December 13. 2007 04:11

Why should homeschoolers be so strongly against Romney, when he wants to give tax deductions to homeschoolers and strongly favors school choice?

Why are they so strongly in favor of Huckabee when he's been endorsed by the NEA(!!) and is the only Republican candidate against school choice (which is why the New Hampshire NEA endorsed him)?

Huckabee wouldn't allow parents to use their own tax money to send their children to private religious schools, but he favored using tax money to give illegal aliens in-state tuition and scholarships. Hardly seems like the perfect candicate for parents who want to opt out of the public education bureaucracy. Why not give Romney a look?

Rex

December 13. 2007 14:56

The political reality is that Huckabee is a supporter of public education just like all the other candidates. But, he is also a proven friend of homeschooling. He is the only governor ever to appoint a homeschooler to a state board of education.

If Huckabee can get the New Hampshire NEA endorsement after supporting homeschooling the way he has, it just speaks to his wide political appeal. Remember too that Mike Huckabee was the only Republican to show up to the New Hampshire NEA event that brought about their endorsement. And this was not the only event that Mike Huckabee stood alone at -- in the lion's den, if you will -- while the other major candidates excused themselves. It shows his political courage and willingness to lead.

But Romney reminds me too much of the say anything, do anything, get the sale at all costs regardless of the truth CEO's that I have worked with in the past. When Romney ran for the Senate in Massachusetts against Ted Kennedy, he tried to run to the left of Kennedy on abortion, gay rights, etc. To the left of Ted Kennedy!

Now, I would say that most Christian homeschoolers are probably more aware and discerning than the average voter, average Republican, or average conservative. That's why Romney doesn't get our support.

For generations the establishment has said that the best place for children is in the arms of the state educational system. But, Christian homeschoolers can spot a snake oil shyster a mile away -- that's why we homeschool and reject slick, flip-flopping politicians.

Charles

December 13. 2007 17:35

Thanks for the response. No question Huckabee has been consistent on homeschooling, and no question that Romney's prior abortion position is troubling. But on the issue of school choice generally, Romney's been in favor going all the way back to his '94 campaign against Kennedy. In fact, his campaign flier shows that he ran against Kennedy as a conservative on that issue and almost all others (with the notable exceptions of abortion and discrimination) -

www.politico.com/.../...94_senate_flier_side_1.pdf

Not going to change your mind in the election I'm sure, but I think homeschoolers will find a friend in Romney if he's elected.

Rex

December 13. 2007 17:50

"School choice", "vouchers", "charter schools" are simply code words for more state controlled education. We are "private" homeschoolers here and we know the difference.

As for Romney's troubling abortion position being in the past... I take from Fred "abortion lobbying is private life" Thompson a resent press release:

Romney claims to be pro-life. But under his health care plan, Massachusetts residents now have access to taxpayer-funded abortions for $50.

Romney's Health Care Plan:

Provides Taxpayer-Funded Abortions. Abortions are covered in the Commonwealth Care program that Romney created as Governor. Under the program, abortions are available for a copay of $50. (Menu of Health Care Services: www.mass.gov/Qhic/docs/cc_benefits1220_pt234.pdf)

Guarantees Planned Parenthood A Seat At The Table. Romney's legislation created an advisory board and guarantees, by law, that Planned Parenthood has a seat at the table. Romney's plan established a MassHealth payment policy advisory board, and one member of the Board must be from Planned Parenthood. No pro-life organization is represented. (Chapter 58 Section 3 (q) Section 16M (a), www.mass.gov/legis/laws/seslaw06/sl060058.htm)

Romney used his line-item veto authority to strike eight sections of the bill that he found objectionable, including the expansion of dental benefits to Medicaid recipients. Yet, he did not strike Planned Parenthood's guaranteed Board representation and he did nothing to prohibit taxpayer-funded abortions as part of his plan. ("Romney's Health Care Vetoes," Associated Press, 4/12/06)

Charles