Sic’ ‘Em Saturday: CCSS Naysayers

Anti CCSS Warriors, you’ve read the stories, culled the Congressional Reports. You know this ‘War Against Common Core’ is NOT over yet.  However, today, we’ll take a look at the 17 who stood strong in the Senate against not only their peers, but the CCSS Machine. I’d like to preface my article, I am NOT endorsing any political candidate publicly. My focus isn’t on the campaigns of any of the 17 Senators. Are these 17 tied to Common Core in any way? Let’s find out.
The Nay Sayers:

While each of the following said ‘no’ July 16th, will they remain nay sayers? We’ll need to continue to hold them accountable. Especially when you discover more about their education stances.
Blunt: MO, voted ‘no’ to S1177, As a member of the Appropriations Committee, Sen. Blunt gets to help decide where our taxpayer’s money is spent. One such benefactor? The U.S. Dept. of Education. See: http://www.blunt.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/committee-assignments I didn’t find a press release following his ‘no’ to ECAA on his website. However, I did find that his stance on job growth may be of concern, therefore watching how he continues to vote where education is concerned. See: http://www.blunt.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/grow-jobs-and-opportunity Note the phrase ‘shovel ready’ and Missouri’s community colleges. As we’ve discovered, community colleges are entrapped in the CCSS/CTE pipeline for education.
Booker: NJ, voted ‘no’ to S1177, HIs statement following his vote, revealed his dissatisfaction with Title One funding. See: http://www.booker.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=281 That said, Sen. Booker’s involvement in a trained workforce is worthy of not only our concern, but our voice. Sen. Booker has teamed up with Sen. Scott (see below) in LEAP, Leveraging and Energizing America’s Apprenticeship Program Act. Why would a CCSS Warrior need to be concerned? I’ve published a detailed article previously detailing how the Apprenticeship program in America is CCSS, CTE aligned.
Booker’s statement on jobs and the economy:  http://www.booker.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=281 His committee service includes commerce and science. See:
http://www.booker.senate.gov/?p=about_senator My article about apprentices:
https://www.commoncorediva.com/2015/02/12/tech-thursday-aligned-apprentices/
Crapo: ID, voted ‘no’ to S1177, If you don’t know his stance on education, you should. While he’s a big supporter of public education, he desires more local control. That said, he also shares that the federal role in education is helpful. Anti CC Warriors, I’m curious, do Congress members receive a ‘Know your Constitution’ exam before being sworn in? If not, maybe they should. As per our 10th Amendment, there is to be NO federal role in education. See Sen. Crapo’s educational stance:
http://www.crapo.senate.gov/issues/education/education.cfm While I didn’t see his service on any committees which directly impact education, I did notice a few caucuses he belongs to which are tied to CCSS. (for example: TRIO, 4-H, and others) See:  http://www.crapo.senate.gov/about_mike/committees.cfm
Cruz: TX,  voted ‘no’ to S1177, Sen. Cruz’s vote was consistent with his education stance as an opposer of CCSS. His statement following that vote said ECAA missed the mark. See:
http://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2385 His education page: http://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=issue&id=36 According to his bio page, he is a defender of the U.S. Constitution. As you’ll see with some of the other Senators, Cruz serves of the Joint Economic Committee and others. Commerce is among them. Knowing how big business has its hands all over education, I’m sure we’ll need to watch to see how this is handled.
Daines: MT, voted ‘no’ to S1177, His amendment, SAFE Kids, is said to protect student data privacy, however, in looking at the website detailing this amendment, several CCSS Machine members are supportive. This should be a huge concern to us, as opposed to Common Core! See: http://www.daines.senate.gov/news/press-releases/daines-blumenthal-introduce-bill-to-protect-students-data A noted other key concern for us should be his participation in cloud data storage. See: http://www.daines.senate.gov/meet-steve/biography
Flake: AZ, voted ‘no’ to S1177, While some of his amendments were included in ECAA (Every Child Achieves Act), he couldn’t support some of the other components of the bill. See: http://www.flake.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=dfad8ae1-0422-49b6-9ae1-68181f4053b9 However, his amendments were for charter school authority and early learning alignment are very concerning to anti CC Warriors. Why? As I’ve shared with you before, many overseeing charter schools are part of the CCSS Machine. Early learning alignment? No! Absolutely not! His education page will reveal he voted against NCLB and believes in local control. See: http://www.flake.senate.gov/public/?p=healthcare-and-education
Lee: UT, voted ‘no’ to S1177, His press release statement following that vote stated it was because the bill expands the U.S. Dept. of Education, increases early education overhaul,and more. See:  http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=9c7f3ff8-1e62-4fcb-98ef-4c0b7f30406f According to his website, Sen. Lee is a defender of the U.S. Constitution. He also is a member of the U.S. Joint Economic Committee. (JEC’s website address is provided below in another Senator’s description) Lee is currently working on higher education legislation. He has even asked for America’s help. Anti CCSS Warriors, if you’re concerned about Sen. Lamar Alexander’s push for aligning as much as he can of education from birth to post grad, perhaps you’d like to help Sen. Lee’s writing of legislation. See: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/higher-education-reform-and-college-opportunity#form_a6481d29-13fc-4476-a3f8-525869be3f88  As any good anti CC Warrior, we need to be ever watchful of what transpires from here on out.
Moran: KS, voted ‘no’ to S1177, A fan of CTE (career and technical education) is a big cause of concern for those of us opposed to the CCSS Machine. We now very well by now, that CTE is in every state of the United States, no matter if your state ‘adopted’ CCSS or not.
The Senator’s website will tell you he voted against NCLB in 2001, and why. See:
http://www.moran.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/education His service on two committees which involve education (commerce and science) are worth holding him accountable in the coming days. See: http://www.moran.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/committee-assignments
Murphy: CT, voted ‘no’ to S1177, His stance on education includes the 21st century skills needed for the global economy statement we’ve heard so much from the CCSS Machine. There are other statements in his education view point which are concerning to us as anti CCSS Warriors. For example, the states and accountability facing us in a re-authorized ESEA. (Press release: http://www.murphy.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/murphy-booker-warren-coons-esea-accountability-amendment-receives-broad-support)
Murphy is a member of hte HELP Committee (Health, Education, Labor, and Pension). See: http://www.murphy.senate.gov/issues/education
Paul: KY, voted ‘no’ to S1177, Which directly supports his stance on education view point. His website has a well explained statement to detail his stance. See: http://www.paul.senate.gov/about-rand/issues/promoting-opportunity-through-education
His statement following the passage of S1177: http://www.paul.senate.gov/news/press/dr-rand-paul-votes-against-flawed-education-reform-bill-
Paul is a member of the HELP (Health, Education, Labor, and Pension) Committee. HELP was key in S1177’s existence.
Risch: ID, voted ‘no’ to S1177, His statement on education is brief, but to the anti CC Warrior, says a lot. For example, his stance on the role of the federal government in education is one of concern. How so? He believes the federal government should have a role in education. Warriors, does no one remember that federal government, per the U.S. Constitution, shouldn’t have ANY role in education?! See Risch’s statement: http://www.risch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Education
Rubio: FL, voted ‘no’ to S1177, There’s not a message on his website concerning his vote that I could find. His blog has no entry for 7/16/15, either. However, I did find he serves on several committees that are directly related to education (technology, for example). His bio page on his website can serve as alert to his stance on higher education (as in making it affordable). Then, there’s the concern for the ‘global economy’. Why are these areas to hold him accountable? Sen. Alexander’s statement concerning the Higher Education Act was next on his list is a great reason. Add to that the push from the CCSS Machine where digital this and that are on a hyper speed effort to impact technology. See Rubio’s website: http://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/biography
Sasse: NE, voted ‘no’ to S1177, I cannot find any sort of press release after the vote. His website does not share any education view points that I can find. However, he does serve on the U.S. Joint Economic Committee. Since the CCSS Machine has a huge goal for the economic status of the U.S. A., I’d say we most definitely need to find out more about Sen Sasse’s view of education. See his website:
http://www.sasse.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/about
See the Joint Econ Website:  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/
Scott: SC, voted ‘no’ to S1177, because he didn’t feel the bill was good enough. See his statement explaining his vote: http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/sen-tim-scott-statement-every-child-achieves-act However, Sen. Scott’s been key to the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2014 and other ‘opportunities’ for aligned education and labor. WIOA embedded CCSS aligned Career Pathways at least 21 times. (See Sen. Scott’s agenda for a trained workforce, http://www.scott.senate.gov/opportunityagenda
Shelby: AL, voted ‘no’ to S1177, according to his website, he serves on at least 2 committees where funding occurs. Combine that with his stance that states are choosing CCSS, is a cause, in my opinion, to continue to watch him. See: http://www.shelby.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/legislativeissues?p=Education
Vitter: LA, voted ‘no’ to S1177, due to his stance against CCSS, assessments, privacy violatons (see his education stance on his website page: http://www.vitter.senate.gov/issues/education However, he supports school choice and charter schools (which CCSS is using both of these  to distort education) and is supportive of 21st Century job preparation for students.
Warren: MA, voted ‘no’ to S1177,  due to dissatisfaction over the funding for schools.See Her statement on her website,  http://www.warren.senate.gov/?p=committees(scroll down, look to the right) She’s also friendly towards post secondary alignment efforts. She’s a member of the HELP Committee (Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions). HELP has been extremely involved in re-writing ESEA.

Actions We Should Take:

1) Continue to watch Congress for how voting goes.
2) Continue to interact with Congress where HR5, S1177, child care, preK, post-secondary are concerned. EVERY educational level and choice will be impacted by what happens in D.C. concerning the re-authorization of the ESEA.
3) Look, not only at the Congress members’ stances on education, but look at workforce, public-private partnerships, etc. Remember, economy and a trained workforce are 2 of the main CCSS agenda points. NO Congress member should support a CCSS/CTE aligned America. It’s unconstitutional! It’s unAmerican! It violates the oath each Congress member swore to uphold!
4) Thank these 17 Senators for standing with we, the anti CCSS Warriors! Remind them we are watching.
5) PJNET has a one stop tool to help you thank each Senator. See: http://patriotjournalist.com/CommonCoreAction.php?v=6