The volume of true
citizen participation in government of, for, and by
the People is probably the most reliable test for
public education effectiveness that could ever be.
Good luck on your deliberations.
8:57:42 AM
BOB BIRD complimented Mr. Thompson on his testimony. He
provided his background, stating he has taught 41 years in the
public schools and holds a Master's degree in history. Although
he is semi-retired, but still teaches constitutional law to
seniors at Nikiski High School. He also does homeschool
tutoring in his semi-retirement. He said he was twice a
candidate for the U.S. Senate and was endorsed by Ron Paul. He
stated that he exercises the great books method of teaching
government, noting the course is required course in the Kenai
Peninsula Borough School District. He emphasized that his
students reads the entire Declaration of Independence, the Bill
of Rights, and the Constitution word for word. He has been
taking this approach to teaching since 1986, but he wishes he
had always done so since it is only when reviewing the
documents, including the federalist and the antifederalist
papers that one is able to gain a full understanding of what is
going wrong. He has held discussions with legislators about
Constitutional questions and on many other issues. It occurred
to him that every legislator should have a refresher course on
the Constitution, which is what he thinks Mr. Thompson was
alluding to, he said.
8:59:58 AM
MR. BIRD said he sent an attachment that illustrate typical
responses students make after taking a full semester of his
courses. He hoped the committee could put those comments into
the record or members will read them, since it shows 12th
graders are perfectly capable of understanding that the country
is in a terrible constitutional mess. He praised the bill, but
offered caution since federalist and antifederalist papers are
absolutely essential to properly teach the Constitution, but it
is largely incomprehensible to most adults, let alone students.
He said he has to translate the Declaration of Independence due
to the language style as well as the federalist papers.
MR. BIRD highlighted one problem with the bill is it may allow
boilerplate constitutional textbooks to fulfill the requirement.
For example, he just received a glossy package that asked
whether or not there should be a balanced budget amendment. The
liberal Democrats said no and the conservative Republicans said
there should and the packet provided arguments. It asked
students to analyze the arguments and make up their own mind;
however, they missed that there already is a balanced budget
amendment, the Tenth Amendment. He said, "I tell my students
there is no need for a balanced budget amendment since we've
already got one. If we made another one are we going to
guarantee that's going to be obeyed when there already is one?"
He characterized that as a typical example of how textbooks
generally don't get it.
9:02:15 AM
MR. BIRD rejected the idea that the Constitution is a living
document, and if so, it is essentially dead. Further the
Constitution takes sides, it does demand, it does require a
strict construction, which in most textbooks is seen as simply
another opinion worthy of considering. He emphasized the only
textbook that should be required is The Politically Incorrect
Guide to the Constitution by Kevin Gutzman. He acknowledged that
the legislature probably isn't going to force feed textbooks,
but he maintained that is the only way to really understand the
Constitution. He wished members well with the bill, but
cautioned that if it doesn't take the care to show that the
federalist and anti-federalist papers should be part of the
curriculum, it will probably just become nothing but "fluff
stuff" when it gets down to each individual school district.
9:03:43 AM
CHAIR KELLER offered that Mr. Bird captured his intent and he
heard the caution. He offered his belief that one good part of
the bill is the use of "ism" as in "American constitutionalism"
which stems from a book that impressed him, American
Constitutionalism Heard Round the World, [1776-1989: A Global
Perspective by George Billias], that implies the values need to
be looked at and refreshed. He did not anticipate this bill
will force ends in of itself. Any good results, if this passes,
will come from good faith efforts like teachers, such as Mr.
Bird, who will keep expanding on the values. He asked for his
expertise on what the most impressive "ism value" revealed in a
review of the Declaration of Independence.
MR. BIRD answered that he shows students that God is recognized
in our founding document. He characterized the separation of
church and state as nonsense, which is meant to mean we have a
separation of state and God, which is nonsense since God is
mentioned four times. He is recognized as lawgiver, creator,
provider, and judge. However the U.S. Supreme Court wants to
ram their opinions down American's throats, the court can't
escape that aspect of the Declaration of Independence. Further,
bureaucracy is specifically cited in the Declaration of
Independence as is implied jury nullification. He interpreted
the phrase " ... and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass
our people and eat out their substance," to represent what the
federal government has become. He offered his belief that in
1776, our founders created firewalls that have since been
destroyed, but people are starting to wake up to it now. He
said his characterization of the Declaration is to mention that
natural law is cited in the first breath, God is asked to judge
the righteousness of the American cause and they were not afraid
to call upon his name so the idea of expunging any mention of
God in public venues is nonsense.
CHAIR KELLER thanked Mr. Bird.
9:07:28 AM
CHRISTINE HUTCHISON stated that although she is actively
involved in a group, she is testifying today on behalf of
herself. She gave a brief personal history, noting she has a
degree in education and previously taught social studies. She
agreed with Mr. Thompson and Mr. Bird's testimony. She has
previously testified on this issue and she will continue to
testify on this issue because it is extremely important. She
acknowledged she has not paid sufficient attention to this
issue, but she now realizes the grievous lack of knowledge
students have of the process [of government] in Alaska to
Washington D.C. She related her understanding that the
legislature wants to hear from the public, but to do so requires
an understanding of the process, the policies, and the
procedures to. Again, she favored what these gentlemen have
said today. She hoped the committee would pass [HB 30] in its
entirety. As she goes through her day, she asks young people if
they are registered to vote. More times than not, students will
respond that they graduated from Nikiski High School, that Bob
Bird was their teacher, and that is why they are registered to
vote. She noted she has asked a student who didn't graduate
from Nikiski High School who wasn't registered to vote and
although that doesn't mean there is disparity in education, she
emphasized the importance of getting young people involved, to
help them understand how the Constitution works and get them out
to vote. She expressed concern that the country is losing
ground from her generation and her parent's generation. She
said this information is all found in the Constitution. She
expressed her gratitude for Mr. Thompson and Mr. Bird's
testimony. She hopes this will flow through the committee, that
she understands the bill may encounter roadblocks in the Senate.
She emphasized that she will be back, that this is not an option
or choice, and that this must to be done. She thanked Chair
Keller for sponsoring HB 30. She acknowledged that this issue
may need to be heard again next year and this is a process so it
may not get fixed with one bill. She thanked the committee for
their consideration and urged them to have a positive vote on
the bill.
9:11:28 AM
BARBARA HANEY stated that she taught a political economy course
at University of Alaska Fairbanks. She stressed the importance
of this bill. She was somewhat amused by the chief
administrator developing the curriculum. She asked whether the
Mayflower Compact could be added to the list of documents since
it was the first freedom document written on North American
soil. The history behind the document of people coming out of a
storm, establishing a government and rules of conduct should
impress upon students that even the lack of an overreaching
structure doesn't give them an excuse to act in an absurd way.
She said that there are certain rules and standards of conduct
that people have historically used, even without government.
9:14:20 AM
MR. THOMPSON concluded his earlier testimony, by stating that
Alaska Constitution, Article VII prohibition against sectarian
control of education should compel the committee's interest
since the following principle is not directly taught in Alaska's
schools, which is evidenced by citizen and government conduct.
All types of government fall somewhere on the spectrum of one,
government of the people, including dictatorships, monarchies,
and theocracies; two, government of and for the people,
including benevolent ruler-ships, such as nobility councils or
parliamentary-backed monarchies; and three, government of, for,
and by the people, such as real constitutional republics and
parliamentary democracies. He said that the type of government
being used can be judged by the types of devices used to rule.
The attitude toward citizen potential ranges from the attitude
of Obama's people who are too small minded to govern themselves
to Thomas Jefferson's convictions and how much a government
harvests the fruits of people's minds to govern. He asked
members to consider the volume of true citizen participation in
government of, for, and by the people, which is probably the
most reliable test of public education's effectiveness.
9:16:18 AM
CHAIR KELLER, after first determining no one wished to testify,
closed public testimony on HB 30.
The committee took a brief at-ease.
9:17:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER said although he supports the intent of HB
30, he would like to work with the sponsor on implementing the
curriculum in the schools without requiring students to need
additional credits for graduation. For example, perhaps
language could be incorporated to have the curriculum segment
apply to the U.S. history credit without adding another
requirement for graduation. He expressed concern that that the
current language might result in districts dropping course work
or needing additional staff. Instead, he hoped to incorporate
this important subject matter as part of the U.S. history credit
already required as part of the curriculum. He suggested if any
textbooks are required that they could be phased in to avoid
additional costs to districts.
9:18:57 AM
CHAIR KELLER asked whether he has any specific amendment. He
suggested that some of these issues were discussed in committee
and have been vetted. He suggested a review of minutes may
satisfy him.
9:20:00 AM
CHAIR KELLER, in response to Representative Colver, offered to
set the bill aside. He asked Representative Colver to review
the minutes. He hoped to bring the back for quick action.
9:20:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON pointed out the committee has not yet
discussed the bill. He said at this point he is uncomfortable
with the bill as well as previous versions that have come before
the committee in prior legislatures. Further, he was
uncomfortable with some of testimony today that suggested ideas
in previous documents should override the Constitution. He
stated that the Constitution was an agreement reached among many
parties. It is a structured document, so by reaching back to
ideas contained in the papers such as Declaration of
Independence and the federalist papers indicating they should be
controlling, seems to reject the idea of a constitution
entirely. Although he didn't wish to debate with testifiers, he
suggested the committee must consider what is being asked in the
bill. For example, the bill doesn't pertain to civics or
studying the Constitution. Instead, the bill speaks to teaching
the values held by the people that existed at the time the
Constitution was created.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said adopting the Constitution was a
compromise, but the final document also allowed slavery and did
not allow women the right to vote. The bill also includes state
constitutions, and many did not allow married women to own
property in their names, counted American Indians as no persons
in the census - they were counted as zero, as well as counting
anyone else other than white men and women as a 3/4 person.
Certainly many occurrences in world that [committee members]
strongly object to are present in our own history during its
formation and in the values held by the people. Since then, the
Constitution has been changed through amendments, including
suffrage, and other rights were granted.
9:22:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON expressed concern that the Constitution
would not be studied and that is the document that was crafted
and agreed to by the people of the United States. Instead, HB
30 would adopt the values of the people who negotiated the
Constitution as being the controlling values. Views of the
federalists or the antifederalist papers could be picked. He
objected to the idea that under the bill the Constitution isn't
what is important, but rather the values expressed by some of
the founders would be accelerated.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said that other than concerns about the
structure of the bill, he has concerns about the actual
implementation of HB 30, including that values the United States
no longer espouses would be taught. He concluded by saying he
is not in favor of moving the bill. He suggested that perhaps
some things could be outlined but he is uncomfortable teaching
values not incorporated into the Constitution and the amendments
adopted later. Otherwise, the bill would require teaching the
Constitution, he said.
9:25:05 AM
CHAIR KELLER offered the intent of the bill is to examine
constitutionalism and the values at the time when the
Constitution was formed. He further said the aforementioned
items that Representative Seaton raised could be allowable and
included in the proposed curriculum segment. He suggested that
there is a huge value in [adding the curriculum segment]. One
alternative would be the outcome that HB 30 will not consider
the values that were present and incorporated into the founding
documents for fear that some of the values would be shut out.
He said, "I can't go there. But that's okay. That's a matter of
debate." The bill will be set aside and the stage is set for
committee discussion, he said.
[HB 30 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 30 Fiscal Note.pdf |
HEDC 2/6/2015 8:00:00 AM |
HB 30 |
| HCR2 FiscalNote.pdf |
HEDC 2/6/2015 8:00:00 AM |