Yippee! Hip-Hip-Hooray!!! (Sarc ON!)

Yippee!  Hip-Hip-Hooray!!!

Today, your Kansas Senate moves to GROW GOVERNMENT!!!

Today, your Kansas Senate moves to INFUSE MORE GOVERNMENT into more private entities!

Today, your Kansas Senate moves to INFUSE MORE GOVERNMENT into the individual lives of kids!


Led by Chair Sen. Molly Baumgardner and Vice Chair Sen. Renee Erickson, the Senate Education committee feeling it “necessary” to get as many bills passed out of Committee as soon as possible got their part done!  SB61 was moved quickly through and passed out of committee; recommended to be passed by the Senate!

Isn’t it wonderful?!

Those things and people that are “necessary” get such attention!

Those things and people that are “necessary” get rushed handling!

All the while, the legislature HAS NOT felt the “necessity” of moving quickly to unchain your life from all its mandated restrictions and government tracking!

And, WAIT, your Kansas House will also be moving to GROW GOVERNMENT!!!

Led by Chair Rep. Kristey Williams, the House K-12 Education Budget committee has ALSO recommended passage of SB61’s counterpart, bill HB2068!  The House Education committee is working hard as well to GROW GOVERNMENT!

MORE GOVERNMENT REGULATION of private schools!!!

MORE KIDS being included in GOVERNMENT accountability reports and achievement reports!!!

Congratulations, Kansas legislature!

The people of Kansas cannot THANK YOU enough for RUSHING to EXTEND the SHUTDOWN of our lives – AND – GROW more GOVERNMENT!

We can’t wait to see how quickly the Rep. Kristey William’s K-12 Education Budget committee can pass HB2119.  It’s even MORE GOVERNMENT!


CALL the CHAIR Phone: 785-296-7488
Email: brenda.landwehr@house.ks.gov

and VICE-CHAIR Phone: 785 296-8621
Email: John.Eplee@house.ks.gov

of the Health and Human Services committee and express your high displeasure with their hearing of HB2159 – a bill SPONSORED BY the committee.


HB2159 — AN ACT concerning schools; relating to the student data privacy act; certain tests, questionnaires, surveys and examinations; permitting the administration thereof on an opt-out basis; providing conditions therefor; amending K.S.A. 72-6316 and repealing the existing section.  hb2159_00_0000.pdf (kslegislature.org)

Sponsored by the committee on Health and Human Services.

Chaired by Rep Brenda Landwehr

Vice Chaired by Rep John Eplee

Two years ago, in 2019, this EXACT bill (HB2361) to DIMINISH parent authority and EXPAND counselling and mental health personnel authority was heard by the Committee on Children and Seniors, chaired by Rep Susan Concannon and vice-chaired by Rep Susan Humphries.  In 2018, a very similar bill (SB389) was heard in the Senate Education committee chaired by Sen Molly Baumgardner.


·        Seeks to CHANGE the authority to administer surveys FROM an affirmative consent on the part of the parent TO a parent only being able to opt out.

·        Seeks to CHANGE the complete authority for the decision to participate in the survey FROM the parent TO an innate assumption of participation, UNLESS a student having been notified that participation is voluntary elects to not participate, OR a parent, upon notification elects to opt out.

·        Seeks to EXPAND the authority of school employees to provide services (which automatically include the administration of tests and forms) to a student WITHOUT the KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT of the parent, via the ADDED INCLUSION of the services of SCHOOL-BASED MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS with those of counselors.


The provisions in this bill would allow for the administration of the Kansas Communities That Care (KCTC) Student Survey.  Sec 1.(a)(1) of HB2159 provides that a survey does not “record, request or solicit a student to provide any personally identifiable student data.”  If you look an actual copy of the KCTC survey, you will find numerous personally identifying points of data.  And, especially when these data points are considered in combination with one another, you most certainly do have the ability to personally identify survey participants.


ü  This bill removes strong reverence and respect for parent authority and replaces it with a weakened nod to parent authority; replaces ACTIVE parent authority with PASSIVE parent authority.

ü  There is NO provision in this bill requiring an ACTUAL COPY of the test, questionnaire, or survey be provided to the parent as a part of the initial notification.

ü  This bill allows an END-RUN around parent authority via school counseling services.

ü  This bill does not represent, affirm, or protect the personal private intellectual data of students.

ü  This bill SUBJUGATES INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS to the purported premise of the benefit or need of THE COMMUNITY.

Terrible Bill–HB2119–Read More Here

Have we had enough GOVERNMENT intrusion in and control of our lives in this last year?

Did Kansans not show up and elect people to the legislature who campaigned on reducing the government’s stranglehold on our lives?

Have Kansas parents not shown up numerous times to demand schools be fully open?

Well, thus far, the legislature has managed to EXTEND the “state of emergency.”  How many days did it take for newly elected legislators to walk back their campaign rhetoric and VOTE to continue the infringements of our individual rights?  “Just two more months” of your life.  No problem!  Right?

Instead … legislators have been busy rushing hearings on bills to GROW GOVERNMENT.

Instead of – first and foremost – doing everything they could to end the attack on our lives and livelihoods.

Instead of – first and foremost – doing everything they could to fulfill their oath to uphold the Constitution, protecting and defending our individual liberties.

Instead … legislators FIRST ACTED to tell the people they could continue on in the same “shut down” “emergency” mode, while ….

Instead … legislators have been busy AS USUAL bringing all their lobbyist bills to continue GROWING GOVERNMENT, “managing” our little lives.

The legislature has done nothing to “fix” the schools it funds – apparently the schools at which kids are “failing.”

Parents and kids are TIRED of the “choices” many have been forced to make.

–        Remote / Hybrid / In-person

–        All the on-line time

–        Masks / screening protocols

–        Quarantining

–        Contact tracing invasion of privacy

–        Reduced or eliminated activities

–        Restrictions on families being able to enter schools and attend activities

So, instead of fixing their own public school mess, legislators are working hard to allow GOVERNMENT funding to be moved from public schools (along with the strings – SHACKLES – that GOVERNMENT monies have afforded the “failing” public schools) to homeschools and private schools.

The legislators have done such a terrific job with public schools that they fund, they want to see what they can do with their GOVERNMENT money “attached to/following” a child.

“Money following the child” = the GOVERNMENT following the child.

“Money following the child” = the GOVERNMENT’s DIRECT ATTACHMENT to your child.

“Money following the child” = the GOVERNMENT directly ENJOINED to your child.

Every kid that is “eligible:”

–        “Gets” his very own GOVERNMENT account, set up and monitored by the GOVERNMENT

–        “Gets” his account funded by the GOVERNMENT

o   Welfare check?

o   Why not have a “base” state housing allowance for EVERYONE?

o   Why not a “living wage” for all?

–        “Gets” a “base” government education allowance to “choose” where he “gets” his government education.

–        “Gets” to have reports regarding his ESA “bank” account prepared for state agencies.

“Money following the child” = the GOVERNMENT’s DIRECT ATTACHMENT to your child.

Even non-“eligible” kids in nonpublic schools accepting “eligible” kids “gets” the same GOVERNMENT education.  With the school having to comply with GOVERNMENT guidelines, programming, reporting,, and oversight, they will correspondingly be included.  Your “non-eligible” child will be nonetheless entangled in the same strings.  Sorry, parents.  Some of you who made the TRUE CHOICE and financial sacrifice to send your child to a privately funded nonpublic school will just have to understand.

AND, schools “win” too!                                                                                                         

–        Homeschoolers and nonpublic schools “get” access to GOVERNMENT monies

–        Homeschoolers and nonpublic schools “get” to comply with GOVERNMENT guidelines

–        Homeschoolers and nonpublic schools “get” to meet GOVERNMENT education qualifications

–        Homeschoolers and nonpublic schools “get” access to special program monies

–        Homeschoolers and nonpublic schools “get” to report to the GOVERNMENT

–        Homeschoolers and nonpublic schools “get” to be overseen by GOVERNMENT

–        Homeschoolers and nonpublic schools “get” to be audited by the GOVERNMENT

–        Homeschoolers and nonpublic schools “get” to defend themselves against any ways they don’t comply with GOVERNMENT directives

This bill is NOT free market.  It POISONS the market.  The “coupon”/account with the GOVERNMENT money for the child becomes the NEW NORMAL – permanent government education.  The GOVERNMENT  “coupon”/account offers vast powers of control over the entire education system.  It COMPROMISES homeschools and private schools, and UNDERCUTS public schools.

This bill brings more kids under ONE-TO-ONE GOVERNMENT monitoring and control.

This is confirmed by legislators stating, we have to give kids and option, “even if it has strings.”

Two see just how many STRINGS and “freedom” the legislature is rushing to “give” you, look at this 20-PAGE! “school choice” bill (HB2119).  hb2119_00_0000.pdf (kslegislature.org)  It’s being heard today in the House K-12 Education Budget committee meeting at 3:30pm.

20 PAGES of “FREEDOM”!!!!  Not!

We’ve also conveniently started parsing the details of HB2119.  Go here to see where the legislature you worked hard to elect is focusing its energy.  You know … rather than ending things like “states of emergency.”

Have You Contacted Legislators?

THREE things happening TODAY … Committee meetings impacting YOUR child and EXPANDING GOVERNMENT.

1.  HB2086--Allowing schools to maintain emergency medication and administer medication in emergency situations.


*What if your child is allergic to the medication delivered by the school?  Is the school liable?


*House Education committee at 1:30 today. http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2021_22/committees/ctte_h_ed_1/

 2.  HB2068 

*This is the “school choice” bill we’ve been posting about.

*Heard in House K-12 Education Budget committee at 3:30 today. http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2021_22/committees/ctte_h_k12_education_budget_1/

3. A hearing on the program  (HB2068) 


*Tax Credits for Low Income Student Scholarship Program

*Heard in Senate Education committee at 1:30 today. http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2021_22/committees/ctte_s_ed_1/


A response to HB2068 to expand Kansas’ Tax Credit for Low Income program.

(Because we haven’t experienced enough growth of the government…sarc on!)

People have been led to believe that school choice, via some type of government mechanism (vouchers, tax credits, tax credit scholarships, ESAs, etc.) is the solution to escaping what they may not like about public education. They contend it will foster competition between government subsidized private schools and government public schools, with parents having more choice between schools and schools working to improve.

Do entities in receipt of government subsidies, tax incentives/breaks, or savings mechanisms have the same autonomy as entities whose receipts and finances are not the result of a government incentive, subsidy, or savings mechanism? Do government designed and approved constructs come with requirements as to eligibility, qualifications, limits, allowances, reporting, compliance, etc., or are they free of such things? What example exists demonstrating the lack of government interference or control when in receipt of government funding, subsidies, tax breaks, or savings mechanisms? Where has the government infusion of funding ever not increased costs for all?

We even have statements and findings to affirm the goal of inevitable interference and control by the government. A few are nicely provided by Charlotte Iserbyt in “Choice” Mixing Oil with Water. http://deliberatedumbingdown.com/ddd/2019/03/03/choice-mixing-oil-with-water/

– George Bernard Shaw, of the socialist Fabian Society of England, said, “Nothing will more quickly destroy independent Christian schools than state aid; their freedom and independence will soon be compromised, and before long their faith.” https://chalcedon.edu/magazine/vouchers-freedom-and-slavery

– ALEC founder, Paul Weyrich: “We are radicals who want to change the existing power structure. We are not conservatives … We want change – we are the forces of change.” In 1981, ALEC mailed a proposed voucher model to 16,000 state and federal officials. https://lithub.com/how-fringe-christian-nationalists-made-abortion-a-central-political-issue/

– Thomas A. Shannon, Executive Director of NSBA said, “Tuition Tax credits for private school profoundly change the character of private education. Private schools that operate with public money will be subject to public regulations.” “The immutable fact is that what the government funds, the government regulates,” Mr. Shannon warned, “and that’s going to change the character of private schools enormously.” https://www.edweek.org/education/proposals-for-private-school-choice-reviving-at-all-levels-of-government/1991/02

– Per The Interagency Day Care Standards:

– “Any agency, public or private, which receives federal funds directly or indirectly through a grant or contract… or by way of a voucher plan” must meet all programs that are set down for public schools. Acceptance of Federal funds is an agreement to abide by the requirements.”

– In a March 1984 U.S. Supreme Court ruled that private schools are subject to government regulation because they enroll students who receive tuition money from the government. Even though the checks are payable to individual students, not the school, the Court says any scholarships, loans, or grants to students “constitute federal financial assistance.” https://thenewamerican.com/how-independent-are-private-schools/

Therefore, let’s consider Kansas’ tax credit scholarship program:

– Defines parameters on amounts and uses of scholarship monies

– Defines student “eligibility”

– Defines characteristics and state accreditations requirements of “qualifying” schools

– Lays out the KS statutes that establish the program

– Lays out all the state requirements and reporting SGOs must comply with

– Lays out all the school accountability reporting requirements

– Lays out the reporting in order to comply with federal ESSA, state board CCR metrics, state longitudinal achievement reporting, etc.

There’s certainly no lack of government regulation.

School choice marketing asserts that there can be stipulations (i.e. limits) on government regulation. But, the evidence is to the contrary. Rulings and legislation language have decisively affirmed that acceptance of or participation in government financial constructs obligates the acceptance of government regulation. What should lead any person to logically think this “school choice” to be the exception?

Look at Kansas’ own history in regard to these tax credit scholarships. How has this program alone impacted the institutions participating? Are any not state accredited? Are any operating under standards that do not meet state standards for accreditation? Are any not submitting reports to the state? Are any not required to comply with the K.S.A. 72-5170 requirement for schools to publish accountability measures as established by the KSBOE in regard to SEL, kindergarten readiness, individual plans of study, graduation, and postsecondary success?

How has this program impacted the kids attending? Are any of the scholarship recipients receiving an education not accredited by the state? Are any of the kids not compelled to participate in SEL? Are any of the kids not on individual plans of study? Are any of the kids not listed in state databases with commensurate data points?

Privately funded education schools have always had the freedom to choose who attends their schools, to choose their own academic constructs, to choose to decline social emotional and mental health programming, to choose their financial constructs, to choose their hiring policies, to choose not to report to the government, etc.

But, when a private school is directly or indirectly funded by the government, it must become more like the public schools. Evidence and history bear this out. If this is not a correct statement, what example can be brought forth?

We also experience the camel’s nose under the tent and incrementalism. The overall goal is to grow government control. HB2068 demonstrates this:

– Includes a change from “at risk” to “free or reduced lunch” student eligibility

– Expands the public schools from lowest performing to “any.”

The direction of change is certainly that of expansion.

School choice ≠ education freedom.

School choice = The choice by parents of where/how their child will receive his government education.

Government education seeks to mold citizens into compliant government servants.

The data collection and reporting requirements have propagated the government production of extensive dossiers on every American from cradle to grave.

Jeb Bush, a big supporter of the ever expanding datamining of children and a champion of Common Core standards, is also …. one of the biggest and key promoters of … wait for it … School Choice! The SAME people financing and pushing Common Core, assessments, and technology to transform public education, SUPPORT School Choice.

“My personal belief is there is no one single thing that needs to get done,” said [Jeb] Bush …. What it will require, he said, is a combination of school choice (vouchers), CC standards, rigorous assessments, consequences for anything less than excellence, and using technology to transform education ….. [Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, pg 7]

What happens with public education? Is it eventually totally eliminated? What replaces it?

The Blaine Amendments?

Title I portability?

Direct Student Services?

Non-government regulated private education?

There is so much more to understand about this heavily propagandized false illusion of freedom called “school choice.” It’s not actual freedom.

Tax-supported school choice proposals affecting public, private, religious, and home school education are the vehicle to change not only the right of Americans to choose what kind of education they wish for their children, but may also result in changing our representative form of government to an “unelected council form of government” due to one form of school choice, charter schools, run by “unelected councils. http://newswithviews.com/iserbyt/iserbyt115.htm

Wintry-Day Thoughts on School Choice (but with a motive in mind…HB2068 to be heard in House K-12 Budget on Tuesday)

“Money following the child = the government following the child.”

If you see the words “school choice,” you may as well put the word “fake” in front of it.

“School choice” has long been the planned mechanism to ensnare private schools and to bring them into the fold – in order to force them to teach the very ideologies that many parents want to escape. Parents, don’t fall for it! It is called “school choice,” but this term is a trap! (and by design)

Publicly funding private schools is dangerous, for they have no elected school boards, therefore no citizen representation to ensure public monies are spent teaching what the public, as a whole in in favor of. This also explains the danger of another type of “choice”: charter schools — for they, too, use public monies without representation of the public (publicly-elected school boards, for example).

To put it simply, money following the child is really the government following the child, for when government subsidizes a program, it (the government) has the obligation to regulate it. This is not choice!

So, “school choice” wants to take a designated amount of money that the state presently provides to the public school a child attends and “give” that amount of money to the parents to “choose” which school will receive that designated money.

The assumption is that schools will have to “compete” for parents to choose to send their child to their school.

Presently, the state monies going to the schools, require the schools to implement all manner of curriculum, reporting, and programming requirements. By moving the “place” as to where the monies are directed, the state requirements will move as well, landing on each specific child.

It won’t matter “where” a child goes to school.  Everything will be directly tied to each child.  Each “place” of education, be it a school or parent, will be required to meet all the state requirements.

And, what about equity issues?  Presently, there is an exhaustive list of risk categories that schools screen for and receive additional funding for.  Wouldn’t, therefore, each child receive a different allocation of state monies, based on his varying risk designations?  Wouldn’t it also be possible that children “achieving” or “exhibiting” certain aptitudes or competencies will be allocated a different level of state monies?

Would schools then not compete to acquire the children with higher allocations of state monies?

Also, a school that parents believe to be excellent doesn’t automatically have the capacity to “receive” every child whose parent would “choose” that school to send her child to.  What will be the process/criteria to determine which schools take which kids?  Do we not think that the state has to have a “stake” in this process?

The “money following the child” does not result in a mushrooming of private schools that are responsive and accountable to parents.  There will very likely be a mushrooming of schools competing for as much government funding as they can garner.  The schools/parents will be encumbered with meeting all the state curriculum, reporting, and other programming requirements.

Children become even more a piece of capital, a human resource, an asset/investment of the government.  The “interest” of the state in the child is even more specifically “personalized” to each child.

Money can only be responsible to the person who earned it and from which it comes.  Yes, individual taxpayer taxes fund the government.  But, the government is also funded by business/corporation taxes, and all number of taxes paid by people who do not have kids or kids in school.

The funding of local schools needs to be from local sources, directly.  This means local community taxes directly fund its local schools.  This includes any fundraising by local schools.

If the people of a community do not think their local school is “good,” then they would vote for lower taxes to support it.  Lower taxes would also allow parents to retain more of their personal income to CHOOSE to use it to send their child to a truly private school.  As well, grandparents – also the beneficiaries of lower taxes – could contribute to their grandchild’s education.  Local businesses could also directly support the schools of the area.

Lower taxes for everyone would allow for all persons to fund those things unique to and characteristic of those who reside in the area.

Again, history supports this.  As the source of direct education funding has continuously left parents and local communities, the excellence has continued to decline.

Here is a link to the House K-12 Budget committee: http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2021_22/committees/ctte_h_k12_education_budget_1/

On that page, you will see the link to HB2068, if you’re so inclined.

HB 2488–This Thursday…


This bill is scheduled to be heard this Thursday in the House Education committee.  It’s HB2488 School Emergency Medicine Bill

hb2488_00_0000.pdf (kslegislature.org)

Do you want your child’s school acting in the capacity of a medical entity AND without PARENT consent?

Do you want your child’s school NOT HELD LIABLE for administering medications?

Do you want your child’s school NOT HELD LIABLE for ACTING in any circumstances it deems to be “emergencies?”

Do you want your child’s school NOT HELD LIABLE for ACTING in a manner that may be contrary to your PARENTAL DIRECTIVES?

I think of my own son here who cannot have albuterol. He carries his own inhaler and always has, and it’s not an albuterol inhaler, but a different medication, altogether. So, imagine these people giving him albuterol, and I have zero recourse!?! Totally unacceptable.


Was heard in 2020 and was actually RECOMMENDED to be PASSED by the committee.  Didn’t proceed as was “stricken from calendar by Rule 1507” on February 27, 2020.

Why this is a TERRIBLE BILL:

  • Continues the incremental MEDICALIZATION of your neighborhood school.
    • Do you want your child to be receiving medical services from “the school,” and most probably WITHOUT your KNOWLEDGE or CONSENT?
  • Allows for stock supplies of epinephrine and albuterol at every school.
    • The camel’s nose under the tent?
    • What will be the next stock supply of medications?
    • Vaccinations?
  • Physicians or mid-level practitioners can write prescriptions “in the name of the school” and provide training to school personnel.
  • Physicians or mid-level practitioners shall NOT be HELD LIABLE for civil DAMAGES.
  • Pharmacists filling said prescriptions are NOT LIABLE for any civil DAMAGES resulting from their ADMINISTRATION.
  • ANY school designated person may ADMINISTER doses to ANY person at school, on school property or at a school-sponsored event.
  • School personnel acting in accordance with policy and in good faith shall NOT be HELD LIABLE.
  • “SCHOOL DESIGNATE PERSONNEL” include persons who can be trained to administer medications include SCHOOL EMPLOYEES, OFFICERS, AGENTS OR VOLUNTEERS – OUTSIDE their scope of employment.
  • “School designate personnel” are trained to NOTIFY PARENTS, guardians or NEXT OF KIN upon the administration of medication.
  • Schools may accept MONETARY GIFTS, GRANTS and DONATIONS to carry out the provisions of this bill.

The “Not So New” Plan

Recall what I have been saying since the beginning of all of this.  This “crisis” is just the opportunity to fully implement on-line “learning.”

It’s been moving in this direction for years.

It allows for the purview and responsibility of the school to extend into the family’s home.

Have you heard of the “Well Being Check Toolkit” in Tennessee?

It called for “child wellbeing checks to ensure the needs of children are being met during and after extended periods away from school.  It is promoted as protecting children.”

It calls for no one (a parent) to be in the room while the student is being interviewed.

It is for ALL public, private, homeschool and home bound students.


On-line “learning” allows for the full “personalization” of education.  The computer/technology is constantly analyzing student data, personalizing the education of each child/person based on the desired outcomes of those designing the system.

The president said “that families should be ‘empowered to make the decision’ about whether or not to return to school.  … Trump said that school funding should go directly to students rather than school districts.”  The money should follow the child.   https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-administration-school-reopening-guidelines

  • So, every child will “receive” an amount from the government for education (and, childcare, too will be included).
  • How is this “attached/following” money any different from the WELFARE system?
  • Every child receives a government handout for education/childcare?
  • EVERY child.
  • There is already a very long list of “risk” categories that result in additional funding to schools for kids falling into those “risk”: categories.
  • Won’t all of those categories now be specifically assigned to each individual child, resulting in differing amounts “following each child?”
  • How is this not a gateway to UNIVERSAL INCOME?
  • Why wouldn’t other “health and wellbeing” factors be added to “education?”
  • Why not food, housing, healthcare, etc.?
  • The cost of ALL education will skyrocket, just like all other places that have government supplements and regulations.  Think of government healthcare, higher education costs, and on and on.
  • For all the “education” places that will spring up, do parents think they will automatically be able to have their child attend the place of their choosing?  Won’t every physical location have a max capacity?
    • What will be the entrance and qualification criteria?
    • Who will be determining the entrance and qualification criteria?
  • There will be regulations, just like every other government “solution.”  NOT ONE “school choice” design or pieces of legislation hasn’t included the following
    • The necessary accountability measures.
    • Determinations as to what is eligible and acceptable.
    • “Approved” organizations.
    • “Qualifying” organizations, scholarships, standards, etc.
    • Robust systems and administration requirements to oversee (track) it all
  • How does this not allow for even more re-distribution of income, re-distribution of opportunity?

Some excerpts from Brainwashing by Edward Hunter:

“Learning” and confession are inseparable from brainwashing.

Learning in this sense means only political teaching from the communist standpoint.

Confession is an integral part of the rites.

In China there are no exceptions from it for anyone, any more than for attendance at “learning” classes.

Everyone within reach of Party cadres, security police, and soldiers has to attend, even if a hermit in a cave.

The retention of his own individuality by a single person is recognized as a deadly menace by the whole monolithic structure.

“Learning begins with the study of communist literature, but soon embraces what is called criticism, self-criticism, examination, re-examination, though conclusions, and “learning by doing.”

These are obligatory in schools, factories, government bureaus, army battalions, and prisons.

… language and ideals … were taken over and given new meanings and new interpretations in accordance with communist needs.

Brainwashing is a combination of this face evangelism and quack psychiatry in a setting of false science.

The entire mechanism of brainwashing, so as to condition the patient and to indoctrinate him, … is geared to putting his mind into a fog.

This book was published in 1956.

Below, you will find an article from the Kansas City Star from August 18, 2020:

The Medicalization of Our Schools

I’ve been saying it from day one of kids not returning to schools in March.  The changes that kids experienced under the guise of “health” and “safety” in response to the overreaction to C19, were just the “next steps” for the direction the state was already taking education.

It’s confirmed in this article from the Kansas City Star. (See attached photos below.)

“Mastering competencies.”

Just a regurgitation of training for the workforce.

Kids don’t receive an education.

They are merely trained for some trade.

Their attitudes, values and beliefs are what is molded.

Per the article (see attached photos below):

For example, a successful pre-K through second grade student can “recognize characteristics of caring relationships and hurtful relationships and identify trusting adults” and “identify personal strengths and weaknesses.”

Mmmmm…parents send their kids to school to learn arithmetic, reading, writing, etc. Pre-K through second graders already being labeled as to their supposed strengths and weaknesses? Relationship defining? Most school materials do not emphasize a child’s parents as the primary “trusting adult.”

Success is measured by the ability of students to demonstrate “competency” in performing various actions.

If the above are just two examples of the voluminous “competencies” kids must demonstrate, how are each of these “competencies” specifically defined, and HOW will a kid be asked to DEMONSTRATE  such?

In a competency approach, less emphasis is placed on the amount of time a student receives instruction.

This really means, that less emphasis is placed on actual academics.

Some Kansas districts are already dabbling in competency-based education as part of KSDE’s efforts to redesign schooling.  Kansas Education Commissioner Randy Watson said the pandemic will speed up adoption of competency-based models, though he emphasized the guidance to districts won’t be mandatory.

Again, CONFIRMATION, that the “changes” happening in the schools were just “the next steps,” not a change in direction in response to C19. It won’t be “mandatory,” but it IS the eventual endpoint for schools. So how has this redesign been going for the districts already “dabbling” in it?

Some schools have actually dropped the platform because concerns of the parents. Here in Kansas, there are parents that have fought their school boards over this and some have even moved their children to other school districts! (But, with it being rolled out to more districts, there won’t be any other districts to transfer to.) They all noticed a severe drop in their child’s grades on the platform. There also have been reports of concerns of the personal data that is being shared online with this platform.

“Our school has created an environment that may indeed be toxic to some students, maybe even traumatic.”

Wellington parents concerned about new curriculum

*Summit Learning – curriculum; on-line program aimed at learning at own pace

*Dozens of districts participating in Redesign plan to get away from old teaching models

*No option to opt out

*MS in McPherson

*Students learn and progress at their own speed

*Popular because is free to districts

Commissioner Randy Watson has been reporting on this REDESIGN of Kansas schools occurring around the state.  file:///C:/Users/Lisa/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/Y3PR7SNE/2.5%20Randy%20Watson%20KSDE%20Presentation%20(2).pdf

Newton is even featured in his presentation. 

If you notice, ACADEMICS are  <25%  of what he says Kansans say they want for kids’ education.

He stated that it is intended for the REDESIGN to be in ALL Kansas schools via accreditation requirements.

The Commissioner is adept at inserting that this Redesign is uniquely Kansan.  It is not.  It is ALL training for the workforce.  AND, it is NOT NEW. It has an extensive documented history.  Global interests, governments, think tanks, and education “designers” have promoted the components of the Kansas Redesign for nearly a century:

Training children (NOT the same as educating them) for the workforce.

Individual Plans of Study (IPS) for EVERY child.

IPS is made capable via the technology in the classroom.

Parents are not inherently allowed to decide if they want their child to use technology.

“Testing” is not the same as “assessing.”  Testing determines knowledge acquisition; insuring what you are doing is working.  Assessing evaluates worth; whether a child holds acceptable values, beliefs, etc. 

Assessing is made capable via the technology in the classroom.

The technology amasses millions of pieces of data on every child, and performs analytics on that data, eventuating in a determination of every child’s future.

State accreditation requires school districts to include Social and Emotional Learning (SEL).

This results in EVERY child having some type of mental health and behavioral scheme applied to him.

Parents are not inherently allowed to decide if they want their child to be socially, emotionally, mentally, or behaviorally assessed.

Workforce training and SEL are necessarily EXPENSIVE.

It takes extensive resources to determine every citizen’s future and foster a compliant citizenry.

A couple years ago, Kansas began appropriating $10 million for a K-2 Mental Health Pilot Program.  Schools are focusing more on hiring psychologists, social workers, and counselors.  PARENTS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO BE INFORMED OR CONSENT TO SCREENING DEVICES BEING USED ON THEIR CHILD.  “A key component of the pilot project is the UNIVERSAL DATABASE.”

A Kansas Superintendent of a school district implementing SEL stated:

SEL will be integrated in the curriculum; it will not be taught separately.  It is not likely that a student could “opt out” of SEL curricular efforts.  For to do so, would be to opt out of a majority of the curriculum. 

It’s called the Medicalization of Our Schools.  Presently, academics are being replaced with wrap-around mental health services and interventions into EVERY child’s personalities, values, beliefs, and dispositions.  Personal behavior data is logged by teachers into data systems.  Out of this comes curriculum, activities, software, and programming to change the personal qualities of children and their families in order to meet government objectives – the NEEDS you hear about in Commerce and Workforce departments and committees.

Spend some time in the Commerce committees of the legislature.  You will hear much about the NEEDS of THE STATE.  You will hear children (who are ultimately adult citizens) referred to as HUMAN CAPITAL.  We are assessing our children’s worth to the planned economy.  Every child monitored and tracked via district technology for distance learning.

Is this the education you desire for your child every day they “go to school?”

Is this – along with all the new C19 “safety” measures awaiting your child – what you want your child to have to navigate beginning in about eight weeks?

Call To Action HB2016

UPDATE:  Yesterday, the Kansas House voted OVERWHELMINGLY FOR the Covid-19 Response Plan (i.e. HB 2016).  Yeas: 107, Nays: 12  http://www.kslegislature.org/li_2020s/b2020s/measures/vote_view/je_20200603210950_181372/

The bill is NOW in the Senate Judiciary committee.  The following committee members NEED TO HEAR FROM YOU.


Vice Chair

Ranking Minority Member


As well, contact YOUR Senator and Senate LEADERSHIP, as well as any many HOUSE LEGISLATORS that voted in support of HB 2016.


*Send emails.

*Leave messages.

*Some will call you back; some won’t.

*Be very clear as to the importance of NOT “balancing” or “compromising” or “reaching across the aisle” when it comes to your INHERENT INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.

There is NEVER a justified basis for infringement of innate individual rights as is protected by the Constitution.  NO “balancing” the safety/health with the rights of individuals.

My health information is PERSONAL and PRIVATE.

NO person or interest beyond my personal doctor should have any of my health information.

NO person should be inquiring as to my whereabouts or associations.  EVER.

Anything not conforming to these principles will NOT BE COMPLIED with.

Again, VOTE AGAINST this bill.

Stop insulting Kansans by voting to allow the government to infringe on our innate rights that are protected by the Constitution.

Remind your representative/senator that he SWORE to uphold and defend the Constitution.

Kansans’ ability and right to worship, freely move about, provide for themselves and their families, operate a business, and have privacy and anonymity in their associations, personal information, and doings must NOT be infringed.