Part 27: ‘We, The People’ — The Constitution in a Nutshell

 (Editor’s Note: No. 27 in a 29-part series on “We The People,” a look back at the United States Constitution and how it came to be. It was written in 1987 by the late 6^th State District Judge Henry Braswell during the nation’s bicentennial celebration.)

By HENRY BRASWELL

(written in July 1987, during the nation’s bicentennial celebration)

Part 27: The Constitution in a Nutshell

“No document in the world, outside Holy Writ,” remarked a British historian, “has been the occasion of such a mass of annotation and exposition as the American Constitution.”

He was right, and most of it is so stodgy, dreary, and pretentious that no one in his right mind is going to wade through it. That probably includes this series of articles.

For most people, reading the document itself would be equally boring.

Let us consider then in abbreviated form the 10 basic principles embodied in the U.S. Constitution.

1. We are citizens of two governments – one being our state government and the other being the United States of America. Therefore, we are subject to the laws of each and derive certain benefits from each. This is federalism.
2. All of the authority that these two governments have over us derives from the people, meaning the qualified voters. This is a republican form of government.
3. Our national government is one of limited powers, more particularly those granted to it in the Constitution. Those not granted to the national government, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states or the people.
4. The U.S. Constitution, the acts of Congress made in pursuance thereof, and treaties of the U.S. government are the supreme law of the land.
5. The people, acting through their state legislatures and the Congress, can change the Constitution.
6. All states are equal so far as the national government is concerned. Special privileges cannot be allowed to any one state or group of states.
7. All persons are equal before the law, and anyone, rich or poor, has the right to protection of the law.
8. No official of our government has authority to act outside the law.
9. There are three branches of the national government – one to make the laws, another to execute and enforce them, and another to interpret the laws and resolve legal disputes. Each branch holds some check on the power of the other two.
10. Every individual is guaranteed certain rights and individual liberties – freedom of speech; religion; press; assembly; petition; freedom from unreasonable searches, seizures and arrest; in criminal proceedings certain procedural rights, such as to be informed of the charge, the right to counsel, the right to a jury; freedom from involuntary servitude; freedom to vote regardless of race or color or religion or sex; the right to equal protection of the laws, and the right to not have one’s property taken by the government except according to law and with just compensation.

These are the dominant patterns in the fabric of the Constitution. They make it unique and, indeed, the most magnificent tapestry ever woven by any people on the loom of their collective experience. In the Centennial year of its ratification, Britain’s Prime Minister William Gladstone pronounced it “the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.”

—

Next: “Part 28: The Real Constitution.”  The three most important words in the U.S. Constitution are the first three: “We, the people.”

—

Send questions or comments about this article to

extra@eParisTexas.com

Part 26: ‘We, The People’ — Religion and the Constitution

 (Editor’s Note: No. 26 in a 29-part series on “We The People,” a look back at the United States Constitution and how it came to be. It was written in 1987 by the late 6^th State District Judge Henry Braswell during the nation’s bicentennial celebration.)

By HENRY BRASWELL

(written in July 1987, during the nation’s bicentennial celebration)

The late 6th State District Judge Henry Braswell (photo submitted to eParisExtra.com by his wife, Rachel Braswell)

Part 26: Religion and the Constitution

Religion looms large in the life of America. So does government. For more than 300 years, the proper relationship between the two has generated spirited debate.

The Constitutional Convention, the delegates to which were Protestant with a sprinkling of Deists like Madison, Franklin and Hamilton, received a letter from a respected citizen of Philadelphia named Jonas Phillips.

In this letter, Phillips – a veteran of the American Revolution, plaintively and eloquently pleaded for an end to the kind of oaths Pennsylvania and some other states required of their elected officials.

In the case of Pennsylvania, the official was compelled to swear that he believed in God and that both the Old and New Testament were divinely inspired.

History does not record whether Phillips’ letter was ever even discussed. What we do know is that the only reference to religion in the document that emerged from the Convention is this: “… no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the united States.”

This betokens the Framers’ firm belief that our country belongs to citizens of all religious persuasions or, for that matter, equally to people with no religious persuasion. In sum, our government should be neutral where religion is concerned.

Apparently, however, this was not explicit enough for the people because practically every ratifying convention demanded that both separation of Church and State and religious freedom be spelled out.

Accordingly, these two concepts came to be embodied in what is known as the “religion” clause of the First Amendment, ratified in 1791.

The “religion” clause declares: “Congress shall make no laws respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

This terse sentence has confronted this nation with a continuing chain of dilemmas as well as a series of controversial and not always consistent U.S. Supreme Court rulings.

Not until the 1940’s did the high court start holding that the “religion” clause applies to state and local governments, including the public schools. That, of course, is when it really began to get sticky.

Most of the public furor arises from the court’s interpretation of the “religion” clause as it relates to education – the use of public money to aid schools and colleges sponsored by the various denominations and the teaching of religion in the public schools.

The logic of the “religion” clause can only be understood in the light of human experience. “A page of history,” observed Justice Holmes, “is worth a volume of logic.”

Both concepts – separation of Church and State and freedom of religion – primarily arose out of the experience of the colonists and the experience of the Founding Fathers in the years following the Revolution.

During the Colonial period, the alliance of government with a particular religious sect was common, as was the persecution of religious dissenters.

Tax money was used to support the official church, and in many instances the failure of a citizen to profess adherence to the doctrines of that church or to observe the rituals of that church was a penal offense.

Needless to say, this did not sit well with the host of minority sects that flourished in the colonies or with Age-of-Enlightenment men like Jefferson and Madison who championed freedom of the mind.

By the time of the Revolution, some states had ceased to give preferential treatment to any particular religious persuasion, while others clung to the practice.

It was Virginia’s abolition of the Church of England as the state-sanctioned church in 1785 with the adoption of Jefferson’s Statute of Religious Freedom that had the most far-reaching effect in the long struggle for religious liberty.

Largely through the efforts of James Madison, who would later author the First Amendment, did this come to pass. This statute accorded absolute freedom of conscience not only to dissenters from the established church but also to non-Christians and atheists.

No small amount of credit is due the Baptists, who were the leaders among the minority sects in the long struggle for religious freedom and for separating Church from State, reaching all the way back to Roger Williams, the founder of Rhode Island.

Also, the Founding Fathers were influenced by their knowledge of English history, which chronicles centuries-long wars between religious factions to determine which faction would control the Crown, accompanied by merciless persecution fo the religious factions that were out of power.

Well, regardless of the First Amendment’s “religious” clause, the debate persists to this day.

Why? Because Americans are on the whole a church-oriented people, and inevitably some of them in their zeal to promote their religion cannot resist the temptation to tap the public till and to utilize the personnel and facilities of government to this end.

And it seems so right. It has been said that “the price of forgetting the lessons of history is being condemned to relive it.”

The wall separating Church and State is by no means solid, but as it now stands, quoting the high court, “The establishment of religion clause means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government … can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another. No tax in any amount can be levied to support any religious activity or institution. Neither can force or influence a person to go or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.”

Further, in order to be constitutional, the law or regulation or policy in question “must avoid excessive governmental entanglement with religion,” it “must have a principal effect which neither advances nro inhibits religion,” and it “must have a secular purpose.”

In the midst of the controversy, it should be remembered that in this country with its laissez faire, free enterprise system of competing religions — cut off from government sponsorship and repression alike – religion remains a far more vital force than in any of the countries of Europe where church and state are not separate.

Is it not a priceless freedom to live in a land where our tax money is not diverted to support some creed we have not the least interest in supporting – a land where we can worship as we please as long as it is not in connection with a governmental activity?

You know, that still leaves lots of room for worship – a land where each individual’s beliefs about God are too private, too personal, and too sacred to permit the rulers of the earth – including the majority, moral or otherwise – to interfere with them.

—

Next: “Part 27: The Constitution in a Nutshell.”  An abbreviated look at the 10 basic principles embodied in the U.S. Constitution.

—

Send questions or comments about this article to

extra@eParisTexas.com

Paris-area school districts receive 2010-2011 accountability ratings

By CHARLES RICHARDS

eParisExtra.com

The Texas Education Agency on Friday released accountability ratings for Texas schools — including the five five public schools in Paris and Lamar County.

(Go to bottom of the page for the accountability ratings by school district and individual campuses at Chisum, North Lamar, Paris, Prairiland and Roxton from 1995 to 2011.)

Recent significant changes made to the accountability system resulted in lower ratings across the board statewide.

The Chisum and Prairiland school systems dropped from “Exemplary” ratings in 2010 to “Recognized” in 2011.

North Lamar Independent School District was ranked “Recognized,” the same as last year, while Paris ISD and Roxton ISD both got “Academically Acceptable” rankings, the same as in 2010.

The only “Academically Unacceptable” rankings  went to two campuses of the Paris ISD – Paris Junior High and Aikin Elementary. Both fell into the lowest category because of substandard performance by their African American sub-population in math and reading at Aikin and math and science at the junior high school.

For the first time, assessments for all special education students in all grades and subjects were included in the accountability ratings.

Also, the Texas Projection Measure was discontinued this year so school districts received no credit for the growth of students who demonstrated improvement outside those areas evaluated by the assessment.

“Had they not done away with that, all of our schools would have been academically acceptable,” said Mark Hudson, Paris ISD assistant superintendent for curriculum.

The TEA  accountability system rates all public schools, charter schools, and school districts in the State of Texas, based upon the number of students meeting the state’s criteria on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS), completion rates, and annual dropout rates.

Additionally, the performance of individual student groups (defined to be the major ethnic and racial groups and students designated as economically disadvantaged) is included in the state’s criteria for determining ratings. All of the evaluated groups must meet the criteria for any given rating label in order to receive that label. The district and its campuses receive the rating attained by the lowest performing group.

The criteria are the same for schools and districts.

Based upon how the school or district performs, the school or district will receive one of four possible rankings: Exemplary (the highest possible ranking), Recognized, Academically Acceptable, and Academically Unacceptable (the lowest possible ranking).

Four major changes were made to the accountability system between 2010 and 2011:

• Commended Performance — added as an extra level of accountability where all represented groups had to reach a 15 percent commended rating for a district or campus to receive a recognized rating and 25 percent for an exemplary rating.
• English Language Learners (ELL) Progress Indicator — 60 percent of students classified as ELL had to reach mastery to be classified as recognized or exemplary.
• TAKS Modified and TAKS Alternate — for the first time, assessments for all special education students in all grades and subjects were included in the accountability ratings.
• Texas Projection Measure — discontinued this year so school districts received no credit for the growth of students who demonstrated improvement outside those areas evaluated by the assessment.

Exemplary

In order to receive an Exemplary rating, a school/district must meet all four of the following criteria:

• TAKS (TM) Test Passing – At least 90 percent of all students must pass the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) test overall and on each of five subsections (Reading/ELA, Writing, Social Studies, Mathematics, and Science); in addition, each “subgroup” (African American, Hispanic, White, and Economically Disadvantaged) must also meet the 90 percent criterion overall and in each subsection (provided there are enough students to meet “minimum size” requirements)
• SDAA II Test Passing – At least 90 percent of all students must pass the State-Developed Alternative Assessment II (SDAA II) test, which is required for only those students for whom the TAKS test is not an acceptable measurement (subgroup criterion does not apply)
• Completion Rate – At least 95 percent of all students, as well as 95 percent of each subgroup listed under the TAKS test, must either have completed or are continuing their education four years after entering high school (this criterion applies to high schools and districts only)
• Dropout Rate – No more than 0.2 percent of all students, as well as no more than 0.2 percent of each subgroup, can have dropped out of school.

Recognized

The criteria are 75 percent pass rate on TAKS and SDAA II (again, required for all students as well as each subgroup), 85 percent on Completion Rate, and 0.7 percent on Dropout Rate.

Academically Acceptable

The criteria are 60 percent on TAKS Subsections “Social Studies”, “Reading/ELA”, and “Writing”, 40 percent on “Mathematics”, which were an increase in standards in 2006 from 2005.^[1] Other minimum standards required to be met are 40 percent on “Science”, 50 percent on SDAA II, 75 percent on Completion Rate, and 1.0 percent on Dropout Rate.

Academically Unacceptable

Any school or district not meeting all of the above criteria for Academically Acceptable will be rated thus. Any school or district with such ranking will be required to submit a plan for corrective action, and TEA may assign a monitor to the school or district to assist it in improving its rating.

A district with two consecutive Academically Unacceptable ratings can be closed by TEA (as was the case with the now-defunct Wilmer-Hutchins Independent School District and the Mirando City Independent School District).

——————————————

Here are the ratings for Lamar County’s five independent school districts since 1995 (no new ratings were given in 2003):

State ranks Aikin Elementary and Paris Junior High as "Academically Unacceptable"

By CHARLES RICHARDS

eParisExtra.com

In a Texas Education Agency rating system that judges schools by their lowest-performing students, the Paris Independent School District came away Friday with an “Academically Acceptable” label — but the Paris Junior High and Aikin Elementary campuses were labeled “Academically Unacceptable.”

The TEA released its rankings of Texas schools on its Internet website Friday.

PISD was marked down because of sub-standard scores by its African-American sub-population in math and science at Paris Junior High and in math and reading at Aikin Elementary.

“In track and field, a relay team gets recognized for its best time, rather than its worst time, but in the accountable system, it’s just the reverse,” said Mark Hudson, PISD’s assistant superintendent for curriculum.

The district and its campuses receive the rating attained by the lowest-performing group.

“That’s really not fair. They don’t look at growth or any of that sort of stuff,” Hudson said. “Last year, they did. They went with the Texas Projection Measure, which actually did reward schools for students’ improvement.”

The TEA dropped the TPM, which meant that school districts received no credit for the growth of students who demonstrated improvement outside those areas evaluated by the assessment.

“Had they not done away with that, all of our schools would have been Academically Acceptable. We got our initial scores back in June, and we could see there was a potential for problems,” Hudson said.

“ If anyone takes a closer look at the data, and not just the two words, it shows we’re teaching our kids, and they’re learning. We don’t have bad schools. Our kids are performing and showing growth,” he added.

“Any educator knows that that’s the real measure – are your kids improving? I think most people look beyond the words and really examine the growth our students have shown,” he said.

Hudson said the school district is continuously looking to improve its curriculum and ways to instruct its students to make sure it is being effective with them.

One of the criteria for a school district or high school being rated Exemplary, the highest ranking, is that at least 95 percent of all students, and 95 percent of each subgroup listed under the TAKS test, must either have completed or are continuing their education four years after entering high school.

Paris High School had a completion rate of 91.2 percent during the 2010-2011 school year.

Paris High School, Crockett Intermediate and Justiss Elementary all were judged “Academically Acceptable” — as was the PISD school district as a whole.

—

Send questions or comments about this article to

extra@eParisTexas.com

Cataracts – what you need to know

Did you know that cataracts are the leading cause of vision loss among adults that are age 55 and older? In fact, more than half of the people over age 65 have some degree of cataract developmentStudies from the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston indicates that seniors suffering from poor vision have shown evidence of a premature mental decline. The results of this study clearly bring to light the importance of routine eye care for older adults, who are at increased risk of eye conditions that cause severe visual impairment such as cataracts. What people may not know is that vision loss caused by cataracts can be easily treated.

What is a cataract? A cataract is a clouding of the lens in the eye, the part of the eye that focuses light and produces clean images. Inside of the eye, the lens is contained in what is like a capsule. As old cells die, they become trapped within the capsule. Over time, more cells die and accumulate causing the lens to cloud, making images look blurred or fuzzy. For most people cataracts are a natural result of aging but other factors such as eye injuries , certain medications, medical treatments and diseases such as diabetes and alcoholism have also been known to cause cataracts. Family history can make you more prone to the condition as well

Following are some of the signs and risk factors for eye disease. If you have any of these you need to consult an Ophthalmologist(an eye M.D.). A simple eye exam could be the first step toward saving your sight. Look for bulging  of one or both eyes; a dark curtain or veil that blocks your vision; decreased vision; even if only temporarily, distorted vision; double vision; excessive tearing; eyelid abnormalities; Halos(colored circles around lights); high blood pressure; HIV or AIDS; injury to the eye, loss of peripheral(side) vision; misaligned eyes, floaters(black “strings” or speckles in your vision and/or flashes of light); pain in the eye, thyroid disease or unusually “red” eyes.

 Treatment for cataracts was one of the earliest medical procedures performed in recorded history. Cataracts were treated as early as the fifth century BC, using a basic (and somewhat horrifying) procedure known as “couching”, which doesn’t sound too terribly bad until you learn that it consisted of laying the patient down and striking him in the eye with a blunt object. The theory behind this assault-as-surgery was that the trauma would cause the hardened cataract to break apart! Ouch! Thank goodness techniques progressed and today cataracts are removed almost by magic(compared to “couching” that is) with 1mm incisions to correct vision length as well as corneal aging.  This requires only a few hours in the hospital  and virtually no pain afterward. You get to go back home after your procedure and your eyesight is restored generally within hours. Eye drops are ordered by your physician to aid the eyes in the healing process.

If you need more information about cataracts or other vision problems feel free to contact me, Alice Barlow, RN at 903-739-8070

Alice Barlow RN is the Alternate Administrator of Platinum Home Health, INC. located at 140 S. Collegiate Drive in Paris Texas.