Jeff Davis Parish.com
Leaning to the Right Index of Articles
Expanding the Powers of.........."Principals"?
A recent article in the Jennings Daily News along with a follow up piece in the
OP/ED section the next day is a cause for concern. Jeff Davis Parish School
Board has approved an ordinance to pursue the revocation of driving privileges
of students upon suspension or expulsion. In the articles those students were
defined as those that are unruly, disruptive etc. The articles describe an
effort that gives School Principals the authority to revoke driving privileges.
As citizens and, voting taxpayers, we should all be sensitive to the transfer
of authority, and the creation of new laws that violate civil liberties. One of
the mantras repeated is that “Driving is a privilege and not a right”. That may
have been true in the horse and buggy days but that may no longer be true today.
Just because someone repeats the mantra does not make it accurate. The
automobile has become an essential part of life. It has, in many instances
become an extension of the home and of individuals personal space. That is why
police have to obtain permission to search a vehicle or acquire a search
warrant. The idea that driving is a privilege and not a right is at minimum an
arguable point. When we read these types of things, and without much thought we
become agreeable to such rules.
We assume they will implement these forms of discipline on the hard core problem
children. That may not be the case.
The article references a Louisiana Revised Statute that does not exist. Perhaps it is just a typo. One of the laws that is being referred to is actually RS 32:341. It even states that Driving is a Privilege” but someone else added the “Not a Right” line while making their arguments in support of this authority. The law can be found at http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=88425.
The revised statute, defines a tool that can be used for students who are disciplined, limited to expulsions, suspensions, and assignments to alternative educational settings for infractions involving the sale or possession of drugs, alcohol, or any other illegal substance, the possession of a firearm, or an infraction involving assault or battery on a member of the school faculty or staff. The Revised Statute is clear on what students it applies to and for what offenses. The school board can “promulgate rules and regulations to implement the provisions of this Section”. However while creating these rules and regulations they are required to stay within the provisions of the RS 32:341 Section. It is also clear on a process leading up to that disciplinary action. Nowhere in the statue is a Principal given authority beyond “written notification from a principal or headmaster at a public or private school pursuant to R.S. 17:416.1(D), the Department of Public Safety and Corrections shall take the following action with respect to the student if he is an unemancipated minor between fifteen years of age and eighteen years of age: In fact, the word “Principal” occurs only once in the statute and his authority goes as far as notification. In other words, the principal only has the authority to make a recommendation. Any attempt by the School Board to extend powers beyond the statute, is unconstitutional.
If, in our desperate attempt to deal with daily discipline problems we extend powers to individuals to revoke driving privileges/rights where does it end? What is next?
All too often the efforts to deal with disciplinary problems of students has become a them versus us mentality. All too often we get a letter in the mail several days after the fact that there was a disciplinary event involving our children. Or, we get a phone call to notify us of what disciplinary event occurred.
There is a disconnect between the parents and their children with respect to the school system and its plan to administer disciplinary action. When you question a disciplinary action, your met with an excuse that the decision is based on policy. Yet, the policy is not enforced equitably and fairly to all students. My own child was once sent to detention for chewing gum. Another child whom he got the gum from was told to spit his out. The difference was that the other student was the child of a school board employee and was on the starting lineup of the basketball team. My examples only stop there because of time/space constraints. This state is heavily populated with people who can give similar examples of how policies are not enforced equitably. Unfortunately, this is part of the culture of our school system that has existed since I was in school in the 70’s.
There are instances where teachers, coaches, janitors, principals and others who have behaved inappropriately and their actions have bordered on corrupt. Some of these people were terminated because of their corrupt behavior but nothing was pursued beyond the termination of their employment. A suspension or expulsion of a student should be no different.
For decades the school systems have been educating and disciplining with mixed messages. We all know about the drug free efforts of our schools yet they do not require drug testing as a condition for participating in sports. A child can be arrested after school for drugs or fighting or any number of things but if he or she is good in sports you can expect to still see them right there on the starting line up.
The school systems is ripe with nepotism, favoritism and conflicts of interest. It has been that way dating back to when I first recognized it back in the 70’s. Not much has changed except there are more rules that apply to those outside of the umbrella of favoritism.
Look at the structure of the make up of the school system. In most cases you can connect the dots. There’s the farmer that pays a large sum in property taxes that goes to paying the bills of the school system. That school system employs the farmer’s wife as a teacher who’s is friends with another teacher that has his/her child in their class. That child gets exceptions to the rules and enough attention that will give them the breaks they need to succeed in the school environment. Homework for their children is assisted by phone calls directly to their teacher friend who help explain the questions or assist with the answers. When YOU call you are spoken to in a condescending tone and reminded that your child should have paid attention. Then there is the teacher who sends your child to the designated disciplinarian of the school who also happens to be the spouse of the disciplinarian. Then there is the school board member who are elected and lose their objectivity because they have multiple family members employed by the school board. Is a child supposed to be naïve and think they will get fair treatment under those conditions? Do parents actually think they will get fair treatment under that structure?
The problems in the school systems are within the school system and it will have to be repaired from the inside out. Some of the problems that are being encountered in the school system is self perpetuating. When the system leads a child down a road that basically encourages them to “give up because it doesn’t pay”, then there becomes problems that are nothing more than a by-product of the problem the system created for itself and for the children it proclaims to be helping.