There should be an opt in piece rather than an opt out. This is one sneaky component of NCLB that most parents are unaware of.

Perhaps that is Republican campaigning?

Keith Imon 11/1/2007 11:44 AM
November 1, 2007

TO: PWCS School-based Leadership Team
FR: Keith Imon
RE: Political Campaigning on School Property

It has come to my attention that some candidates running for office have been distributing political campaign materials at some of our school events (e.g., sports activities). As a reminder, School Board Policy 273.01 clearly states that, “Political interests of any individual or group may not be promoted during the school day or at school-sponsored activities, including athletic events…………..”

Therefore, if you should see this campaigning taking place on school property, please do whatever you can to assist with letting these candidates and/or their representatives know about our School Board policy on this issue; and ask them to please stop.

Thanks for your assistance with this matter.

Why would any elected official, local, state, or federal, be denied access to a school? I can’t imagine this being done for any reason. Perhaps I am just not a creative enough thinker……

Sure.

I would hope that this practice would be done throughout their term rather than just at election time. Perhaps decisions at budget time would be easier with more first hand knowledge of what is happening where the rubber meets the road since over half the county budget is allocated for schools.

The real crux of this should really be whether Al Pollard should have been there. One of the benefits of being elected is that you get to do things as part of your position that walk a fine line between duties of the position and political campaigning. Kaine should be able to visit schools (just as it is fine that Corey Stewart picked the month before an election to visit my daughter’s school). The real question, then, is whether Al Pollard should have been able to meet with the YDs at Colonial Forge High School. It seems beyond silly to me that a political organization like the YOUNG DEMOCRATS is not allowed to meet the local DEMOCRATIC candidates. And, yes, I do believe that Richard Stuart should be allowed to meet with the Young Republicans. Good gracious! We have young people actually interested in the political process. Let’s not stifle them under silly rules which clearly were intended to keep teachers, staff, and others from proselytizing during school hours or under the umbrella of a “school-sanctioned” position.

Of course Corey Stewart’s appearance at your child’s school doesn’t count. The same rules obviously do not apply. How on earth could the character assassinations continue if they did?

I would also like to suggest that any governor of Virginia, regardless of party in power, can pretty much go where he choses. Political candidates no. The governor, yes.

How’d you like the editorial cartoon in today’s Manassas Journal-Messenger/Potomac News, Greg? My guess is not very much, but probably more than you liked their skewering of Corey Stewart in their endorsement of Sharon Pandak. (Hmmmm…I see you made no mention of it on your blog). I sense the electoral tide is turning. PWC Dems have a GOTV effort you can’t even begin to imagine. Tell me, Greg, what will you do when your buddies Stewart and Stirrup are put out to pasture?

I can’t wait until Tuesday.

As for the Stafford County Schools policy, it is not as clear cut as the editorial implies. According to the school system’s Web site, the Candidates for Political Office (adopted 9/25/07) policy reads in part:

“The board prohibits campaigning in its school buildings by
individual candidates and/or parties for local, state, and
federal elections except during all-candidate forums and as may
otherwise be authorized by law. In instances where schools are
utilized as polling places, strict compliance with pertinent
election laws shall be observed.

“The procedures apply to all school property at all times, except
when the property is used by an authorized organization other
than the Stafford County Public Schools. Example: Campaign
materials may be distributed to voters attending a PTA or association event sponsoring a candidate forum at a school. ” (see http://stafford.schoolfusion.us/modules/groups/homepagefiles/cms/120789/File/Policy/Policy%20Packet%20D%20Oct%2030/Policy%201-27.pdf?sessionid=c72ae077f5b3893bd27a2e5a43c77d42 for the full policy if you’re worried I omitted something important–I don’t think I did)

Given that the Young Democrats are a separate, non-school organization (and one with a clearly political agenda), it could be argued that they fall under the last paragraph quoted (”authorized organization other than the Stafford County Public Schools”).

Oh, and since PWCS Policy 273.01 does not permit the same sort of activity in Prince William Schools, should I be filing a complaint because Corey Stewart came to our back-to-school night and gave a 3-minute stump speech about all the good he’s done for the western end of the county (with, ironically, no mention of the schools in the entire speech) and a reminder to vote on November 6 (though, to his credit, at no time did he ask for anyone to vote for him)? I would think Stewart’s address was more in violation since back-to-school night clearly falls under the policy while the activities of an after-school advocacy group is in a little more of a gray area.

Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s great Stewart visited our school and would love to see more of our political leaders getting face time in our schools. The democratic process should be taught early and often to keep the next generation of voters engaged and informed. I think policies that ban all political activity from schools are as bad as some of the stupid PC policies in that they stifle the democratic process and expression of free speech. I don’t want my kids’ teachers telling them who to vote for, but I certainly want my kids exposed to their elected leaders and those who want to be their leaders.