EDUCATION FOR A FREE NATION
105 Peavey Rd, Suite 116, Chaska, MN 55318
952-361-4931
www.edwatch.org -
edwatch@lakes.com
December 22, 2005
We the People - A Terrible
Federally-Funded Textbook
By Allen Quist
In
her recent article on civics education, Nancy Salvato defended the
textbook We the People: the Citizen and the Constitution and its
publisher, the Center for Civic Education (CCE). In this article Salvato
chose to not mention the fact that both the textbook and the CCE are
funded by federal tax dollars (as written in
"
We the Proletariat"). She praises the CCE, however, by saying:
The best thing about it [CCEs We the People program] is that
schools can implement it at no cost. She avoids the real issue, however,
by not saying that the reason We the People is available to
schools at little or no cost is because it is funded by federal tax
dollars.
Salvato additionally neglects to tell her readers that she is the Illinois Sixth
Congressional District Coordinator for the CCE. This means that her
article is not an arms-length, objective defense of We the People
and the CCE. On the contrary, the article is really the spin that the
CCE uses to promote its programs and its ongoing requests for federal
money.
The CCE should be free to write any kind of materials it wishes, including
textbooks which push the ideology of the radical left -- its forte. (See
Textbook
Review of We the People.) The federal government, however, should
not be subsidizing the CCE and its textbooks, or any other textbooks (as
stipulated by the proposed
Freedom in
Education Act). The CCE should be required to compete in the
free-marketplace of ideas along with other publishers of school
textbooks. Salvato can not begin to defend the CCE without avoiding the
real issue. Under present circumstances, the CCE uses some of its
substantial financial resources to lobby Congress for more money. That
money will be used to lobby Congress for more funding in the future as
well as put various people on the payroll who will be expected to defend
the CCE.
In its last budget proposal to Congress, the Bush Administration wisely zeroed
out funding for the CCE. Was that a problem for the CCE? Not at all. The
CCE simply used its influence, paid for in part by federal dollars, to
lobby Congress to have its funding put back in the budget and has
actually managed to have its proposed appropriations increased over the
current budget. To minimize the potential for this kind of abuse of
centralized power, perhaps education policy should be left to the states
and the people, as the Tenth Amendment clearly indicates. (Not
surprisingly, the CCE undermines the Tenth Amendment in its materials.)
Because of
the left-leaning nature of the its materials, in addition to the federal
funding issue, the CCE understandably specializes in misleading the
public about its works. The Salvato article is typical of the CCE. In
this article, for example, Nancy Salvato attempts to explain the fact
that the Second Amendment is conspicuously absent from the second portion
of the textbook, the unit titled: What Rights Does the Bill of Rights
Protect [Today]? (How can a government text have a unit with this title
and not mention the right to bear arms?) Salvatos defense of this Second
Amendment disappearing act is stated as follows:
Yet on page 240, right there in black and white, the second
amendment is listed with a definition that includes both of these ideas
[state militias and private ownership rights].
Unfortunately, Salvato neglects to inform the reader that page 240 is in
the Appendix! It is in that part of the Appendix that includes the
Constitution (all government textbooks include the Constitution some
place, usually in the Appendix). For Salvato to argue that the book gives
the Second Amendment adequate treatment because the Constitution is in
the Appendix is absurd. This is not a legitimate argument; it is
manipulation -- the kind of propaganda that is typical of the
CCE.
The rest of the Salvato article has no more substance than the argument described
above. Let the buyer beware. The writings of Nancy Salvato regarding the
CCE and its We the People program are nothing more than the
rhetoric of the CCE. Is it too much to ask that the talking points of
the CCE be labeled as such?
[Allen Quist is Adjunct Professor of Political Science at Bethany
Lutheran College. He is a former three-term member of the Minnesota House
of Representatives and the Minnesota House Education Committee. He is
author of three books and numerous articles on education policy. He is a
frequent speaker at various national conferences on education issues.
Several of his articles and books are available at
EdWatch.org.]
EdWatch is entirely user-supported. The continuation of our research
and distribution work depends upon individual contributors. To assure
that our work continues,
click here. If
you want to subscribe or unsubscribe to this EdWatch e-mail service, mail
to:
edwatch@lakes.com. Put "subscribe" or
"unsubscribe" in the SUBJECT of the message. Resources of
videos, books, and audiotapes are available on our shopping cart.