A Wiser Republic

The great philosopher Plato always spoke of the dangers of democracy, as he realized the unhealthy tendency for voters to choose as they so believe, regardless of hard facts or common sense. In an olden analogy, he uses the example of a ship floundering in the bowels of a tempest, led by a weak captain who represents the majority, and a crew of sailors, who show themselves to be as politicians, anxious to dismantle and then seize control. And even as this remains intensely applicable in the modern day, many seem to defend democracy as the only way, disregarding what could be a singular yet decisive change for the best in its clockwork: a prerequisite test for each registered voter. 

Of course this move brings immediate scorn and hate from members of the more socially liberal, who feel it would be disadvantageous to their average supporters, however a quick analysis of this past election campaign can prove otherwise, in states both in the east and west coast. 


To be clear, the following assessments of the Maryland, Oregon, and Washington races are not meant to be overtly partisan; on the contrary, they can be applied in 2008 to the Senate Race in Georgia, in which voters failed to elect a good man over a sleazy Republican insider. Depending on the circumstance, the disease of voter ignorance can permeate across both red and blue states, though for practical purposes it focuses on the blue in this election. 


When Bob Ehrlich announced his bid for reelection in early 2006, he should have cruised to victory, even as a conservative in the Democratic haven of Maryland. Instead, voters moved to elect Martin O'Malley due to his party affiliation, letting Ehrlich leave office with immense budget successes despite his earning of a second term. But in 2010, as the former governor launched a comeback bid, Maryland voters, clinging desperately to their Democratic leanings, would not reelect him, regardless of O'Malleys blatant failures to keep the state;s fiscal house in order. All because of Baltimore, a haven for welfare recipients and the average ignoramus when it comes to politics, the entire state was forced to loose a hope for economic recovery. 

Democrats have argued that background is important in any election, and so they propped up failure ex-governor John Kitzhaber to battle the imposing Chris Dudley, who was bulleted  as inexperienced and unprepared to lead--notwithstanding the 28 years of Democratic rule in the state which has led to a budget shortfall and 25% of the state budget meant for public sector retirement pay. True Dudley was a novice, yet he swept the entire state, only losing because of Portland's strong Democratic lean, and equal lean away from sensibility. If thirty years cannot solve one's problems, is it not time for a change?

And to the north, Washington's vote, decided predominantly by King County, went to veteran Democratic Senator Patty Murray, ignoring her categorically corrupt associations with Wall Street lobbyists and special interests in the nation's capital. Never mind that her opponent, estate agent Dino Rossi, carried most every county of the state--it is only the population center which counts. 

So are these outcomes really sensible or fair? Should each race be hinging on the largest portion of the states, which according to studies are the least educated and intellectually deficient? There's no forcible right or wrong answer, yet this should not stop the country from adopting a test for would be voters before they may pass their ballots. Nothing extreme, but a quick test on constitutional law would be enough to encourage individuals to read up on the issues before going out to vote, thus resulting in at least closer or more logical election consequences. 

Melanie Bryant

National Alliance Vice President for Education

Creating an Era of Strength

English novelist Henry Fielding once brazenly stated that "public schools are the nurseries of all vice and immorality." I caution from adding this as a universal and unchangeable label to the American education system, yet the need for a better institution of mainstream education is overtly prevalent in our nation is obvious and takes little preparation or skill to spot sight of. 

Shortly after taking office in 2001, President George W. Bush signed into law the No Child Left Behind Act in an effort to combat the statistically low test scores of students over the past decade. And while the plan was a general success, it did so at the expense of some schools with lower averages, cutting off funding to classrooms in which students simply did not make the accepted minimum. In spite of its movements towards stronger grade schools and enforced preparation for colleges, both positives to the mainstream, the bill was unfair overall because it did not address the central issue of the culture of poor instruction and academic behavior. 

To be absolutely fair however, the other major party of the United States, led currently by President Barack Obama, has also failed to steer schools away from poor habits and academia, instead exacerbating the issue by voting to continuously increase the benefits of teacher's unions and instructors, all while these figures bring about the unacceptable results within our public schools. Yet one might ask, if salary spikes or the cutting of funding is not working, than what possibly can?  

The answer is plain in its stating yet complex in detail: a radical reconstruction of the places of learning for most of the younger American population. Such an shaped system would be based on classical education, dispelling demolition of the historical figures who give children hope, and an imprinting of America as a nation of greatness--not failure, in the minds of the next generation. 

In keeping with a commitment to discipline and self-resolution, students would recite not only the Pledge of Allegiance, but an oath in concrete embrace of education and with a tenet of dedication to success and accomplishment. Furthermore, students would wear uniforms to learn self respect, and administrators would be given authority no only to teach, but to instruct leadership qualities in each of their pupils. 

In the vein of compensation, school teachers must stop being fed massive benefits through the federal system if their standards are not at least above average. As we live in the day of public sector unions, it is all too easy for bosses of these greed-based organizations to extort humongous concessions from the weak backbone of the national government even while they bring about terrible results in our schools. By eliminating unions from the schools systems, and placing raises on a merit based system of class performance, we as a nation can take away the tremendous issue of poor instruction in the schoolroom. 

On academic matters, the centerpiece curriculum would be focused on the United States Constitution, requiring children from the age of 14 to not only orally explain the document, but also write in full about its factors, as well as how they affect life in America. Besides making studying members more aware of government and more capable of debate, it would prevent a distraction from the need of new businesspeople, professionals, and other active citizens to grow our economy. Our public schools must produce positive entrants into society, not the miscreant individuals who leach off of government welfare programs because they were never given the encouragement and stimulation for true success.

Government may not be adequate at dealing with most of the pressing issues in our country sensibly, yet the one area in which it can have an involved and worthy impact is within the classroom. With prudence, respect, and wisdom, our students can move to the levels of success seen in other countries, beginning to take charge of their own generation without fear or reservation in the days and years of the future. 

Melanie Bryant

National Alliance Vice President for Education