Thank you very much. Now excuse me while I vomit.
The "Dear Hillary" letter lays out a plan "to remold the entire American [school] system" into "a seamless web that literally extends from cradle to grave and is the same system for everyone," coordinated by "a system of labor market boards at the local, state and federal levels" where curriculum and "job matching" will be handled by counselors "accessing the integrated computer-based program." The plan would change the mission of the schools away from teaching children academic basics and knowledge so they can make their own life choices, and toward training them narrowly in specific job skills to serve the global economy in jobs selected by workforce boards.
I heard Sam Blumenfeld speak about this at the Boston Conservative Society way back in the late '80s. I thought he had gone off the deep end. Like my wife says, "If you tell people this stuff no one will believe you." It's up to all of us to spread the word.
God help us. God save our children.
"Everything we have heard indicates virtually universal opposition in the employer community to the proposal for a 1 1/2% levy on employers for training to support the costs associated with employed workers gaining these skills, whatever the levy is called. We propose that Bill [Clinton] take a leaf out of the German book. One of the most important reasons that large German employers offer apprenticeship slots to German youngsters is that they fear, with good reason, that if they don't volunteer to do so, the law will require it. Bill could gather a group of leading executives and business organization leaders, and tell them straight out that he will hold back on submitting legislation to require a training levy, provided that they commit themselves to a drive to get employers to get their average expenditures on front-line employee training up to 2% of front-line employee salaries and wages within two years. If they have not done so within that time, then he will expect their support when he submits legislation requiring the training levy. He could do the same thing with respect to slots for structured on-the-job training..."One can see this as a logical extension of Horace Mann's vision (see #117 above):
"Creating such a system means sweeping aside countless programs, building new ones, combining funding authorities, changing deeply embedded institutional structures and so on. .... Trying to ram it down everyone's throat would engender overwhelming opposition..."
"we propose that a new agency be created, the National Institute for Learning, Work and Service. .... The staff would be small, high powered and able to move quickly..."
"Create National Board for Professional and Technical Standards. Board is private .... Neither Congress nor the executive branch can dictate the standards set by the Board..."
"One would want to make sure that the specific actions of the new administration were designed, in a general way, to advance this agenda as it evolved, while not committing anyone to the details, which would change over time..."
[The new system will] "free up school professionals to make the key decisions about how to use all the available resources to bring students up to the standards..."
[Institutions receiving funds under this system] "are required to provide information" [on student's] "backgrounds and characteristics, and career outcomes..."
"All available front-line jobs - whether public or private - must be listed in [the government run employment system] by law..."
She [the State] explores the world for new objects of beneficence; and, so deep and common is the feeling which expects and prompts all this that she is gradually changing and ennobling the definition of a cardinal word in the language of morals,--doing what no king or court with all their authority, nor royal academy with all its sages and literary men, can do: she [the State] is changing the meaning of charity into duty.