Californians for Equal Rights Foundation（CFER） 在成立的第二年继续在多方面达成了既定目标，包括：州立法watchdog、选民宣传、研究报告、法律诉讼、媒体公关等。特别是在选民宣传方面，与San Dieguito Union High学区（SDUHSD）的家长们一起进行了一次成功的华人维权行动，罕见地让对华人种族歧视的学监在两个月内下台。该学区家长更是再接再厉，在年末的选举中积极助选，成功将一位越南华裔Phan Anderson选举为学区董事。今年九月份，CFER还成功举办了第一次年会，邀请了业界专家教授在圣地亚哥进行了一天八场专题演讲和讨论，很多后来当选的学区董事都到场参加，使他们得以更全面地了解CFER提倡的“任人唯贤”的理念。在大家的支持下，CFER证明了自己是一个既有理念又有执行力的组织。因为我们的努力，CFER也得到了兄弟组织[Parents Defending Education](https://defendinged.org/) (PDE)的[赞扬](https://twitter.com/DefendingEd/status/1597657790603927552?s=20&t=pOHUeNMZ4Xj3zgpGceFSCQ)。

![Beige Minimalist Testimonial Instagram Post.png](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/deb1f7ddcefd2050cb51e0801c39d4b2.png)

CFER 2021到2022这两年所取得的成功再次彰显， 只要持续不断、有理有节地发声，我们是可以团结到大多数选民的，我们是可以让立法者听到我们的声音的。不要因为声音看上去微弱而放弃，也不要因为这个世界看上去不尽如人意而放弃。

我们的资金来源完全来自大家的支持，除了CFER各位理事捐赠的超过四万美元之外，其他资金全部来自公众的支持。我们的开支预算在二十八万美元左右，主要是全职人员的工资、年会费用、研究费用、律师费用以及其他行政、财务、办公、IT支持等各项费用。目前还有$25,000左右的缺口，如果收到 email的每一位包括您能够捐赠$50，CFER就可以实现2022年收支平衡。请审阅下面的年度工作报告，考虑[捐赠](https://cferfoundation.org/support)一顿饭钱帮助CFER实现财务平衡 。

下面是CFER 2021年具体年度工作报告（年报英文版[链接](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/eb1317913c51cc2f4a8cf8589bd8a645.pdf?updated_at=2022-11-23T15:58:09.073Z)）：

1，  选民宣传

CFER意识到，要反对极左的思潮，必须要能够有效地向选民进行宣传，让选民可以尽快意识到极左思潮和政策的危害。因此CFER非常注重选民宣传的工作，只有选民认可的文化发生改变了，“任人唯贤”的理念才能出现在公立学校课堂、媒体、法院判决、立法等各个层面。

由于CFER的选民宣传工作，大量本地的家长们组织起来了，在2022年圣地亚哥郡的各学区董事选举中，不少学区有了不受教师工会辖制的独立董事，不少学区里面甚至这些独立董事成为多数。2023年，CFER将与这些独立董事密切协作，可以做好更多的选民宣传工作。其中最成功的[案例](https://cferfoundation.org/posts/calming-the-waters-in-the-san-dieguito-unified-high-school-district)就是前述与SDUHSD家长们的合作。

CFER今年组织了[第一次年会](https://cferfoundation.org/event-registration)，邀请了业界专家教授在圣地亚哥进行了一天八场专题演讲和讨论，很多后来当选的学区独立董事都到场参加，使他们得以更全面地了解CFER提倡的“任人唯贤”的理念，为今后的施政打下理论基础。

经过两年的选民宣传实践，CFER找到了如何让公立教育尽量摆脱教师工会控制、提高教育质量的路线图，目前正在多个学区与当地学区家长组织合作长期进行选民宣传工作。希望在2023年我们可以看到更多的成功案例。

CFER也开始逐步[进入](https://cferfoundation.org/posts/rejectProtectSD)公共安全领域。因为在公共安全领域进行种族优待后，必然会造成一些地区犯罪率的上升，San Francisco、Oakland、Los Angeles就是前车之鉴，而这些犯罪率的上升必然会导致这些地区公立教育质量的下降，最终这些失去教育功能的公立学校会向社会输出更多的潜在犯罪分子。因此CFER今年在San Diego地区通过反对Protect Act的契机开始进入公共安全领域，反对种族优待类的各种提案。

2，  州立法Watchdog

CFER给自己确定的一大任务就是在州立法层面关注是否有违反Prop 209宪法，对不同种族肤色进行区别对待的立法。如果发现，则通过组织联盟、草根呼吁、媒体发声、发布研究报告等方式进行干预。

成功[逼迫](https://cferfoundation.org/posts/cfer-and-plf-prompted-the-california-state-legislature-to-amend-the-upward-mobility-bill-and-remove-unconstitutional-provisions)州议会修改了AB 1604种族配额提案（2021年被CFER逼停的AB 105卷土重来）。CFER从年初开始一直跟踪这个提案到最后，发布分析报告，在州议会讨论这个提案时发言反对，最终成功迫使提案作者全部删除了种族配额部分内容。这次成功再次彰显，只要有理有据、坚持到底，还是可以让立法者听到我们的声音的。

成功[推迟](https://cferfoundation.org/posts/the-california-department-of-education-further-delays-the-new-math-framework-process)了所谓的新版数学教学框架。组织了大量义工一起打电话或者发email发言反对，迫使教育厅推迟讨论该有争议的数学框架，我们仍将持续保持关注。

3，  研究报告

CFER认为要做好选民教育工作，其中一项至关重要的任务就是做好[研究报告](https://media.graphassets.com/CTncDK3YRzuNEbRFoO0c)工作，这样选民可以从CFER完成的研究报告中获得相关的事实和数据，这样在跟选民所在的学区董事及其他民选官员打交道的时候，就可以更加理性平和，也更加容易争取到中间选民的支持。

CFER 做了一个各个学区教Critical Race Theory的[计分卡](https://cferfoundation.org/research/crt-in-school-districts)(需要大量的资料查找工作)，在去年44个学区的基础上，今年又完成了47个加州最大的学区。如果资源足够，我们希望能够在2023年完成全部学区的计分卡工作。

CFER还在2022年启动了教师工会在公立教育中的影响的研究报告，特别是选战资金投入方面，希望2023年能够出初稿。

CFER 2021年发布了一份反对CRT的Brochure、一个指导学区家长如何反对Critical Race Theory的网站[www.rejectCRT.org](http://www.rejectcrt.org)  。2022年不断完善。

CFER 根据各个学区家长的要求针对性地对不同的政策、教材等都做过针对性的研究报告，以便学区家长可以有理有据地跟学区进行沟通。

4，  法律诉讼

法律诉讼是做好Watchdog的重要支持工具。在掌握法律资源地情况下，议会或者州长会更加慎重地考虑我们的意见。因此CFER这两年与很多专业的律师团队建立了合作关系。

CFER去年启动与Thomas More Society合作，针对Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum教材中违宪的部分将加州、加州教育厅等一起告上了法庭。此案在今年[达成](https://cferfoundation.org/posts/victory-the-state-of-california-removes-the-aztec-and-ashe-prayers-from-its-ethnic-studies-model-curriculum)有利于我方的和解。加州教育厅按照我们的要求将违宪部分从教材中删除，并且向我们的合作律师团队支付了十万美元的律师费。

CFER今年还与Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF)一起合作，启动了针对Alameda County 违宪的[诉讼](https://californiaglobe.com/articles/alameda-county-sued-over-racial-preferences-in-awarding-governmental-contracts/)，他们在项目招标过程中对某些族裔进行政策化的种族优待。目前该诉讼正在进行过程中。

在反对AB 1604的过程中，与Pacific Legal Foundation（PLF）一直保持紧密的联系，成为联手反对该提案的仅有的两个组织。最终该提案被大幅修改，删除了我们提出疑问的种族配额部分内容。

今年大家关注的SFFA vs Harvard案进入高法审理阶段。CFER与American Civil Rights Project[合作](https://cferfoundation.org/posts/cfer-and-the-acr-project-urge-the-u-s-supreme-court-to-overturn-grutter-and-reverse-lower-courts-rulings-in-the-harvard-and-unc-racial-discrimination-cases)完成了一篇Amicus Brief提交给高院参考，并且参与了AACE组织的10/30大游行并应邀发表讲话。

5，  媒体公关

媒体公关也是对选民宣传非常重要的一项工作。如果我们的声音能够在媒体上发出去，那么我们做的工作就可以得到更多选民的关注。

CFER在2022年发表了超过五十篇[观点文章](https://www.mindingthecampus.org/author/wwu/)，分析[高等教育](https://www.jamesgmartin.center/author/wenyuan-wu/)、[中小学教育](https://californiaglobe.com/author/wenyuan-wu/)和[其他公共政策领域里](https://www.theepochtimes.com/author-wenyuan-wu)的相关[话题](https://www.realcleareducation.com/authors/wenyuan_wu/)。同时，我们的工作也得到了多个全国性和加州本地媒体上百次的[报道](https://cferfoundation.org/media-coverage)，成功地暴露了从北加Palo Alto学区到南加Poway学区、San Dieguito Union High学区等多个学区的问题操作，获得了广泛关注，发动了大量的选民关注公立教育。

以上就是CFER 2022年的工作报告，我们对于在这么短时间内能够完成这样大量的工作非常自豪。CFER 是一个501(c)(3)非盈利组织，所以您对CFER的捐款可以抵税。我们自信在您的支持下，CFER在2023年可以更好地发挥抗击极左思潮的作用，在反对CRT的一线做盐做光。请考虑[捐赠$50](https://cferfoundation.org/support)帮助我们在2022年实现财务平衡。

Blue Photo Public Service Announcement Facebook Post (1).png

medium_Blue Photo Public Service Announcement Facebook Post (1).png

small_Blue Photo Public Service Announcement Facebook Post (1).png

thumbnail_Blue Photo Public Service Announcement Facebook Post (1).png

CFER 2022年度工作报告

本文初作于2022年11月9日，目前加州计票率才45%。由于全民邮寄选票以及今年新实行的区域投票中心替代社区投票站的投票制度，导致计票极其缓慢。目前未统计的选票都是选举日当天或者之后  一周内抵达选务中心的选票。按照初选时的规律（唯一一次类似投票制度可作为参考的），  这一类型的选票大部分是对现状不满的选民所投。假设这个规律有效，那么可以乐观地说加州2022年权力制衡机制正在形成。具体体现是有可能会有一位非民主党候选人在全州选举中胜选，国会议员、州参众两院都有可能出现共和党议员增加的现象，从市长、市议员到学区都有共和党候选人表现优于选民登记的情况出现。

州一级的选战来说，竞选Controller的Lanhee Chen得票率为46.4%，考虑到加州46.9%民主党选民、23.8%共和党选民、29.3%无党派及其他党派选民的选民组成，以及早投票选民中民主党选民占比比较高的情况，Lanhee Chen仍然有可能在后续的计票中把这个差距追回来，这是洛杉矶时报在[州一级选战中](https://www.latimes.com/projects/2022-california-election-statewide-live-results/)唯一还没有call的选战。如果他追票成功，将成为施瓦辛格以来第一个在加州州级选战中获胜的共和党候选人。

![Picture1.png](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/293829a16cd18ec64177a2f593b1c98e.png)

备受关注的选战还有洛杉矶市长的选战。为了参选改注册为民主党的亿万富翁Rick Caruso正以51.25%的得票率领先他的对手现任国会议员Karen Bass。这反映了即使在洛杉矶这样一个极左的地方，民众也无法再接受极左的政客了。

![Picture2.png](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/67184bd73a0be8066c238863a38c346e.png)

[国会议员的选战](https://www.latimes.com/projects/2022-california-election-statewide-live-results/)方面，在本次选举前，加州共有53位国会议员：其中42位民主党议员和11位共和党议员。今年由于加州人口减少了一个国会议员席位。在目前的选举中，媒体已经call了6个席位给共和党候选人，有5个席位（3 Kiley、13 Duarte、22 Vladao、27 Garcia、45 Steel）共和党候选人出于领先地位。即使只是这5个席位全部拿下，加州已经做到在这次选举中没有损失国会议员了。这在加州总国会议员数少一个、加州民主党主导重新划分国会选区对民主党本身有利的背景下已经难能可贵了。与此同时，还有7个非常接近的选区，包括6（Hamilton）、9（Patti）、21（Maher）、26（Jacobs）、41（Calvert）、47（Baugh）、49（Maryott）。只要任何一个席位拿下对于加州来说都是向党派权力均衡迈进了一步。

[州参议员层面](https://electionresults.sos.ca.gov/contests/district/state-senate)，今年重选的20个选区中，目前有6个选区共和党候选人领先，4个选区选情接近，乐观情况下很有可能从现在9个共和党州参议员增加到12个共和党州参议员，虽然仍然打破不了民主党的super majority，但也是向这个方向前进了一小步  。[州众议院选举](https://electionresults.sos.ca.gov/returns/state-assembly/district/all)中，目前有18个选区共和党候选人领先，11个选区选情接近，最乐观情况下很有可能从现在19个共和党州众议员增加到超过27个众议员，从而打破民主党一党独大的局面，使得两党权力向均衡方向迈进。而这还是在今年年初民主党掌控的重划选区不公平的情况下取得的。年初的重新划区把六个现任共和党众议员分到三个区里面自相残杀，相当于选战还没开始共和党就已经丢到三个席位的情况。

在市一级、学区一级也可以看到一些权力均衡的迹象，比如在北加的Union City，共和党注册选民只有12%，民主党注册选民56.3%，参选市议员的共和党人Jeff Wang仍然可以高票领先。在共和党注册选民仅占30%的San Marcos，竞选连任市长的共和党人Rebecca Jones已经确认当选。在共和党注册选民仅占22.2%的Chula Vista，由于参选的民主党人被爆出不住在市内，所以共和党候选人John McCann也是高票领先。学区层面特别值得一提的是，在San Dieguito学区第五选区，由于华人的积极助选，在这个共和党选民仅占23.1%的选区，家长们鼎力支持的候选人Phan Anderson目前领先教师工会支持的候选人超过8%。

![pic 3.png](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/b7111984b6995c624fafc44d946d703f.png)
![Picture4.png](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/57e83693eead957ad2602c4da64c6873.png)
![Picture5.png](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/06fb629f10dcd6952178e4b1dc7b4711.png)

所有这些数据说明：
1，	加州从上至下、从南到北的权力制衡正在形成中，只是由于计票缓慢，所以现在还看不出来。目前的预估是未统计的选票中对现状不满的选民比例比较高。
2，	候选人背景对于选战还是很重要的。特别典型的例子就是Chula Vista的市长候选人。民主党以为必胜，所以派了一个不住在那个市里的关系户（现任国会议员Sarah Jacobs的男朋友）去参选，结果这个政治联姻以及本人不住市内的情况被爆出来之后，选民也不买帐，导致一个46.1%民主党选民的选区目前居然是共和党候选人John McCann领先。
3，	选民的人口结构变化并不是决定性因素。这个主要就是看加州深蓝的城市洛杉矶，选民深受通胀、犯罪率之苦，也不会去选择一个极左的市长候选人，而去选一个刚刚为了参选才转党（本应是候选人硬伤）的候选人Rick Caruso寻求权力制衡。San Marcos、Chula Vista这些民主党注册人数占优的城市都有可能选出共和党市长来。
4，	普通居民积极参与助选很重要。San Dieguito学区三个选区之间的选情对比就很说明问题，这三个选区中都是民主党选民比例至少是40.3%，其中第一和第三选区因为只有很少的居民参与助选，所以一开票民主党对手就是高票当选，而且这两个区的民主党候选人还不是现任。而第五区不仅仅对手是现任，而且还有另外一个分票的候选人，然而由于有超过50位华人家长积极助选，扫街举牌，目前开票情况居然领先了现任8%，凸显了学区选举中居民积极参与的重要性，也为今后不满意学区现状的家长改变学区董事构成提供了一个良好的思路。
5，	即使在深蓝州，媒体有很多偏向性，选举制度设计越来越不透明，但是只要民众坚持投票、坚持为真相发声，民意还是可以通过投票来实现的。

加州是深蓝州，在这次选举中，川普从未来助选过，拜登来助选的49区国会议员选区目前选情胶着。可以说来自两位总统对加州选举的影响相对较小，但是在深蓝州中仍然有隐隐权力制衡闪现，这可以说是相当鼓舞的，也为后续民众的继续参与提供了更多的依据和信心。希望一个月之后计票结束的时候，加州权力能够更加均衡。

本文作者Frank Xu，文中观点仅代表他个人意见。


large_post-1110.png

medium_post-1110.png

small_post-1110.png

thumbnail_post-1110.png

post-1110.png

2022中选，加州权力制衡正在发生

I have some exciting news to share with you! Recently, CFER worked with local parents, community members and legal advocates to facilitate a successful initiative for free speech. Our effort helped block [the Hate Speech Resolution](http://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sduhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=CJRQTF6AD27E) at a school board meeting in the San Dieguito Union High School District (SDUHSD)!  
  
After learning about the proposal, CFER first blew the whistle on the corrosive and anti-free-speech nature of the resolution through [an action alert](https://cferfoundation.org/posts/action-alert-in-san-dieguito-union-high-oc-2022) that went out to the community. We then connected two parents with an attorney specializing in free speech cases. Subsequently, [a formal letter](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/37afe3445bba587daaaf0d0137bd11e1.pdf) threatening legal action was sent to the SDUHSD Board.  
  
**The official letter, requested by CFER, correctly pinpointed the legal risks of regulating speech**:  
  
“The phrase ‘Hate Speech’ may be a satisfying label to apply to opposing viewpoints but it is not a legal term of any significance and the Supreme Court has consistently struck down ‘Hate Speech’ regulations much more carefully drawn than Board Member Young’s resolution… The Board enters a First Amendment minefield by adopting these recommendations.”  
  
**The combination of timely policy monitoring, grassroots organizing and legal advocacy ensures the warranted failure of the resolution.**  
  
The SDUHSD Board made the right decision to protect the U.S. Constitution and free speech by rejecting the hate speech proposal supported by two union-backed school board trustees Katrina Young and Julie Bronstein.  
  
More importantly, parents and community members who become involved and speak up at local school board meetings have proactively advanced our liberal democracy. **Their constitutional right to freely express opposing viewpoints must be safeguarded against the illiberal impulse to censor, regulate, and penalize what they have to say**.  
  
In addition to promoting the school board to reevaluate the policy proposal and vote in favor of free speech, our effective initiative has also raised public awareness on how an unconstitutional proposal to police public speech can lead to viewpoint discrimination and chill public participation.

For the last two years, CFER has developed a track record of effectively advancing equality and freedom through local organizing, legal advocacy, policy monitoring, rigorous research and media outreach. This latest victory adds to our growing record and encourages us to keep at it! However, many of these proven actions don't come without any cost. While I hope you are also encouraged by our success and if you are, can I please ask you to make [a kind contribution](https://cferfoundation.org/support) to CFER today to help offset the legal and other costs that added to our important work?

Dark Red White Black Digital Nomad  YouTube Banner (2).png

large_Dark Red White Black Digital Nomad  YouTube Banner (2).png

medium_Dark Red White Black Digital Nomad  YouTube Banner (2).png

small_Dark Red White Black Digital Nomad  YouTube Banner (2).png

thumbnail_Dark Red White Black Digital Nomad  YouTube Banner (2).png

Victory! CFER Helped Parents and Community Defeat an Unconstitutional Speech Code Resolution

**For Immediate Release**

**October 24, 2022**

**SAN DIEGO, CA – October 25, 2022-** On the eve of the Supreme Court’s hearing oral arguments in the two race-preferential admissions cases, CFER will join a coalition of partner groups in a historic rally to advocate for equal education rights on October 30, 2022.

This important event is organized by the [Asian American Coalition for Education](https://asianamericanforeducation.org/en/pr_20180606/) (AACE) in support of Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA). SFFA’s lawyers will argue against racial preferences in college admissions by Harvard and the University of North Carolina at our nation’s higher court on October 31, 2022. The Rally for Equal Education Rights is co-sponsored by organizations across the country including CFER and will take place in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on **Sunday, October 30, 2022 between 1:30 and 4 PM Eastern Time**.

“We are standing up for equal rights and opportunity and against racism and discrimination. Echoing what Dr. Martin Luther King famously said, we do not want our children to be judged by their skin color, but by their content of character and their merit.” said Yukong Mike Zhao, president of AACE. “We are confident the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court will agree with us that America will not accept racism in the 21st century, against Asians – or anyone.”

AACE is a non-political, nonprofit, grassroots national organization dedicated to fighting for Asian-American children’s equal educational rights. In May 2015, the founders of AACE united 64 Asian-American organizations and jointly filed a civil rights complaint with the Department of Education (DOE) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) to request that they conduct investigations into Harvard University’s discriminatory admissions practices against Asian-American applicants. As the largest joint action taken by Asian-American communities over the last few decades, this complaint was investigated by the Justice Department.

“CFER is proud to co-sponsor the 10/30 rally. In 2020, over 9.65 million Californian voters resoundingly rejected Proposition 16, strengthening a national consensus for equal rights,” commented Frank Xu, president of CFER. “We hope that the Supreme Court will consider unequivocal evidence of racial discrimination in both cases and safeguard equal protection.”

Between March 2021 and May 2022, CFER collaborated with the American Civil Rights Project (ACR Project) in filing [three amicus briefs](https://cferfoundation.org/legal) in support of SFFA’s lawsuits, presenting strong evidence that America has a settled public consensus against racial preferences. Our briefs made the case for a demonstrable, broad-based consensus against race-based admissions, which has existed since the early 1990s. This growing national consensus is evidenced by a succession of reputable public opinion surveys and state ballot initiative history in recent years.

In April 2022, the Pew Research Center released [newest polling data](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/04/26/u-s-public-continues-to-view-grades-test-scores-as-top-factors-in-college-admissions/) affirming that an overwhelming majority of the American public say race or ethnicity should not be a factor in admissions. Last week, the American people’s disapproval of racial preferences is again validated by a Washington Post-Schar School [poll](https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/10/22/race-college-admissions-poll-results/).

The Supreme Court must overturn Grutter, uphold the Rule of Law and end the experimental departure from equal protection.

large_Ff1rDpbXkAEOvfJ.jpeg

medium_Ff1rDpbXkAEOvfJ.jpeg

small_Ff1rDpbXkAEOvfJ.jpeg

thumbnail_Ff1rDpbXkAEOvfJ.jpeg

Ff1rDpbXkAEOvfJ.jpeg

CFER Co-Sponsors the 10/30 Equal Education Rights Rally in Front of the U.S. Supreme Court to Support SFFA’s Legal Battles Against Harvard and UNC

**For Immediate Release**

**October 12, 2022**

**SAN DIEGO, CA -- October 12, 2022**- Californians for Equal Rights Foundation (CFER) joins the National Association of Scholars, California Policy Center, Goldwater Institute, James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal, John Locke Foundation, Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, Palm Beach Freedom Institute, and Washington Policy Center in releasing the [Model Education Licensure Code](https://www.nas.org/policy/model-education-licensure-code). 

The Model Education Licensure Code provides three model bills state policymakers can use to reform education schools and the education licensure process—[the Education Licensure Nondiscrimination Act](https://www.nas.org/policy/model-education-licensure-code/education-licensure-nondiscrimination-act), the [Education Licensure Review Act](https://www.nas.org/policy/model-education-licensure-code/education-licensure-review-act), and the [Education Licensure Certificate Act](https://www.nas.org/policy/model-education-licensure-code/education-licensure-certificate-act).

Education reformers must include education schools and education licensure in their reform agenda,” stated David Randall, National Association of Scholars Director of Research. “Radical activists use education schools and licensure requirements as their central means to gain power over America’s classrooms.”

Activists long ago seized control of education schools and began to insert ever more radical ideology and pedagogy into teacher training. The radicalized education schools propagandize teachers and screen out would-be teachers who refuse to acquiesce to the schools’ political demands.

“The radical activists also use education licensure requirements to force teachers and education administrators to receive degrees from education schools,” said Brandon Dutcher, Senior Vice President of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs.

This requirement ensures that our schools’ education administrators and teachers are committed to an ideology not shared by many Americans. More recently, states such as [Illinois](https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/ultra-woke-illinois-mandates-are-top-threat-to-u-s-education/) and [Minnesota](https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/minnesota-proposes-require-teachers-use-critical-race-theory-heres-what) have moved to impose explicitly politicized education licensure requirements. The body of teachers indoctrinated by politicized education schools and licensure requirements sabotage education reform laws wherever they can.

“Education reform cannot succeed so long as the radical education establishment controls the education of our teachers,” said Martin Center President Jenna Robinson. “Policymakers in each state should adapt these model bills to forward education reform most effectively.”

The three model bills work together to eliminate the radical establishment’s power to select America’s teachers.

The Education Licensure Nondiscrimination Act forbids a broad range of the different means that activists uses to politicize the education of our teachers.
The Education Licensure Review Act gives state policymakers the power to veto politicized licensure requirements imposed by state education department bureaucrats.
The Education Licensure Certificate Act, building on initial work done by states such as Arizona, establishes a standard path toward licensure that bypasses requirements for an undergraduate degree and minimizes education-school requirements.

“These three reforms make it possible for a new generation of liberty-minded teachers to enter the classroom,” said Dr. Terry Stoops, the Director of the Center for Effective Education at the John Locke Foundation. “This new generation will support education reform policy with a good heart.”

Issuing Organizations: National Association of Scholars, California Policy Center, Californians for Equal Rights Foundation, Goldwater Institute, The James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal, John Locke Foundation, Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, The Palm Beach Freedom Institute, Washington Policy Center.

###

If you would like more information about this issue, please contact NAS Director of Research David Randall at randall@nas.org.

**Further Testimonials**

“At a time when American schools are struggling to keep their greatest assets, teachers, in the classroom and away from the temptation of other professions and retirement, it is necessary to rethink our teacher credentialing processes to attract new and exciting talent. California Policy Center is excited to work with others who want to reduce barriers to entry and make our students the top priority in education and our schools the envy of the world once again. We can do that by pursuing bold, innovative reforms that will help to attract and keep the best and brightest teachers in the state unburdened by bureaucratic forms and union control.”
**Lance Christensen
Vice President of Education Policy & Government Affairs
California Policy Center**

“Our students deserve access to great teachers, and those teachers deserve a clear and direct path into the classroom—one free from bureaucratic barriers and relentless political indoctrination. In a time where cries of “teacher shortages” abound, there is simply no justification whatsoever to bar effective educators from the classroom unless they first submit to academically barren and politically radical programming. These model policies will help wrest control away from the ideological gatekeepers who currently oversee and operate our primary teacher preparation pipelines, and help return teacher training to more academic fundamentals.”
**Matt Beienburg
Director of Education Policy & the Van Sittert Center for Constitutional Advocacy
Goldwater Institute**

Black and Blue Modern State University Presentation Template.jpg

large_Black and Blue Modern State University Presentation Template.jpg

medium_Black and Blue Modern State University Presentation Template.jpg

small_Black and Blue Modern State University Presentation Template.jpg

thumbnail_Black and Blue Modern State University Presentation Template.jpg

CFER Joins the National Association of Scholars and Other National Groups to Reform Education Licensure: Three Model Bills Can Help Disrupt Radical Teachers 

Dear San Dieguito parents, community members and concerned citizens,

Recently, San Dieguito Union High School District (SDUHSD) Board Trustee Katrina Young proposed a resolution governing “[Board’s Response to Hate Speech](http://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sduhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=CJRQTF6AD27E)." On October 13, 2022, the SDUHSD Board will hold a [Special Board Meeting](https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sduhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=CF7TMH7729DB), during which this resolution will be discussed **(Item 10L)**.

Using subterfuge of diversity and school safety, this resolution is nothing but a naked attack on free speech and viewpoint diversity. It is aimed at targeting parents and community members who express opinions and dissent opposing the political orthodoxy of race-based policy making and hijacked diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs. 

By arguing that “free expression can and has resulted in bias-based behavior and expressions at school board meetings,” Trustee Young’s politicized proposal is a direct code of speech regulation. It defines “hate speech” as “[a]ny kind of communication in speech, writing or behavior, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are and/or any characteristic conveying identity, including, but not limited to, religion, ethnicity, nationality, ancestry, race, color, creed, descent, language, economic status, social origin, disability, health status, sex, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, and/or other gender expression.” The expansive list and subjective nature of protected identities will undoubtedly lead to thought policing and ideological conformity. 

Nationwide, systemic attacks on free speech in the name of regulating “hate” have been on the rise, resulting in increased cancel culture incidents and self-censorship. A May 2022 survey by the Future of the First Amendment Project [found](https://knightfoundation.org/reports/future-of-the-first-amendment-2022-high-schooler-views-on-speech-over-time/) over 40% of high school students are comfortable voicing disagreement with teachers and peers in the classroom. The 2022 College Free Speech Rankings by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression and College Pulse [found](https://www.thefire.org/just-released-the-2022-2023-college-free-speech-rankings/) that “63% of students fear reputational damage if they speak their minds.” 

We urge you to take prompt action to defend your right to free expression and reject political censorship:
1. Please attend the **October 13 Special Board Meeting** at **5pm** at **Mustang Commons at San Dieguito High School Academy (800 Santa Fe Drive, Encinitas, CA 92024)**. Sign up to give a public comment opposing **Agenda Item 10L** and address the Board with your opposition. 
2. Contact your SDUHSD board representative via email and let them know you don’t support the speech regulation resolution. Their contact information can be found below:

	- Trustee Maureen “Mo” Muir, President, Trustee Area 1, Maureen.Muir@sduhsd.net 

 	- Trustee Michael Allman, Vice-President, Trustee Area 4, Michael.Allman@sduhsd.net 

  	- Trustee Julie Bronstein, Clerk, Trustee Area 5, Julie.Bronstein@sduhsd.net, 

  	- Trustee Katrina Young, Trustee Area 2, Katrina.Young@sduhsd.net

Thank you in advance! 

&nbsp;

**Californians for Equal Rights Foundation**

Dark Red White Black Digital Nomad  YouTube Banner (1).png

Join Our Coalition

Report CRT Practices

Reject Liberate Ethnic Studies

Oppose Equity Math

Legislative Reports

Alliance Building

Report a Problematic Bill

CRT in School Districts

CFER Research & More

Legal Advocacy

Report UC Discrimination in Admissions

Public

Policies

Research

Legal

Posts