Tom's Plan — Tom Horne for Arizona State Superintendent of Public Instruction

Tom Horne’s Plan to Make Arizona’s Public Schools the Best in the Nation.

Conservative Republican Tom Horne will:

Fight critical race theory
Stop cancel culture
Promote patriotism, quality education, and real learning

Liberals are trying to indoctrinate our school children to hate America. They want our children to believe that America is a racist country.

Tom Horne WILL stop them.

Why am I running for Arizona State Superintendent of Public Instruction?

Liberals in Arizona are breaking down the pillars to a good education. They want to coddle students, not teach them. They promote liberal ideology like critical race theory which is a bunch of nonsense. And instead of Spanish-speaking students being forced to learn English, they want to return to bilingual education which leaves most students unable to be fluent in English, which means they cannot succeed in this country.

I want to bring conservative values back to education. Promote academic achievement, not mediocrity. Keep our schools open. Our children deserve a brighter future.

When I was superintendent of public instruction, my focus was on academic achievement; I was a crusader against mediocrity, laziness, and political indoctrination as a substitute for academic teaching.

Since I left office, much of my work has been undone. Political agendas have taken the place of a focus on academics, and this is damaging to the students. I feel compelled to bring the focus back to academic achievement.

1. Critical Race Theory Runs Rampant

Critical race theory propagandizes students with false history. It has been spreading in our schools.

It is unprofessional for teachers to use their classrooms to force-feed this kind of propaganda to young, impressionable students. We have licensing laws that should be used to prevent this kind of abuse of the classroom.

Critical theory leads to mediocrity, as academics are sacrificed to propaganda. [Click here for some relevant articles]

2. Put an End to “Ethnic Studies”

Ethnic Studies in Tucson divided students by race: African American students to Classroom 1, Mexican American students to Classroom 2, etc., just like in the old South. The students were taught “critical race theory.” This is their quote: “Unlike traditional civil rights, which embraces incrementalism and step-by-step progress, critical race theory questions the very foundation of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.” Teachers should not be teaching our students to be opposed to Enlightenment rationalism and neutral principles of constitutional law. Ethnic Studies had a table that promulgates racial stereotypes by detailing the differences between “white individualism” (e.g. “white people interrupt a lot”) and “colored collectivism.”

I wrote a bill that the legislature passed, prohibiting this kind of ethnic chauvinism in our schools. First as Superintendent, and then as Attorney General, I pursued the legal process under the statute, and this toxic program was eliminated.

After I was no longer attorney general, a liberal ninth circuit judge cancelled the specific enforcement of the statute, but did not declare it unconstitutional on its fact. There needs to be another effort to enforce it, and if elected I will do that.

3. Bilingual Education

The current Superintendent of Schools is pushing for a return to bilingual education instead of English immersion.

This is not reasonable: The landmark study showed that students in English immersion out performed students in bilingual in college admission, average income, and admission to high-status occupations (by almost 2 to 1).

A pathetic 4% of students in bilingual became proficient in English in a year. At that rate, almost none of the students would ever become proficient in English. After I began enforcing the requirement for structured English immersion, the percentage increased to 29%, which meant almost all students would become proficient in English within 3 to 4 years.

4. Keeping Students in School

Students should be in school when it is safe. The current Superintendent was unreasonable in arguing that all schools should be shut down. The science is that it depends on local circumstances.

The issue is now overcome, but the demand of the current superintendent to close all schools illustrates a kind of thinking that denies science and is not reasonable. It shows a priority on ideology and the interests of groups that do not include students and parents.

5. Arizona Graduation Requirements

Before I became Superintendent social promotion was resulting in functionally illiterate students receiving high school diplomas. Employers were no longer trusting high school diplomas as indicating competence. So the legislature passed a requirement that students pass a standardized test to graduate from high school.

My predecessors did not enforce this requirement. I was the first to enforce it. For the first time, a high school diploma in Arizona really meant something.

But my successors have worked with the legislature to eliminate this requirement. Now we are back to the cycle of mediocrity. If elected again, one of my first priorities would be to persuade the legislature to reinstate this graduation requirement, which would result in a high school diploma providing an assurance of some level of proficiency.

6. State Takeover of Failing Schools

I used this process to motivate the leadership of failing school districts to improve performance for students,

This process has been absent with my successors (other than for financial mismanagement). It needs to be re-instituted so that students are entitled to a first-rate education regardless of their ZIP Code.

7. My Philosophy of Civil Rights

My belief is that we are all individuals, not exemplars of whatever particular ethnic group we were born into. What counts is what an individual knows and can do, not what ethnic group he/she happens to have been born into.

Knowing someone’s ethnicity tells you absolutely nothing meaningful about that person. It is his or her individual qualities that matter. This puts me at odds with identity politics, which elevates the accident of ethnicity to centrality in one’s identity.

8. Scholarships for High Achieving Students

When I was in the legislature, I sponsored a bill to give full scholarships at state universities to students who not only passed the state test but who exceeded it. This country puts too much emphasis on mere proficiency, and not enough on excellence.

While I was in the legislature, the establishment ignored the bill. But as Superintendent, I was a member of the Board of Regents and I worked hard and made it happen.

As an objective measure, it was the perfect motivator. Subjective scholarships motivate no one because no one knows what the criteria are. But with an objective scholarship like this, students, and their parents, were highly motivated to see to it that they exceeded on the state-wide test, so that college would be paid for.

The program was eventually canceled. If I am elected superintendent, I will again be a member of the Board of Regents, and I will fight to restore it.

We must motivate students to excellence, not just to proficiency.

IN-DEPTH REVIEW OF MY PLATFORM

Critical Race Theory Runs Rampant

The problem described above has become much worse. Critical race theory has expanded from the Tucson school district to the rest of the state. (See discussion of 1619 Project below.)

An example is the New York Times 1619 project. The Baltz district in Arizona was in the first district in the nation to adopt it. It is now in 2400 schools nationwide and in a number of Arizona districts.

This program teaches that the founding of our country was not in 1776 but in 1619 when slaves were first introduced into Virginia. It has five themes with which it propagandizes students:

1. The American revolution was not fought for life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but because American slave owners feared a threat of abolition by the British authorities.

2. Lincoln was a racist.

3. For the most part, black Americans fought back alone.

4. Plantation slavery was the foundation of American capitalism, and the cruelty of capitalism is a reflection of the cruelty of the plantation.

5. American history is best understood (to exclusion of everything else) as a struggle by American blacks against white supremacy.

Numerous American historians, who specialize in these areas, have written refutations, showing that each one of these contentions is false. [Please skip to end of this platform for more detailed refutations of why each of these theories false.]

The founder of this program, a New York Times’ staffer named Nicole Hannah-Jones, has declared openly that her purpose was to propagandize students to support a political program of reparations.

I was recently in a meeting of parents upset over this use of the schools for identity politics. According to the parents, the focus on identity politics is displacing the academics that should be the focus of the schools. A Mother of two gifted students broke into tears in front of the group, describing how her younger child was not nearly getting the quality of education that her older child had gotten.

Critical theory leads to mediocrity, as academics are sacrificed to propaganda. [Please click “News” for some relevant articles]

2. Killing “ethnic studies”

Ethnic Studies in Tucson divided students by race. African American students to Classroom 1, Mexican American students to Classroom 2, etc., just like in the old South. The students were taught “critical race theory.” This is their quote: “Unlike traditional civil rights, which embraces incrementalism and step-by-step progress, critical race theory questions the very foundation of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.” Teachers should not be teaching our students to be opposed to Enlightenment rationalism and neutral principles of constitutional law. Teachers who do that should not be teaching. They referred to the states taken from Mexico in 1848 as Aztlan. Their materials stated, “we are slowly taking back Aztlan as our numbers multiply.” Ethnic studies had a table that promulgates racial stereotypes by detailing the differences between “white individualism” (e.g. “white people interrupt a lot”) and “colored collectivism.” The founders of the program described themselves as “neo Marxists.” Marxism taught that all history is about class struggle, to the exclusion of everything else. Neo Marxists substitute race struggle for class struggle as the only thing worth studying. One of the textbooks was Occupied America. It sings the praises of a leader named Jose Angel Gutiérrez, one of whose speeches is described in the textbook as follows: “Gutiérrez … called upon Chicanos to ‘kill the gringo’, which meant to end white control over Mexicans.”

The textbook’s translation of what Gutiérrez meant “kill the Gringo” contradicts his clear language. Another textbook gloated about the trouble the U.S. is having controlling the border: “Apparently the U.S. is having as little success in keeping the Mexicans out of Aztlan [US states taken from Mexico in 1848] as Mexico had when they tried to keep the North Americans out of Texas in 1830. … the Latinos are now realizing that the power to control Aztlan may once again be in their hands” (page 107). My main source was other teachers in the schools, a number of them Latinos, who were profoundly shocked at what they saw. Hector Ayala, who was born in Mexico and an excellent English teacher at Cholla High School in Tucson, told me that the director of La Raza Studies accused him of being the “white man’s agent” and that when this director was a teacher, he taught a separatist political agenda. His students told Ayala that they were taught in Raza Studies to “not fall for the white man’s traps.” One teacher wrote me that he heard students being told they need to go to college so they can gain power to take back the stolen land and return it to Mexico. Another reported to me that Latino students told him that the land is not part of the U.S. but "occupied Mexico." This teaching was a betrayal of the students’ parents. They came to this country as the land of opportunity. They expected their children to be taught that this is the land of opportunity, not that they are oppressed so it is all hopeless, or to hate the country their parents chose to come to.

After I was no longer attorney general, a liberal ninth circuit judge declared our statute unconstitutional. Now that we have a more conservative US Supreme Court we should try again. We should appeal to the US Supreme Court from the liberal Ninth Circuit, so that our schools will focus on academics, and not on propagandizing students with what the teachers themselves describe as a neo-Marxist philosophy.

3. Bilingual education:

Bilingual education is a disaster for students who do not yet speak English. Many of them never learned English properly. This hampers them in succeeding in higher education and in the American economy. They first need to be in structured English immersion, and only after they have become proficient in English, should dual language or bilingual education be allowed. Once students are proficient in English, dual language is educationally sound. It is an advantage to speak two languages. But first, they must become proficient in English.

A study in Educationnext.com (by Joseph Guzman, Professor, of Chicano/Latino Studies), a publication of Harvard and Stanford, compared students who had been in structured English immersion with those who had been in bilingual education, in three areas: college admission, average income, and participation in high-status professions. The students who had been instructed in English immersion outperformed the students in bilingual education in every single topic studied: college admissions, salaries, and in admission to professions (by almost 2 to 1).

Prior to my becoming superintendent, an initiative had passed requiring structured English immersion for students not yet proficient in English. But it was not enforced until I took office.

In a report by then Superintendent Lisa Graham Keegan to the legislature, the percentage of students in bilingual education who became proficient in English in a given year was a pathetic 4%. At that rate, almost none of the students would ever become proficient in English.

I began to enforce the requirement for standard English immersion. I recruited a team of highly trained experts to teach teachers how to bring students to English fluency quickly. A number of teachers arrived at the training with a hostile attitude to the program and ended up giving a standing ovation to the trainers.

After I began enforcing the requirement for structured English immersion, the percentage increased to 29%, which meant almost all students became proficient in English within 3 to 4 years.

The current Superintendent of Schools is pushing for a return to bilingual education instead of English immersion. This is not reasonable. To succeed in the American economy, students must become proficient in English.

4. Students in school

Students need to be in school. Keeping them at home leaves them behind in their academics, which can have long lasting negative consequences for their life. This is true both educationally and emotionally. Closing schools has increased rates of suicide, anxiety, and depression. It has also forced Mothers to leave their jobs, to take care of children not in school. When district schools closed, private schools and charter schools somehow found a way to stay open.

The science said that whether schools are safe places for students and teachers depended on local circumstances, such as how prevalent was Covid 19 in that community, ventilation at the schools, etc. Governor Ducey wisely left a decision on re-opening to local districts. The current Superintendent called on the Governor to close all schools in the State. (Az. Republic. 1/2/21.) He declined.

The issue is now overcome, but the demand of the current superintendent to close all schools illustrates a kind of thinking that denies science and is not reasonable. It shows a priority on radical ideology and the interests of groups that do not include students and parents.

5. Graduation requirements

The smartest superintendent I knew from another state was from Ohio. She taught me that quality education depends on three pillars: the quality of teacher and teacher leaders, the quality of the curriculum, and the motivation of the students. Often, the importance of the motivation of the students is overlooked in education reform.

Before I became Superintendent, social promotion was a serious problem in Arizona. It resulted in functionally illiterate students receiving high school diplomas. Employers were no longer trusting high school diplomas as indicating competence. So the legislature passed a requirement that students pass a standardized test to graduate from high school.

My predecessors did not enforce this requirement. I was the first to enforce it. For the first time a high school diploma in Arizona really meant something.

Some students are intrinsically motivated, and some teachers are very dedicated. But there are other students who, given the choice, would watch television rather than do their homework. There are some teachers (hopefully few) who would rather do as little as possible. In those cases, the students and teachers develop a mutually reinforcing cycle of mediocrity. External motivators are needed. In the case of the teachers, statewide testing and school accountability provide this external motivation. For the less motivated type of students, passing the state test to graduate was what was needed.

A teacher told me that when a student was not doing his homework, she could tell the students’ parents “the student has to pass the state test to graduate”. That was a good motivator.

But my successors have worked with the legislature to eliminate this requirement. Now, we are back to the cycle of mediocrity. If elected again, one of my first priorities would be to persuade the legislature to reinstate this graduation requirement, which resulted in a high school diploma providing an assurance of some level of proficiency.

6. State takeover of failing schools

When test scores show that schools are failing, the state needs to help them. But if that shows no results, the state needs to take them over. Showing a willingness to use this process can motivate district leadership, who otherwise may have a focus on factors other than academics, to intensify their academic focus.

When I was Superintendent, we used this process with the Roosevelt School District right up to a final hearing. This is a very large school district, which, at the time, had pathetically low test scores. Principals and other key personnel were hired not based on merits, but on a spoils system and competition between the Hispanic and the African-American factions to get jobs for their respective groups. I brought

the process of state takeover almost to completion. This was a great motivator. Their academic focus intensified, and the test scores improved.

This process has been absent with my successors (other than for financial mismanagement). It needs to be re-instituted. Students are entitled to a first-rate education regardless of their ZIP Code.

7. My Philosophy Of Civil Rights

In the summer of 1963, having just graduated from high school, I attended the march on Washington in which Martin Luther King gave his famous speech. His philosophy was that we are entitled to be judged by the content of our character and not the color of our skin. This has been my philosophy my entire life.

As Superintendent of Schools, I put great amounts of energy into helping schools in poor neighborhoods, believing that each student is entitled to a quality education, regardless of ZIP Code.

As Attorney General, I had over 30 lawyers doing nothing but civil rights.

As a lawyer in private practice, I obtained $1/2 million for the family of Dravon Ames and Iesha Harper, who were abused by a police officer. This officer, to the credit of the Phoenix Police Department, was fired from the police force. That was not my only civil rights case.

But I am in general a very firm supporter of police, without whom life degenerates into a war of all against all. And I am an adamant opponent of identity politics. What counts is the individual, not the ethnic group.

8. Scholarships for high achieving pupils

I have never forgotten a quotation from a Chinese exchange student at ASU. He said: “We put 90% of our effort into the top 10% of students; you put 90% of your effort into your bottom 10% of students. Who do you think is going to win that contest?”

While I was in the legislature, the establishment ignored the bill. But as Superintendent, I was a member of the Board of Regents. I worked hard and made it happen.

I had to continually lobby other members of the Board of Regents. This was because the presidents of the universities wanted all scholarships at their discretion, even though this new scholarship was only 13% of the total. They could not control that 13% of scholarships, because it was an objective measure.

As an objective measure, it was the perfect motivator. Subjective scholarships motivate no one, because no one knows what the criteria are. But with an objective scholarship like this, students, and their parents, were highly motivated to see to it that they exceeded on the statewide test, so that college would be paid for.

During my last year as Superintendent, the university presidents finally persuaded a Board of Regents to cancel the program. If I am elected superintendent, I will again be a member of the Board of Regents, and I will fight to restore it.

We must motivate students to excellence, not just to proficiency.

REFERENCE:

Refutation of the 1619 Project:

1. The American revolution was not fought for life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but to protect the British authorities abolishing slavery.

Rebuttal: There is no evidence for this except one irrelevant incident. Some slaveowners reacted negatively to the fact that the British governor of Virginia announced that any slaves leaving the plantations and fighting for the British would receive their freedom. But historians of the period point out that this occurred after the revolution was well on its way. So we can still look to the declaration of independence for the reasons for the American revolution.

2. Lincoln was a racist

Rebuttal: The alleged evidence for this is that Lincoln met with black leaders to explore the idea of colonization by free blacks outside the country.

Lincoln knew that many American whites were prejudiced, and was dealing with the problem of what relations would be like between freed slaves and prejudiced whites. Nicolle Hannah-Jones, the principal author of the 1619 project, wrote that there was a heavy silence in the room as what Lincoln was saying “stole the breath of these five black men”. Historians tell us that is not what happened at all. Black leaders were debating the issue amongst themselves, and they knew in advance what was to be discussed. They said no, and Lincoln moved on.

Lincoln had stated in 1854: “if the Negro is a man, why my ancient faith teaches me that all men are created equal; and that there can be no moral right in connection with one man’s making a slave of another.“

In 1863 he issued, by himself, based on his own individual power, the emancipation proclamation, which freed the slaves in the south.

In 1865, he put all of his political power behind passing the 13th amendment. This included almost unlimited giving away of patronage jobs, and even rumors of bribery, to get Congress to vote for the 13th amendment. Once ratified, it freed all slaves throughout the country.

In doing these things, Lincoln did more for humanity than any other individual in the entire history of the United States. To teach impressionable children that Lincoln was a villain is outrageous.

3. For the most part, black Americans fought back alone.

Rebuttal: This ignores: the abolition movement, created and sustained for centuries by white Americans; the deaths of 700,000 in a Civil War that ended slavery; the role of white Americans in the post Civil War constitutional amendments that ended slavery and gave equal rights and the vote to the freed men; and the role of whites in the civil rights movement.

4. Plantation slavery was the foundation of American capitalism, and the cruelty of American capitalism stems from the cruelty of the plantation.

Rebuttal: Proponents of this claim that in the early 19th century, cotton was 50% of the American economy and converted in a small, poor group of colonies into a world economic power. Historians and economists who studied the subject say it was more like 5%, so the 1619 project is only off by one zero. Interestingly, the 1619 project shares this view with the Confederates, who thought the North could not exist without “king cotton.” They thought the North’s factories would collapse. In fact, the North did fine without cotton and the North won the war.

Only a fanatic Marxist would claim that the essence of capitalism is “cruelty”. In fact, capitalism has produced more prosperity for more people than any other system. Germany and Korea were divided in half after World War II. One can compare the two systems within the context of the same people, same culture, etc. South Korea’s prosperity per person is an almost unbelievable 100 times greater than that of North Korea, and West Germany had a similar advantage over East Germany.

Capitalism is not “cruelty”. It brings prosperity.

5. The nation’s history is best understood as a struggle by American blacks against white oppression.

Rebuttal: This is a form of neo-Marxism that I discussed in the section on ethnic studies. Marx taught that class struggle was the only explanation of history. This is a distortion that makes it impossible to understand historical events. Neo-Marxism is the same theory, but substituting race struggle for class struggle. This is according to the developers of ethnic studies, themselves. Obviously, the struggle against racial oppression should be studied. But it is not the whole picture of the history of this great country by a long shot.