Conservatives and commonsense residents in the Peoria Unified School District (PUSD) have a majority on the governing board! Shout out and thanks to Jeff Tobey and Janelle Bowles for stepping up to lead the community.
Since Peoria finally elected a slate (the RINOs got Rebecca Proudfit; conservatives got Tobey and Bowles), you’d think the powers that be would stop trying to manipulate and control the district. Nope. Before the election results were finalized—and it appeared Proudfit and former leftist board member David Sandoval were no longer in power—I heard rumblings of local leaders attempting to undermine the majority vote.
I initially exposed these shenanigans on my Substack entitled “Beware of Tainted Golden Tickets.” The post details how LD27 Chair Carol Ayotte and former LD28 Chair Lori Bango—along with their proxy minions—led their PCs to endorse a liberal (Proudfit). It’s come to my attention that certain community leaders are involved in another shadow campaign to appoint a board president who will work in opposition to current board member Heather Rooks.
No one on the PUSD school board has worked harder than Rooks to support students, families, and teachers. Rooks has not compromised her position on transparency, parental involvement, and quality education. She has also taken the most hits for boldly exercising her First Amendment rights. Understandably, this is a threat and an offense to those who don’t believe in God or the U.S. Constitution.
So, it appears her fatal flaw—from a Democrat and fake Republican perspective—is that she cannot be controlled.
What exactly is going through the minds of “Republicans” who want to silence one of Arizona’s strongest school board candidates? Why do they want true conservatives to care about Democrats/liberals feelings? When did it become our responsibility to “be nice” and avoid offending those who call us “racist” and “transphobic”? This whole scenario reminds me of a cinematic idiom that asks:
“Why worry about snakes in the garden when you’ve got spiders in your bed?”
That may sound like a rhetorical question. But the main issue plaguing true conservatives today is not leftists/Democrats—it’s all the morally compromised, bad actors with an “R” behind their name looking to capitalize on personal gains and party interests. As for me, I will remain a Rooks supporter. I offer no apologies for standing with her and with legitimate conservative values.
If the truth is offensive, then I say: let the truth offend. Truth has the power to set people free.
When Rooks was elected to the PUSD school board in 2022, her bid for the presidency was voted down in favor of her taking the clerk position. Surprisingly, it was leftist Peoria Education Association President Trina Berg who said:
“Having been a president of an organization before—having to have some type of background knowledge, how things work, that in depth knowledge—it’s really difficult to be elected and then immediately go right into a leadership position like that…I actually fully support Rooks [for the clerk position]. I think you should be in a leadership position.”
Nevertheless, when Proudfit was newly appointed by the corrupt former Maricopa County Superintendent Steve Watson, she was immediately nominated for board president by Sandoval. This hypocrisy led PUSD further in the wrong direction for an entire year. Thus, Berg’s words ring true.
If you go back and listen to public comments during the January 12, 2023, and January 11, 2024, school board meetings, you will hear the majority of PUSD community members speaking in favor of Rooks for president. You will witness the same on January 9, 2025, with the exception of those who want her and the district to fail. Only those with an ulterior motive are working to undermine the last two years of Rooks’ community service.
While RINOs are catering to their morally inept counterparts, PUSD’s current policies, curriculum, and predators on the payroll are corrupting the next generation. There’s serious business that needs to be taken care of in this district. Parents and taxpayers don’t have time for hidden agendas and backstabbing community leaders. So, I’ll state it more matter-of-factly:
We the People of Peoria Unified School District challenged authority, investigated, and asked questions. We rejected that gaslighting proposition from LD27 and LD28 executive members. And we will do it again in 2026. Duly elected officials are not beholden to sleazy factions that infiltrate the true grassroots movement. Political activists attempting to thwart the will of Peoria voters should reconsider their position before they’re exposed (again).
Listen as Rooks explains why she’s the right person to lead PUSD’s governing board:
“I’ve been pretty clear that I’m all in for the parents and their children in the Peoria Unified School District. I have built relationships…with teachers, with different staff members, [and] they have entrusted me with the daily concerns that they see. My focus for Peoria Unified is on the students’ academic needs…advocating for their safety, communicating with our parents…and being a voice for the community. “I have never wavered from who I am and what my values are and what I ran on. And I’m not going to step away from those values because that’s what I ran on when people elected me into this seat.”
—PUSD Board Member Heather Rooks
Let’s all look forward to throwing our full support behind Heather Rooks for PUSD board president on January 9, 2025.
What accounts for the differences in academic achievement between inner-city poverty area schools and high-income public schools? We‘ve all heard of the dreadful schools in cities like Chicago and Baltimore with no children in the entire school able to achieve even baseline levels of competence in math or verbal skills and many other schools with a third at most achieving at grade level.
Many would assume funding is the major determinant, but the facts don’t back that up. American public schools have traditionally been funded by local property taxes, which provide a clear advantage to the wealthy. But that was then. Today, education funding is complex, with federal funding for special programs, equalization formulas, and other inputs making it difficult for even experts to determine the bottom line.
A recent study from the Urban Institute confirmed other research showing that “when considering federal, state and local funding,” all states but three “allocate more per student funding to poor kids than to non-poor kids.” Moreover, researchers from Harvard and Stanford found that each extra $1,000 per pupil spending is associated with an annual gain in achievement of 1/10 of one percent of a standard deviation. In other words, more spending and more learning are essentially unrelated.
If more spending did produce more achievement, we would be morally obligated to provide it. As it is, we must look for other reasons to explain the achievement gap, examining how well the allocated funds are used. Education researcher Jay Greene observes that “wasteful schools tend to hire more non-instructional staff while raising the pay and benefits for all staff regardless of their contribution to student outcomes.”
Effective schools, whenever possible, prioritize the learning interests of students, eschewing the fads and misconceptions that plague the public school establishment. When a Stanford education professor helpfully developed an “equity-based” curriculum proposal, gullible California educators issued guidance against students taking algebra courses before high school.
After decades of the promotion of “context-based” reading instruction, it became obvious that the old-fashioned phonics instruction produced better readers. The Columbia University center that pushed context-based instruction was finally closed in 2023.
The devastating COVID closures demanded by the teachers’ unions disproportionately affected low-income public school students. The closures lasted longer and caused more learning loss for poor students than for those in private schools and more upscale districts.
The different, more “lenient” treatment afforded to low-income kids is evident also in the cellphone bans proliferating in the schools. Educators are suddenly realizing, after 20 years or so, that daily staring at a small screen bearing social media messages is not healthy for the developing brain.
According to advisories from the Surgeon General, UNESCO, and others, adolescent cell phone usage impairs academic achievement by distracting students’ attention from classroom instruction. Chronic cell phone overuse is also isolating and interferes with normal social development. Widespread cell phone use is associated with higher rates of teenage depression and suicide.
Eight states and many school districts have imposed cell phone bans, and others, including Arizona, are considering legislation. But there are objections. Parents feel the need to “keep in touch” with their children. Phones are also needed to locate friends in the lunchroom (yes, really). More seriously, parents worry about not having contact in a school shooting, even though the chances of any student encountering even one during their entire school life is vanishingly small.
The bigger problem is that legislative cell phone bans are typically so loose and riddled with exceptions that they are practically useless. California, with great fanfare from Governor Gavin Newsom, passed a bill that only required schools to “adopt a policy limiting or prohibiting smart phones by July 2026.” Any school with even an insignificant modification in cell phone usage would be legally in compliance, and enforcement would be a snap. Helicopter parents would still be in business. Florida’s ban is limited to classroom time only.
Private schools and high-end public schools pushed ahead with their own rules, which typically are more comprehensive and tightly written. Strict, uniform restrictions are easier for both teachers and students to understand. Meanwhile, poor students once again are saddled with misdirected compassion and low expectations.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
Among the many promises and commitments that he has made during his ongoing transition period, President-elect Donald Trump has pledged to pull U.S. support for the World Health Organization and cancel its commitments related to the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement. If a new report issued this week by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and incoming chairman Republican Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, is any guide, Trump perhaps should add U.S. support for the International Energy Agency to his growing list of cancellation opportunities.
“French President Macron’s observation that IEA has become the ‘armed wing for implementing the Paris Agreement’ is regrettably true,” said the report. “With the many serious energy security challenges facing the world, however, IEA should not be a partisan cheerleader. What the world needs from IEA—and what it is not receiving now—is sober and unbiased analyses and projections that educate and inform policymakers and investors. IEA needs to remember why it was established and return to its energy security mission.”
The IEA was established in 1974 in response to the first Arab Oil Embargo which resulted in dramatically higher prices for crude oil and gasoline at the pump. Originally supported by 31 member countries including the United States, the agency’s mission was to provide accurate information related to global oil supply and demand which subscribing countries could use to help form effective energy policies. That original mission held firm for decades, during which the IEA was widely considered a leading source of real, unbiased energy information.
But politics tends to corrupt everything it touches, and the IEA has unfortunately proved to be no exception to that rule. As the politics surrounding climate alarmism rose to new highs following the signing of the Paris Climate Agreement, the agency came under increasing pressure to radically alter its mission from that of a provider of real information worthy of trust to more of an activist posture.
In 2020, the report notes, this led to a shift in the IEA’s mission statement and to a new design to its modeling processes that form the basis for its annual World Energy Outlook. As its modeling base case, the agency abandoned its longstanding Current Policies Scenario, which Barrasso’s report describes as “essentially a ‘business as usual’ reference case,” in favor of a more aggressive Stated Policies Scenario.
Barrasso’s report describes this new scenario as “a hypothetical outlook based on unimplemented policies and grounded in unrealistically optimistic assumptions about the pace and scale of the transformation, especially concerning the adoption of electric vehicles by consumers.” It is an approach intentionally designed to introduce bias into the modeling process, and thus into the IEA policy recommendations for which the modeling process serves as the foundation.
This inevitable bias had an immediate and very noticeable effect. In a report published by the IEA in May 2021 Executive Director Fatih Birol laughably stated that “there will not be a need for new investments in oil and gas fields” and urged oil and gas producers to halt investments in exploration and development of new oil reserves. But that was before oil prices exploded as global demand exceeded supply during the recovery from the COVID pandemic, and by August Birol had completely reversed himself, joining President Joe Biden in a desperate call for more oil drilling to help resolve the situation.
Obviously, this sort of flip-floppery does severe damage to the agency’s already crumbling credibility as well as to the justification for governments to continue pouring millions of dollars into its operations each year. Barrasso’s report correctly notes that the IEA’s “reputation has lost its luster.”
Barrasso’s report is blunt about the kinds of reforms he would like to see at the IEA, urging Birol to abandon its advocacy posturing against investments in oil, natural gas, and coal, and to “once again produce for its World Energy Outlooka real unbiased, policy-neutral ‘business as usual’ reference case of the kind the Energy Information Administration produces.”
The Wyoming senator stops short of calling for the U.S. defunding of the IEA, but the agency’s currency is information. If that currency has lost its value, then perhaps Trump should consider a more aggressive approach.
David Blackmon is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, an energy writer, and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
Counteracting the abortion culture requires us to celebrate the gift of children, and to uplift and empower the families who choose life.
By Garrett Riley |
As Arizona grapples with the implications of Proposition 139, a new dynamic in the state’s legislative landscape is emerging. Passed in 2024, the Arizona Abortion Access Act radically expands abortion rights beyond viability, through nine months and up to birth for virtually any reason. We are looking at a future in Arizona that enshrines unrestricted and nearly unregulated abortions.
Cathi Herrod, president of the Center for Arizona Policy, and a key figure in the pro-life community, expressed concerns about the broad and ambiguous language of Prop 139. Herrod and her organization fear that such terms may overturn well-established measures like informed consent and parental consent laws, which are reasonable safeguards. These laws ensure that women fully know the implications and alternatives before making an abortion decision.
From the pro-life perspective, these measures are not merely legal hurdles but essential ethical considerations that respect both the life of the unborn child and the informed autonomy of women. Herrod’s commitment to challenging vague terms within the proposition underscores a broader dedication to engaging in the democratic process, ensuring that all voices are heard and considered.
The legal battles anticipated over Prop 139 are not solely about restricting rights but are seen as a necessary defense of life and ethical medical practices. Of course, the emphasis on legal challenges to abortion laws must stem from the science that proves life begins from conception, and human rights must be conveyed to the unborn.
Tragically, the potential for existing laws to be swept away without thorough public discussion or consideration of the implications will begin unfolding in 2025 and beyond. As Arizona navigates these complex legal and ethical waters, all pro-life voices play an essential role in representing the electorate concerned with real healthcare, medical ethics, and human rights.
The passage of Prop 139 marks a critical juncture in Arizona’s history of abortion laws. This event not only triggers legal disputes but also offers our pro-life community a chance to promote a society that deeply values human life. Our advocacy transcends legal arguments, aiming to foster a culture committed to life’s intrinsic value, and the importance of the foundational roles children and family play in a healthy society. As we engage in these efforts, the goal is to nurture a community ethos that respects life from conception to natural end, thereby influencing legislative and policy frameworks.
Counteracting the abortion culture requires us to celebrate the gift of children, and to uplift and empower the families who choose life. Arizona Life Coalition (ALC) is dedicated to changing the culture by encouraging pro-life choices through education, collaboration, and acts of charity. We believe that to be pro-life is to be pro-family. By supporting pregnant women and struggling families, we stand as a community that affirms life, strengthens families, and nurtures hope, advocating that one life saved from abortion is worth all our time, money, and efforts.
Garrett Riley is the executive director of the Arizona Life Coalition, with a mission of inspiring pro-life choices through charity, education, and unifying collaboration.
Here is my wish list for the incoming Trump administration to make America healthy and prosperous and great again in 2025.
1.Slash Job-Killing Regulations
The regulatory state is a $2 trillion tax on the American economy. We all want worker safety, a clean environment and consumer protections, but in too many cases the costs of regulations far outweigh the societal benefits. President-elect Donald Trump has promised to slash 10 rules for every new rule. Just do it, Mr. President.
2. Make The Trump Tax Cuts Permanent
As JFK, Ronald Reagan and others have proven throughout history, lower tax rates lead to more growth, more investment and more jobs. The Trump tax cuts meant that a typical family of four earning $75,000 a year saw their tax bill fall by half — a benefit valued at more than $2,000. And the corporate tax rate fell from 35% — the highest in the world — to 21%, bringing jobs and capital to America. Trump has promised to make all these tax cuts permanent. Why? Because they worked almost exactly as we anticipated they would.
3. Replace Welfare With Work
Growth will require more able-bodied Americans getting off welfare and into jobs. Welfare — which includes cash assistance, public housing, food stamps, disability payments, unemployment benefits and Medicaid — needs to be a hand up, not a handout.
4. Use America’s Abundant Natural Resources
America has well more than $50 trillion of natural resources that are accessible with existing drilling and mining technologies. This is a vast storehouse of wealth that far surpasses what any other nation is endowed with. We can use the royalty payments and leases to reduce our national debt while creating hundreds of thousands of jobs.
5. Cut Medical Costs by Demanding Health Care Price Transparency
One of many ways to bring health care costs down to consumers (and taxpayers, who pay half the costs) is to require hospitals, pharmacies, doctors and health clinics to list prices for what they are charging. The Committee to Unleash Prosperity estimates that $1 trillion to $2 trillion could be reduced from health care costs, with no reduction in the quality of care, by allowing consumers to shop around on the internet for the best price — just as we do when we buy groceries, a home or a car. This will foster free market competition and lower prices.
6. Allow School Choice for All Families
Test scores in America have been plummeting. Kids are graduating from high school — if at all — without even being able to read the diploma. America no longer ranks in the top 10 in many academic achievement ratings.
A child can get a better education at half the cost in the Catholic school system and in many charters.
Trump has endorsed universal school choice for all children regardless of income or ethnicity or race. This is the civil rights issue of our time.
7. Implement A Pro-America Immigration Policy
Trump’s committed to securing our border, but we also need legal immigrants through a merit-based immigration system. This visa system would select immigrants based on their skills, talents, investment capital, English language ability and education level. These characteristics all presage success in America.
8. Revive America’s Great Cities
Our once-great cities in America — from New York to Chicago to Detroit to San Francisco to Seattle — have come to look like war zones. Crime has run rampant. Businesses and people and capital are fleeing and leaving the poorest Americans — mostly minorities — stranded with tragically limited opportunities other than working at Walmart or McDonald’s for minimum wage. Since 2020, our major cities have lost nearly 1 million residents. And tens of thousands of businesses.
Trump wants to revitalize our cities and abandoned rural areas through deregulation, reduction in tax rates, changes in zoning policies and infrastructure investments.
9. Pull the U.S. Out Of The Paris Climate Change Treaty And Other Anti-America Agreements
We must end American participation in globalist treaties that hurt America most. This includes the Paris Climate Accords — a treaty with which most other nations have failed to comply, yet which places huge burdens on American companies and workers. Trump also has pledged to end global taxation — such as Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen’s global minimum tax. Do we even need a United Nations?
10. Finally, Drain The Swamp
There is a reason why three of the five wealthiest counties in America are in or around Washington, D.C. Washington is getting rich at the expense of the rest of us. Fewer than 10% of overpaid federal workers (of which there are more than 2 million) are working full time in the office even though COVID-19 ended three years ago. These are swamp employees that often get paid $150,000 or more a year. Fire them if they don’t show up. And relocate federal agencies in other cities.
These are admittedly bold aspirations for an economic transformation toward freedom and free enterprise. But the one person who can get it done is Trump.
Stephen Moore is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation and a visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation. His new book, coauthored with Arthur Laffer, is “The Trump Economic Miracle.”
When President-elect Donald Trump named Linda McMahon as the next secretary of Education, he said McMahon “will fight tirelessly to expand ‘Choice’ to every State in America, and empower parents to make the best Education decisions for their families” via a statement issued on Truth Social.
During Trump’s first term, McMahon led the Small Business Administration (SBA), where she favored pragmatic pro-growth policies that emphasized merit-based job opportunities and reducing government intervention in business practices with a nod towards no forced diversity, equity and inclusion measures.
With the selection of McMahon as education secretary, states should demand this administration make true educational freedom attainable, protect our female athletes by returning “girls only” to their sports teams and hold our public schools accountable against child predators.
States like Arizona eagerly await this changing of the guard to truly help protect women. While an enraged Michelle Obama spewed hate-filled propaganda in the last few weeks leading up to the November election by suggesting “women will become collateral damage” if Trump was to return to the White House, thankfully, voters did not buy that.
McMahon understands the importance of bringing education back to the states where it belongs and into the hands of parents, not government bureaucrats relying on zip codes to fill school buildings. While McMahon led the America First Works (AFW), the organization’s main goal was to achieve universal school choice across the country. Over the last several years, the school-choice movement has seen a dozen states achieve this status, but it cannot stop there. McMahon’s leadership role at the helm of AFW illustrates that she adamantly supports competition among our schools, including charter schools, private-school tuition scholarships, education savings accounts and homeschooling. Above all, McMahon believes supporting all educational options will lead to better outcomes for students from all socioeconomic backgrounds.
McMahon’s appointment couldn’t have come at a better time. Future Secretary McMahon could halt the Biden administration’s attack on women by rolling back its faulty rulemaking that was forcing publicly funded schools to allow transgender men to participate in women’s only sports by threatening to defund their Title IX funding if they refused. Hopefully, this war on women can end on Trump’s first day back in the White House. Women’s only sports face near extinction if we don’t prohibit biological men from competing in women’s sports. It is truly unfair for biological girls to have to compete with biological males in sports. Not only do males have bigger muscles than females, but males have the advantage of testosterone that no amount of training or talent can enable biological female athletes to overcome.
Safety in our sports is not the only area this next administration needs to lead. All children should feel safe on their school’s campus. Sexual abuse cases in our public schools continue to generate headlines. Even though teachers and school-district employees are mandatory reporters, they don’t always appropriately record allegations of sexual abuse.
The Trump administration needs to step up in protecting the safety of our kids by requiring all public-school districts and charter-school districts to record all sexual abuse allegations and share these written reports with its state education department. The Department of Education should centrally house a database documenting sexual abuse allegations in our schools so that when district and charter schools are conducting background checks on future employees, they can consult this much needed resource. The teachers’ unions will push back against this proposal. We should all agree, all students should be free from predators, especially in their individual learning environments. Each year public schools report their campuses’ crime data to the Office of Civil Rights under the Department of Education. Schools should be committed to keeping our kids safe and want to be held accountable by reporting any sexual abuse allegations.
Shawnna Bolick is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation and has served in the Arizona Legislature since 2019. She served four years in the Arizona House until 2022. In July 2023, she was appointed to the State Senate, District 2, to fill a vacancy. Bolick has signed onto an amicus brief supporting both Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act and Arizona’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act. She has sponsored or cosponsored legislation pertaining to weeding out sexual predators in our public schools.
