House Votes for School Checks for Sex Offenders


#1

Public schools would be barred from employing teachers and other workers convicted of sexual offenses against children or other violent crimes under a bill the House approved Tuesday.

The measure would require school systems to check state and federal criminal records for employees with unsupervised access to elementary and secondary school students, and for people seeking those jobs. Workers refusing to submit to the checks would not be allowed to have school positions.

A 2010 report by the Government Accountability Office, the auditing arm of Congress, cited one estimate that there are 620,000 convicted sex offenders in the U.S.

It also found that state laws on the employment of sex offenders in schools vary. Some require less stringent background checks than others, and they differ on how people with past convictions are treated, such as whether they are fired or lose their teaching license.

The bill has run into objections from major teachers’ unions like the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers. In letters to lawmakers, their criticisms included concerns that the measure might jeopardize workers’ protections under union contracts.

abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/house-bill-makes-schools-check-sex-offenders-20650235

Just so I get this right - the NEA is fine with sex offenders teaching in schools as long as they are union?


#2

I heard about this on the Kelly File on Fox News. I love to see how some people will try to spin this.


#3

yep. Years ago, when I lived in NJ, the NJEA went to court to enforce a policy that principals could not give bad references to union teachers who went to other schools. The policy had been challenged when a principal revealed to a potential employer (another school) that a teacher had been fired for sexual misconduct. The union’s claim was that the contract was the most important thing, more important than safeguarding children. :mad:


#4

No they are not pro sex-offender they are simply pro-choice.


#5

Someone mentioned the other night that Obamacare aimed at addressing DNA in relation to sex-offenders as part of the program.

“Every school employee, from the cafeteria workers to the administrators, to janitors to the teachers, principals and librarians, that every one” is subject to background checks including the FBI fingerprint indentification system to the national sex offender registry, said Rep. Todd Rokita, R-Ind.

In this age of technology I’m surprised one would get in at all with a simple background check. Nationwide DNA database is coming. Supreme Court decision in case Maryland v. King ruled a warrant isn’t required for testing.


#6

I don’t know why this should disturb them considering their liberal views on all matters sexual. It is like charging a woman with murder when she kills her newborn infant and at the same time being an advocate of abortion.

I hope I am making my point clear.

They appear to have the unique ability to walk in two opposite directions at the same time.


#7

Sincere ignorance. Nothing could be more dangerous.


#8

Gary, do you understand what I am trying to say? They boggle my mind. I don’t know how they cannot see their inconsistency.


#9

Sci they don’t want to molest children-just kill them.I am glad we clearedr that up


#10

They are in denial, they don’t want to see. Its a terrible fight, look how petty the reps in DC have become. Everything is exposed for all to see now. Good will have the final word.


#11

This issue has been brought up several times and all in all I’m for it. I do think that some minor changes need to be made though. It’s great that they will be looking at the sex offender registry and keeping out people who have been convicted of violent felonies (though I think most states already require this). However, I am skeptical of the benefits of keeping people who have had felony drug charges out of teaching positions for life. One of the most inspirational people I have ever known what my high school history teacher, who had spent 8 years in the 1980’s in prison for drugs. He turned his life around, went to college, and then became just an incredible teacher who was so focused on helping kids avoid the same mistakes he made. That’s not to say that just anyone should be able to go from prison to teaching high school, but there should be mechanisms in place that allow for people who have done their time, moved on, cleaned up, and built a life to move past their mistakes and utilize their talents and experiences in a positive way.


#12

Ok my immediate reaction was shock that it isn’t already illegal for sex offenders to work in schools. How is that possible? Everywhere I’ve lived has had strict policies on background checks AFAIK. But then, I remembered that we are taking about a federal law. Do we need this to be a federal law? Do we not trust our local communities to take care of this?


#13

Another example of how unions are out of wack with the common people and even their own members. I know as a member of a union who doesn’t speak the way I feel.:mad:


#14

Public schools would be barred from employing teachers and other workers convicted of sexual offenses against children or other violent crimes under a bill the House approved Tuesday.

Care to explain what “other violent crimes” entail? Does it entail all sex offenders, including those who committed statutory rape at 17 with their 15 year-old girlfriend and those who peed on a sidewalk? :rolleyes:


#15

Why is the Federal gov’t getting involved?
Education is (or supposed to be) a state/local matter.
Criminal law is definitely a state matter.

From the story:

It also found that state laws on the employment of sex offenders in schools vary. Some require less stringent background checks than others, and they differ on how people with past convictions are treated, such as whether they are fired or lose their teaching license.

So Congress thinks some states are too slack and there should be one ring to rule them all. If you believe in federalism (or subsidiarity) this is outrageous.


#16

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.