I find it so ironic that HSLDA is pushing this bill, when, in my own personal, local experience, it was an HSLDA lawyer who stated that that organization did not approach the Prince William County (VA) school board to seek changes in a problematic local homeschooling regulation because, I was told, of the dangers of opening up regulations -- you just never know what you'll end up with, and it might be worse than what you started with, was the explanation I was given. (This was the "approval before removal" regulation, which, counter to state code -- which specifically allows parents to remove children from school and file to homeschool afterwards -- required parents to leave their kids in school until their notice of intent to homeschool was reviewed and found to be in compliance with the law.)
So this kind of action is recognized by HSLDA as potentially injurious to homeschool freedoms on a local level, but on the federal level, it's a GOOD idea to try to fix what ain't broke? (We'll be working on grammar later this afternoon, I am sure.) I would like to hear HSLDA's explanation of this contradiction.
Meanwhile, on his (apparently) soon-to-be-nonexistent blog, we've got Scott Somerville of HSLDA (along with visitors to the site) asking Rob Reich why he advocates regulation of homeschooling when there's no clear evidence of a problem that requires fixing. What demonstrated problems are there with the federal treatment of homeschooling that are worth the risk of drawing the attention of all those legislators to those of us who buck the system in fundamental ways by not sending our kids to school? The Japanese have a saying that "the nail that sticks up will be pounded in" (or something like that). But if no one notices the nail, and nobody trips on it or gets a hole in a their sock from it, then it can go on sticking out for years -- and sometimes the wood around it swells up to meet it and solves the problem painlessly...
But you're missing the big picture. HSLDA has written itself (they ARE the authors of this bill, BTW) in as a de facto homeschooling accreditation agency. Yes, for the purposes of entrance into the military, HEKs would need certification from "the Home School Legal Defense Association or a State or county home-school association or organization." And you thought only educrats could play IAATM games.
I agree with you, Daryl. I was just struck by the irony...
I don't think I was very politically aware when HoNDA first appeared. I recall hearing bits and pieces a few years ago and I've come across references to it. However, I continued to pass over it, because I thought this was all past-tense.
Who's responsible for breathing new life into this thing (sheep who march to the federalist beat, HSLDA lawyers whose livelihoods depend on breeding more sheep, misinformed lawmakers, misinformed hsers, all of the above)?
At any rate, the info I posted has been forwarded extensively, therefore, I am unable to track and credit its original source. If you know who should be hat-tipped, please leave a comment.
Until then, I'm reading everything I can find about HoNDA. Please pass along any relevent resources for those of us who are still navigating the HoNDA learning curve.
Chris has a masterful fisking of HONDA over at O'DonnellWeb http://www.odonnellweb.com/
It's as good an explanation as I've seen anywhere as to why HONDA is bad for homeschoolers.
If someone doesn't understand the potential implications of HONDA, go on over to Chris' and you'll get it.
The bill was written by Mike Farris. Musgrave is his lapdog in Congress. She was also the sponsor of the execrable amendment to enshrine anti-gay discrimination in the U.S. Constitution. Coincidentally, Farris testified before Congress in support of the amendment. Small world, eh?
Oh crap. I can't believe this is back. Thanks for passing along the HT. I'm off to find my activist shoes and stand on some legislative steps (sans denim dress of course!).
Commenting by HaloScan
