Restoring Our Right to Govern

Posted on May 17, 2023 by Victoria M. Young

PART TWO

Dangerous political propaganda, aimed at destroying our governing structure, is subverting the consent of the People — our right to govern. This destructive marketing of political thought is based on a twisted interpretation of Public Choice Theory (PCT).

In PART ONE I asked, did “they” use our individual choices to manipulate our political decisions? You know they did, and do, and will continue to do so until we recognize and resist their manipulative tactics. (Read & review PART ONE, if you have not already.)

What Is Happening?

Once a Convention of States convenes, “representatives” set the rules. They decide what changes will be made. Source: Business Insider JUST 15 states to go!!!!

We all are playing a role in demolishing our republican structure of governing. But that means, if we can see our role, we can resist being part of the destruction. We can overcome what looks to be the imminent ruin of our republic. It requires enough people willing to take some simple actions to stop the march towards a Constitutional Convention (Article V Convention).

First, people must understand PCT’s role in sabotaging and overthrowing the will of the nation.

Those wishing to control us and our nation have applied Public Choice Theory (PCT) within the political marketplace to sell distrust and division rather than our unifying national ideals. Use of PCT taps into self-serving desires and emotions rather than commonsense consensus on solving our common problems. By keeping us divided, its use is torpedoing our right to govern through consent.

“… our reality is that economic theory fostered a political strategy to supplant our constitutional republic with ‘a private governing elite of corporate power.’”

Corporatists, globalists, oligarchies, robber barons, despots, totalitarians, authoritarians, white Christian nationalists, fascists — the label doesn’t matter. They are enemies of the United States when they choose to control the governing of our republic. Governing is “reserved to the people” (The Federalist No.1).

“To the People” never meant “a faction of the people”—one group over another. That is a truth — a guiding principle of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

Why Weaponize PCT?

Achieving a Convention of States, as the mechanism for changing the Constitution, is a mammoth undertaking requiring that voters in two-thirds of the states give control of state legislatures to pro-Convention of States’ candidates. Then, in order to pass changes to the Constitution, those changes would require ratification by three-fourths of the state’s legislatures.

They argue, but have they explained that view? Are they being transparent about the changes they believe will save the republic? And, do those changes make sense in light of the exceptional reasoning the Founding Fathers used?

Changing the Constitution in this manner requires a massive number of voters to cast votes ensuring domination by pro-Convention of States’ lawmakers. But candidates aren’t openly running on the proposal. And voters don’t have it as a priority issue. Therefore, those wanting to change our constitution to fit their agenda need to entice voters using other reasons to vote for “their” guy or gal.

Now, think about how enemies of the republic might use the principles of PCT to analyze us and tap into what motivates us to buy what they are selling — an anti-government sentiment in a government designed for self-governance. It’s a twisted plot.

This was a primary race between two Republicans in North Idaho. Emotional propaganda? Precisely targeted messaging? It worked as planned.

And once our right to have a voice in the lawmaking process is further controlled or eliminated by changes to rules, laws, or the Constitution, we’ll have no chance at true representation. That’s the end of our democratic republic. So …

Here’s What’s Crucial To Understand

Three elements are essential to establishing any massive political movement of this magnitude (whether it is productive such as the American Revolution, or destructive like the Nazi regime):

weaken prevailing beliefs,
undermine established institutions, and
discredit those in power.

Once that preliminary work is done, people with differing priority issues (the economy, education, guns, religion, health care, immigration, abortion) need consolidating into one overwhelmingly powerful party. It’s being done using insight from PCT research to tap into what motivates the single-issue voters.

“Single issue voters do not need a deep understanding of every issue nor do they need to know where a candidate stands on every issue. … In general, single-issue voting gives more power to political parties.” [But] “the power to shape the government should belong to the people and not political parties.” ThoughtCo

Targeting and Using Voters

In PART ONE, I wrote “it’s PCT —not CRT (Critical Race Theory)—being used” in destroying our republic. Here’s why I said that and why I chose CRT to use as an example.

CRT was a theory unknown to most people. That made it easy to shape into a concept made-out to be divisive in nature. In that manner, it was aimed at our national belief in unity. So rightly so, it triggered patriotic passions. That passion, in the form of anger and distrust, was aimed directly at public education institutions and discredited all those seen as holding power in those institutions.

What do you call these actions? Manipulation, FOR SURE! But what else? Thought control? Triggering? Gaslighting?

Without direct knowledge of the (CRT) theory, the public was vulnerable to destructive political propaganda.

The words on the image are a quote from YouTube captioning (not added by me).Image taken from an April 5, 2022 Livestream presentation by Christopher Rufo at Hillsdale College, Michigan, titled, “Laying Siege to the Institutions.”

Those weaponizing CRT did so by controlling the narrative, the propaganda —our ability to have reasonable conversations. They weaponized PCT (Public Choice Theory) in a similar manner — only worse.

Unlike the massive media coverage and open debate over CRT, there’s little talk about PCT outside the circle of “political economists.” And there is little talk about changing the Constitution. That tactic leaves us all vulnerable to targeted propaganda and is sure to end our right to govern if we don’t counter it.

“Although public choice economists have focused mostly on analyzing government failure, they also have suggested ways to correct problems.” Public Choice Theory by Jane S. Shaw

As a research theory, PCT (like CRT) has a legitimate use. But its abuse in the political marketplace — in precisely targeting our voting behavior — is the danger to the republic most in need of addressing immediately.

Here’s Some Simple Actions You Can Take Right Now

We restore our right to govern ourselves by recognizing and resisting the influence Public Choice Theory has over us in the political marketplace.

Judge groups and people by their actions.

Watch your language for divisive words. Listen carefully to words others are using, especially when you find them troubling, confusing, or triggering some other emotion. Question whether or not you and others are being manipulated.

Confront lies. Don’t let them stand as truths when you are certain that what you are really seeing or hearing is destructive propaganda. Correct lies immediately as ” false … fake … untrue … incorrect … dishonest … wrong.” Stand firmly on the truth without arguing.

Decide what you will and can do.

Choose an issue or cause that will help on the local, state, or national fronts.
Determine how much time you can give, stay devoted to that commitment, and do it with a determination to not give up.
Research organizations that are already actively addressing your chosen pursuits, in a way that makes sense to you, and consider joining them. Make sure they are legitimate.

Know a candidate’s position on changing the Constitution.

Vote in every election! Do your best to inform yourself. Then go vote! If you find you don’t have enough information on some contests, it’s okay to leave them blank.

Everyday — try. In everything you read or hear, try to sort out the truth for yourself.

“In politics, being deceived is no excuse.” Leszek Kolakowski

Stuck in the Muck: Trapped in Reforms that Don’t Work

Posted on April 5, 2017 by Victoria M. Young

If President Trump drained the swamp, we would still be stuck in the muck.

Cartoon provided by Ben Garrison. Visit his site at GrrrGraphics!

Still waiting on leaders to fix health care? And how many decades have we talked about fixing the education system? But, did you know that both these systems are suffering from the same problem?

“Make America great again”?

We can’t do that without understanding what changed America. Until then, we spin our wheels, dig ourselves in deeper, and allow the expanding swamp to be refilled.

The problem?

We switched drivers — from leaders believing in progress to those driven by outcome-based data, money, and their own arrogance. Our drivers own the world and dictate the rules.

We the People? We’re stuck in the muck created by political corruption.

Health care, social security, the justice system, the environment, education, on and on — all the major social problems are being kicked down the road. And we are stuck in debt up to our eyeballs while ever-widening holes develop in our social safety net.

Most of the holes were created by us and what we don’t know.

In the health care debate, what aren’t we hearing?

“The physicians say the increased use of quality metrics to assess provider performance is having a negative impact on quality of care. Far fewer (22 percent) see quality metrics as having a positive impact on quality.

Nearly half (47 percent) of physicians and just over a quarter (27 percent) of nurse practitioners and physician assistants say the recent trends in healthcare are leading them to consider an earlier retirement.”

Physicians and teachers are facing the same problems.

Source: NPR Suicides are up. Tracking outcomes isn’t what these people needed us to do.

Where we once had community hospitals (and schools), we now have health care (and charter) management organizations. They control data-driven systems with an eye towards cost-cutting through technology and lower labor costs. The technology industry and health treatment industries, as well as the education market, are flourishing.

People? We aren’t doing so well.

Restoring American Happiness

Not only are teens and middle-aged men killing themselves at alarming rates, Americans in general are not as happy as we once were.

We know we need to address heath care. But we seem unaware of how desperately we need to consider real education reform as a national priority.

If we can’t gain control of our own local school systems, what hope do we have of solving our other more complex problems?

When leaders put Standards Based Reforms (SBR) in federal education law, we were trapped in the education metrics of outcome-based reforms.

Drop the fallacy that Market-Based ideology is a silver bullet!

Market theory was sold as Standards Based Reforms. But it is a business theory NOT a health care or education reform. Only when we wake up to that fact will true education reform become possible.

Statistics now prove what many believe. Standards don’t ensure student achievement. The focus on monitoring outcomes ignores the problems created by separate and unequal schools.

The misconception is that setting “higher, better” standards improves schools. It doesn’t.

Do you know why No Child Left Behind (NCLB) didn’t improve schools? SBR. And the current Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) perpetuates the same problem. SBR.

“Now we risk setting national curriculum standards instead of recognizing that children need us to identify their individual strengths and weaknesses and work with them to attain a level of mastery of the classroom curriculum as outlined in a locally agreed upon instructional framework.

This isn’t a philosophy that gets away from being held accountable to a standard; it’s one that is responsible for meeting the needs of the individual student along with educational standards.” The Crucial Voice of the People, 2012

That is a description of standards-referenced education, not standards-based (NOT the Outcome-Based – Market Theory). Market theory leaves us stuck spending tax dollars on something that isn’t a reform (SBR). Therefore, none of that money is an investment in progress.

“We’re stuck because our focus, our funding priorities, and our personal beliefs and attitudes are failing to serve our country.

We are stuck in the standardization of children ditch because we set test scores as our goal—in law and in the minds of Americans.” The Crucial Voice of the People

Metrics rule.

Plus, we have not listened to people with a passion for teaching and compassion for children.

“In the last several years, with the continuing emphasis on using data to drive instruction, I find myself increasingly skeptical about what we do to ‘benefit’ students. …

Data seems to be the driver of much educational policy today, even when it means we force students into increased time with their weakest subjects, and excluding content that might intrigue them. We marvel at the lack of engagement while we simultaneously impose rigid interventions…

I’m very concerned that our fixation on data has become more important than the engagement of students in topics that might lead them to important self-realizations of competency… It often feels like teachers are working in a system designed for disengagement, while at the same time being evaluated on their skill at maintaining engagement! …

Regardless of my knowledge or enthusiasm, I’m still expected to march as a good soldier with what I see as an archaic system…

Our current models mean we–teachers, administrators, and students–fixate more on ‘grades’ than learning. I can no longer grow as an educator when I feel confined by parameters that fail to prioritize self-discovery and lifelong learning–for all of us.” — Cindy McDonald (A Now Retired Teacher)

We are losing compassionate and passionate public servants.

With money being tied to outcome-metrics, public services are trapped. That leaves public servants controlled by politics. And politics controls government spending.

It gets worse. The more automated our human services become, the less service we are providing to humans. Frustrated, people blame their government.

But consider this. “Our” government is run by those with the biggest say in the lawmaking process. We know who they are — the rich, ultra-rich, and the greedy. Their practice of greasing palms created the swamp slim.

And it is the arrogance of these ultra-rich people— telling us what is best for us— that we should no longer tolerate.

Corruption is literally killing our society.

SO, we are the ones needing to roll up our sleeves and drain the swamp.

Cleaning House requires an election revolution every two years until we’re no longer stuck.

Start in The House.

In writing about the House of Representatives, James Madison said, “They in a word hold the purse” (Federalist No. 58). “The greater the power is, the shorter ought to be its duration” (Federalist No. 52). Thus, Article I SECTION. 2 “The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People…”

If we ever hope to restore America and rebuild upon its ideals, we must make our government work for us.

One solution offered in Restoring American Happiness is greater public financing of health and education. And we must invest wisely.

We need to control the purse…

“As the people are the only legitimate fountain of power” (Federalist No. 49), we are central to our own progress as a nation. That requires “above all the vigilant and manly spirit which actuates the people of America, … (Federalist No. 57).”

Call it an electoral revolt or call it an election revolution. Call it what you will. It is what our nation’s fathers directed us to do. It will advance progress.

We filled the swamp; we can drain it. And we can refill it with representatives that will invest in the human side of both health care and education….or we drain it again…in two years time.

Politically Motivated Bad Behavior

Posted on January 30, 2016 by Victoria M. Young

Bad behavior is routinely accepted — to a degree. Rudeness, bullying, and intimidation — to the point of an armed showdown with authorities — is where many draw the line of civility while others argue that this type of uncivil “disobedience” has become a necessity.

by Amelia Templeton OPB

Are actions without regard to how they affect others really what the People must now do to lobby for change?

Currently, the armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge appears to be almost over. But, this type of fighting over hotly contested political issues will more than likely go on like it has in the past — politically motivated but without party affiliation.

“The right has no monopoly on the kind of people who’ll justify violence or extremism based on what they think are infallible beliefs.”

This time the confrontation with the government of the People began over land rights and mandatory minimum sentencing policies. Other times, as reporter Rocky Barker explained, “I saw environmental activists hound foresters and range conservationists” and “it wasn’t long ago that ecoterrorism was the big fear…”

“What makes the harassment, threats, intimidation, bullying and disrespect worse is that it happens routinely around the West.”

It’s happening routinely around the world!

In Barker’s article, he went on to elaborate on the fact that congress and the executive branch are the ones making and executing the laws while federal employees are the ones on the front lines taking the heat when heated disputes arise over public policies.

What creates “the heat”? Friction.

When we have two opposing views and the sides are unwilling or unable to make an honest attempt to listen to, clearly see, and do their very best to understand the opposing point of view, compromise becomes impossible. Frustration results. Absolutism rubs people the wrong way… creating friction.

Eventually, frustration results in bad behavior. That said, there is no excusing disobedience that crosses the line to terrorism. But there is good reason for all of us to try to comprehend why we continue to see acts of violence perpetuated by frustrated individuals.

We need to look more closely for the root cause of the frustration in this country over public policies.

As Alexis de Tocqueville, the French aristocrat who came to America in the early 1800’s to see our great republic, observed…

“Americans frequently change the laws, but the foundation of the Constitution is respected.”

He warned…

“I think that in changing their administrative processes as often as they do, the inhabitants of the United States compromise the future of republican government.

Constantly hindered in their projects by the continuous volatility of legislation, it is feared that men will in the end consider the republic as an inconvenient way of living in society; the evil resulting from the instability of secondary laws would then put the existence of fundamental laws in question, and would indirectly bring a revolution…”

He also predicted that we would move rapidly into despotism — ruled by absolutism. Have we arrived at that point in time?

Political revolution, by definition, is a fundamental change in a political organization. In the 1800’s, Americans frequently changed the laws? Now? I don’t think so. I think the laws are being changed on us, not by us. In the 1800’s, the foundation of the Constitution was respected? Now? I think the foundation is being ignored, eroded, and misconstrued.

But, this is the political season of seasons. There is no better time than now to ask our representatives and potential representatives to step up to the front lines and explain what they see as the foundation of our country.

My personal views on federal lands, the Constitution, and the tactics it takes to be heard are in opposition to the armed occupiers of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, but, I would also hope something good could still come out of this disastrous, misguided attempt at “civil” disobedience.

The people of Burns should be heard.

Waitress Linda Gainer “is one of many people who say the occupation has torn her community apart. Gainer has fed nearly everyone involved with the standoff: occupiers, FBI agents, journalists, visiting environmentalists and others, but has received criticism for permitting the occupiers to buy food from her cafe.”

“People say that we’re unpatriotic, we’re terrorists,” she said. “You shouldn’t go around and say nasty things about people just because you don’t agree on something.”

Another view:

The Malheur occupation has broken down that spirit of cooperation, said Vanessa Leathers-King, 33, whose great-great grandfather was the first in her family to ranch in the county. She divided the community into three groups: Bundy allies, federal government allies, and a lot of people who identify a bit with both — like her.

“I believe there is a lot of government overreach that is affecting this way of life, affecting small towns,” Leathers-King said. “The part I don’t agree with is taking illegal action to change it.”

Even so, she feels her neighbors have labeled her an occupation supporter, and she pulled her son out of school after students bullied him for being a “Bundy-lover.”

We’ve all heard the old saying that “absolute power corrupts absolutely” but we don’t seem to be able to recognize the destructive nature of absolutism itself — in each of us.

In the case of this armed occupation, one dead so far. One community divided. The total damage? Unknown. The chance for something good to come out of this—up to us.

Test Refusal Justified

Posted on April 15, 2015 by Victoria M. Young

Not only is refusal —or “opting out”— of standardized testing justified, it is necessary. Here’s why: the “reform” process of No Child Left Behind failed and the system failed to respond, or even acknowledge, the crux of the problem despite the repeated attempts of many to help make the law better.

Many parents in low-income communities endured the senseless, useless, time-consuming, curriculum-narrowing, opportunity-limiting implementation of the No Child Left Behind standardized testing regime. Quietly? No, not all of them. Many wrote letters to representatives, editorials to newspapers, dozens upon dozens of researched papers, and even books!

We dissenters attended meetings; we petitioned, protested, and marched. We should have seen things change for the better during the last decade but instead; the next generation of parents got “higher standards” and “next generation assessments.”

This was from Idaho in 1999 when “achievement standards” were introduced as “exit standards.”

The “silver bullet” of standards and testing tied to “accountability” was sold to the public as the path to school improvement. No proof then; no proof now.

Familiar words? Same promise? Different year – 2011.

We should be outraged.

Not paying attention, or, has the information been very tightly controlled?

Last straw? Prompted by tactics and threats aimed at parents that have refused to allow their children to take the “next generation” Common Core aligned tests, I reached a tipping point and directed my words of condemnation at a school district administrator —who had written a disturbing letter to parents and guardians. My letter in response included questions that should have been allowed to be asked, and been answered, in an “open, large scale forum” on education reform BEFORE it happened to us.…Let me step off my soapbox …. and cut to the chase for you readers. …

The concern for compliance with rules and laws mandating testing participation was clearly stated in the districts’ letter, “…the district must ensure compliance with State and Federal laws.”

QUESTION: how do these laws and codes supersede the civil rights of parents as guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States?

Also in the letter was an expression of consideration, “I fully understand every parent’s desire to make educational decisions they think are best for their child…” But… the tone of the letter was meant to discourage parents from doing what they felt was best. How can there be “full understanding”?

FURTHER QUESTIONS: How do parents decide what is right without a full disclosure of information?

With the “next generation assessments” being computerized, being “adaptive” in nature, and teachers not being allowed to view the tests unless specifically certified by the company or state and then not being allowed to discuss the test, what are parents or guardians consenting to when they allow a child to be tested through the new testing consortium? ( COPPA-Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule requires schools obtain verifiable parental consent for their children’s personal information to be entered during the testing process.)

Are our data exchange projects with other states still ongoing?

With student data being linked with information from agencies outside the State Department of Education, will parents or guardians be given the chance to give consent to each transfer of their student’s data?

In informed decision making on this matter, all facts are required to decide if the decision to refuse this testing will severely impact the quality of education in the district, as stated in the letter. Does the risk outweigh the impact of lost instructional time, lost instructional dollars, and loss of control of curriculum content as well as private student information?

There is a reason the dissenters to high-stakes testing have not been sufficiently heard.

Here’s an example:

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundations are major sponsors and this piece was essential for the Common Core State Standards Initiative package deal.

With the push for development of longitudinal data systems during the pit of the Great Recession, many issues surrounding the Common Core State Standards Initiative and its “next generation” tests were not fully vetted in the arena of public opinion partially because it became a “best practice” to “not engage in large scale, open forums.”The not-to-be open debate on education reform could have benefited the public’s understanding of No Child Left Behind, the Common Core State Standards Initiative and its “next generation” assessments.

Now, the public should consider why test refusal is necessary:

1) No Child Left Behind is the federal law upon which the nation was convinced they must comply with high-stakes standardized testing. Thirteen years later, that nonsensical overstep by the federal government has yet to be challenged in our superior courts. Disregarding research about appropriate uses of standardized tests and with no regard for objections raised by the people affected by the law, the law remains in place and the reauthorization process is far from transparent. Consent by the People has not been deemed to be of importance therefore leaving civil disobedience as the next step in a parent’s duty to defend what they think is best for their children.

2) The Common Core State Standards Initiative was never about “just” the standards. There was always the intent to develop the “next generation assessments” to correspond with the Common Core Standards. Our American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA/TARP) dollars served as the seed money for the two consortiums to develop these tests. What has always been missing from any public discussion was the intent of the two private, non-profit groups that hold the copyright for the standards — the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and the National Governors Association (NGA). The intention was/is to “direct the collection of student data to a single reporting office within the U.S. Department of Education through the reauthorization of ESEA” (the Elementary and Secondary Education Act) otherwise know as No Child Left Behind. This is item #10, on page 9, of the CCSSO/NGA “new deal” for ESEA reauthorization.

3) What should be respected and understood about a parents’ refusal to comply with the rules, regulations, and laws set down for them by their elected representatives, who have not represented their views, is that they feel a strong moral responsibility to do what is right for their children. Many parents feel forced or coerced participation in testing is wrong, and is potentially, and in reality, driving a wedge between them and their child, their teachers, their school administrators, their neighbors, communities, and the larger society who can’t comprehend or understand their stance. What we should understand as citizens is that it is morally reprehensible to turn a blind eye to rules, policies, and laws judged to be wrong for children by their own parents.

4) As ordinary law-abiding, tax-paying citizens, we pay our taxes because we know it is the cost of maintaining a civil society including “free” public schools. In a representative form of government founded on the Consent of the People, our choices in this manner should include having “large-scale, open forums” where a meaningful exchange of ideas could occur, or, civil disobedience as a second choice when the first choice has been denied us.

With No Child Left Behind testing mandates, the Common Core State Standards Initiative, and their “next generation” tests and all that go with them, the choice was made for us.

Our “consent” in the decision-making process was denied.

Civil disobedience through test refusal is a parental right in need of supporting.

Politicians put parents and children in the middle of the mess they created through a corrupted political process. There was always a better way.

The Crucial Voice of the People

Shining Light on the Truth

Tag Archives: Constitution