[Vision2020] Politcal questions and answers between Mr. Bouma and Ms. Huskey

Fri Apr 20 18:09:53 PDT 2012

Visionaries:

Over the last week I've exchanged the following emails with Gresham Bouma.
In truth, I was surprised to receive a response since it is clear I will not
be supporting him in the upcoming election.  Therefore, I would like to
publicly acknowledge his willingness to engage in the conversation with me.
He has given his permission for me to share these emails with Vision 2020.
At the end of the emails I responded from my perspective to his position(s)
on the questions I asked him.  

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Rosemary Huskey <
<mailto:donaldrose at cpcinternet.com> donaldrose at cpcinternet.com> wrote:

Good Morning Mr. Bouma,

I am sure that we share the belief that a competent legislator needs to
think clearly and rationally in order to adequately serve his/her
constituents. To that end, could you please respond to the following
questions.

1. Do you believe that the earth is less than ten thousand years old?

2. Do you believe that the creationism should be presented as an alternative
theory to evolution in public schools?

3. Do you believe that homeschooling parents should be required to pass
competency tests equivalent to Idaho certification standards in elementary
or secondary education? If not, why not? 

I will post a copy of this email on Moscow\'s community forum Vision 2020 as
well as your response. It is my hope that you are eager to deliver your
message to a wide audience of (potential) constituents and will not ignore
or avoid this opportunity.

Sincerely,

Rosemary Huskey

******

From: Gresham Bouma [mailto: <mailto:greshambouma at gmail.com>
greshambouma at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 10:19 PM
To:  <mailto:donaldrose at cpcinternet.com> donaldrose at cpcinternet.com
Subject: Re: GreshamBouma.com CONTACT

 Thanks so much, Rosemary, for your desire to help the community get a clear
understanding of my views. Regarding the issue of what is taught in schools,
as an Idaho Senator my concern is not writing our science or philosophy
curricula, but preserving the rights of the people to do that freely without
government bullying or bureaucratic waste. I desire a truly free market of
ideas - debated on their intrinsic merits rather than their political
correctness or effect on "next years funding".

I know I may not be popular with those few citizens who want to use the
government's strong arm to tell their neighbors what theories and ideas they
may or may not let their children be exposed to and discuss. I believe it is
not the federal or state government's job to police or sensor what ideas the
people are allowed to examine. I think local communities of parents have had
quite enough of that and they just need someone to stand with them for their
constitutional liberties.
Sincerely,

Gresham Bouma

********
Thank you for your response Mr. Bouma.  With your permission I will post our
correspondence on V2020.  If you would rather I wouldn't I won't.

Sincerely,

Rosemary Huskey

******

Sure Rosemary, you can go ahead and post it.

Thanks,

Gresham

********

Dear Mr. Bouma,

I believe that while we both care about the education of children and (in my
case) grandchildren we approach the issue from very different perspectives.
It is my sense that as a parent and Libertarian-style conservative you
strongly support the curious educational justifications offered by
homeschooling parents who self-segregate for religious and political
reasons.  Is that what you meant when you wrote that you were interested in
"preserving the rights of the people [i.e. to write science or philosophical
curricula] freely without government bullying or bureaucratic waste"? While
your commitment to those goals may soothe the emotional needs of that group
of parents, I wonder what effect it has on the intellectual growth of their
children.

My concerns about home schooled children are the same concerns that I have
for children whose parents think they are competent to treat strep throat
with homeopathic concoctions brewed on the kitchen stove. The child may
survive the (arguably) well intentioned efforts of their parents but their
recovery will be prolonged, unnecessary painful, and may include serious
post-infection complications.

Homeschooling is often used to celebrate and accommodate personal
philosophies.  That rationale, in my opinion, represents a substantial risk
to the intellectual and social development of a child.  Perhaps we can agree
that the task of educating a child is complex and demanding.  Effective
pedagogy and accurate  instruction requires a particular background and
specialized knowledge.  Sensible, mature adults readily admit to great gaps
in specialized knowledge. They know what they don't know.  For example, I
would not be competent to teach Gallic despite a comprehensive set of Gallic
language tapes, many CDs of Gallic music, a granddaughter who is an award
winning Irish dancer, and a relatively strong academic background in the
history and culture of Great Britain and Ireland.  Despite the Gallic
"props" I own and my personal interest in all things Irish, I realize that a
"can do" attitude alone is insufficient to explain my demonstrable failure
to speak, let alone teach, Gallic.  

If I can grasp the concept that I am not a know-it-all Renaissance woman
would you help me to understand why the constant display of swaggering
hubris is so evident (and frankly, misplaced) in the minds and behaviors of
local Tea Party Republicans.  Why is it so difficult for these men (and
women) to acknowledge that they don't have a special and unique knowledge of
biological sciences, U.S. history, and certainly not constitution law.  Do
you understand how silly your Brush Fire Alliance
<http://www.facebook.com/pages/Brushfire-Alliance-Inc/121660691205500>
supporters  look and sound when they yank out their pocket constitutions and
proffer legal opinions on complex issues  which appear to be based on the
ignorant and half assed notions of Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, and that tin
star yahoo, constitutional jackass Sheriff Richard Mack
<http://sheriffmack.com/> .  Why in the world is sheriff Mack such an
inspiration  to local Tea Party/Latah County candidates
<http://www.facebook.com/rickh340> ?   

And, that Mr. Bouma, leads me to the plank in your platform that claims
government needs to be removed from our lives.  There are many examples that
government can and does serve the public interest.  For example, I
appreciate the standards (developed by specialists) that are enacted by
state and federal legislators and enforced by public agencies (you know,
that whole by the people and for the people thing) which offers protection
and oversight from impure or unsafe medications and food.  I am grateful
that teachers in Idaho public schools are subject to a process of
certification in the subject area they teach.  I am delighted that the folks
who design our highways and bridges can provide documents demonstrating that
they have successfully completed academic and professional requirements to
be civil engineers.  What is objectionable about those activites?

What do you mean by the statement that "the government's strong arm attempts
to tell people what theories or ideas they may or may not let their children
be exposed to or discuss."  Please provide me with examples of that
behavior.  When has the federal or state government presumed to "sensored
[sic] what people think"?  Are you referring to  The State of Tennessee v.
John Thomas Scopes
<http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/statcase.htm>  or
Brown v Topeka Board of Education
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0347_0483_ZO.html>
as  examples of unwarranted governmental intrusion?  If you decide to answer
only one question of the many I have asked, your answer to this one is
probably the most significant to your potential constituents.

And finally, are you willing to introduce or support legislation calling for
proof of teaching competency and verification of professional credentials by
the Idaho Board of Education from home schooling parents?  If not, why not?
The issue is clear: does the state have an interest in the education of all
children who live in Idaho?  The State Board of Education reviews and sets
academic standards and credential requirements for public schools and
teachers.  Don't the children of homeschooling parents have a right to equal
or equivalent qualifications from their teachers?  If not, how do you defend
the apparent double standard?  I can't help pointing out that good
intentions, religious orthodoxy, devotion to children, and enthusiasm aren't
legitimate substitutes for independently recognized and accepted teaching
credentials.

Thank you for offering me the opportunity for this conversation.

Rose Huskey

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120420/3c910dcc/attachment-0001.html>