OK, I understand reading is hard, but I’ve said like half a dozen times that I’m not even challenging Republican policies, which are what they are. I’m question the competence of the specific person chosen to implement those policies.
Are you genuinely so fucking stupid that you don’t understand that? And if so, which cabinet position have you been nominated for?
Many?
What percentage of the right do you think shares this view?
Do you have a quote or a cite of her saying that we should get rid of public funding of education anywhere?
She wants to privatize and this will lead to the collapse of some public school systems and will put pressure on teachers and their unions and leave kids with very mixed results depending on which school they choose.
Compared to who? You seem to be under the impression that this position has typically been held by educators.
There’s no conflict of interest. Once public policy is bent, kicked, and sledgehammered into shape, it will align perfectly with the particular Cabinet member’s private interests. No conflict will even be possible.
The only thing you have to realize now is that when plutocrats rule, they are the only ones who matter. The only “public” they serve is themselves.
Lets see. John King Jr (all info from wikipedia articles, by clicking “preceding” link under each Secy.)
King served on the board of New Leaders for New Schools from 2005 to 2009, and is a 2008 Aspen Institute-NewSchools Entrepreneurial Leaders for Public Education Fellow.[9] After that,he was New York Commissioner of Education. Gee, no “educational background”.
Before that was Arne Duncan. In 1992, childhood friend and investment banker John W. Rogers, Jr., appointed Duncan director of the Ariel Education Initiative, a program mentoring children at one of the city’s worst-performing elementary schools and then assisting them as they proceeded further in the education system.[7] After the school closed in 1996, Duncan and Rogers were instrumental in re-opening it as a charter school, Ariel Community Academy.[8] In 1999, Duncan was appointed Deputy Chief of Staff for former Chicago Public Schools CEO Paul Vallas.[9]
CEO of Chicago Public Schools
Mayor Richard M. Daley appointed Duncan to serve as Chief Executive Officer of the Chicago Public Schools on June 26, 2001.[10] Opinions vary on Duncan’s success as CEO; one prominent publication notes improved test scores and describes Duncan as a consensus builder,[11] while another finds the improvements largely a myth and is troubled by the closing of neighborhood schools and their replacement by charter schools, and what it describes as schools’ militarization.[12] (Before becoming Secy of Education)
Before that, was Margaret Spellings, who is now President of University of Borth Carolina, But what of before she was the Secy?
She earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from the University of Houston in 1979 and worked in an education reform commission under Texas Governor William P. Clements and as associate executive director for the Texas Association of School Boards. Before her appointment to George W. Bush’s presidential administration, Spellings was the political director for Bush’s first gubernatorial campaign in 1994, and later became a senior advisor to Bush during his term as Governor of Texas from 1995 to 2000. (Hey look, some actual education work. Huh. Also political work. No Amway, though.)
Before her - let’s see. Rod Paige. Under President Bush…
Paige, who grew up in Mississippi, moved from classroom teacher to college dean and school superintendent to be the first African American to serve as the nation’s education chief.
Before that gentleman, Clinton appointed someone that I can’t see has any educational experience. Richard Riley was 6th Education Sec’y.
Lamar Alexander was President of University of Tennessee. (5th Secy of education, under Bush.)
She has been a pretty visible voice for school choice on the right for a while now. We have been nominating and confirming political folks to that particular cabinet position almost from its inception.
I don’t like her because of her policies. She is about as well qualified as the average secretary of education (the consistency of people in this position is spotty at best). We’ve just had a spate of really good ones recently but most of them haven’t been as well qualified as John King Jr.
The reason this one is a big deal is because of the teachers unions.
And what makes you think that DeVos was Trump’s first choice?
The problem is that she has an agenda. Previous unqualified nominees just wanted to add a line to their resume.
That doesn’t bother you at all? Have you and your family contribute, what are we at now? $200 million dollars, and you get to be Sec’y of Education, despite not having any relevant experience or even basic knowledge (profiency v. growth) of the issues? You’re all good with that?
What percent? I dunno. I hope less than 10, but I have been regularly disappointed in overestimating the republicans of late. My point entirely is that the gutting of the public school system is something that is only wanted on the fringe, and so most moderate republicans would probably not approve.
She absolutely wants to get rid of federal funding for public education, and leave the rest of it up to the state. To be fair, I don’t have a quote of her saying that, but I do have quotes of democrats asking her if she would maintain federal funding if she were confirmed, and her dodging the question.
And what happens to those kids? You think they are going to get to “choose” their school? If they have a school at all to go to, it will be so gutted from the voucher system, it will barely be able to keep the lights on, much less provide a quality education.
And the way the voucher system works is that the state and community pay about 5,000 per pupil per year to educate them. The voucher system will take that money from the public school, and give it to parents to use as a subsidy towards private school.
So, if you can afford to send your kid to a private school , you get a discount. If you cannot afford to send your kid to private school, the voucher will not make up for it, and your child’s educational opportunities will suffer tremendously so that the well off can save some money on their tuition.
By mixed results, you mean massively increasing the income and education gap between rich and not-rich.
It has definitely been held by people much better informed on education than her.
Did you actually watch the confirmation hearings? Did you see how she didn’t know even the most basic things about the position she was about to take?
How do you defend that?
Only a few more to go.
4th Secry of Education was Lauro Cavazos.
Following a stint on the faculties of Tufts University and the Medical College of Virginia. From 1975-80, he served as Dean of the Tufts University School of Medicine. From April 15, 1980, to 1988, he served as President of Texas Tech University. He was both the first alumnus and the first Hispanic to serve as Texas Tech president.[citation needed]
A Democrat, Cavazos served as Secretary of Education from August 1988 to December 1990 during the Republican Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations. He was forced to resign amid an investigation into improper use of frequent flyer miles in December 1990.
3rd:
William Bennett. He wasn’t Reagen’s first choice, but Mel Bradford had some concerning Pro Confederate beliefs. I dont see much in the way of educational background in Bennett. From 1979 to 1981, he was the executive director of the National Humanities Center, a private research facility in North Carolina. In 1981 President Reagan appointed him to chair the National Endowment for the Humanities, where he served until Reagan appointed him Secretary of Education in 1985.
Terrell Bell, 2nd Secy of Education Appointed to the Reagan cabinet, Bell was expected to preside over the dismantling of the Department of Education, but he ran into the legal requirement that such a dismantling required legislation. He was well-known, admired, and respected in education circles, having risen from high school teacher through college professor to administrative positions. Bell stood out as a humble man in an administration of moneyed people—he drove a U-Haul truck from Utah to Washington when he moved.[citation needed].
And then we have Shirley Hufstedler.
She was a lawyer and a judge. Wikipedia doesn’t have much of an article on her, but I don’t see much in the way of educational background.
(post shortened)
The elected Democrats lost the DeVos confirmation six years ago when the voters began replacing elected Democrats with elected Republicans. It appears that the Democrat collective was so busy patting themselves on their collective backs and declaring themselves to be so much smarter that the rest of the country, they didn’t realize that they were steadily losing legislative power.
Every high school graduate was supposed to have learned how the U.S. government works. It seems that some of them have forgotten the basics. Or as Obama famously claimed, “I don’t all the facts but…”, wait a minute, not that quote, it was the one about elections having consequences.
If the Democrat collective’s self-proclaimed smart people were repeatedly being outsmarted by the Democrat collective’s so-called stupid people, maybe the self-proclaimed smart people are not as smart as they think they are?
I understood what you said. The trouble is that what you said wasn’t true. The reason you and the Dems in Congress oppose DeVos is because of the policies she will presumably try to implement. It’s not related to her competence.
The problem is that I am not fucking stupid enough to believe you.
Regards,
Shodan
Why does she have to be the best possible choice?
Is Rick Perry the best possible choice to lead a department of scientists and engineers?
I don’t think she will improve education at all. I think she will do great harm. But the OP seems amazed that Republicans could support her.
I don’t see how she is any worse than Lamar Alexander.
But you asked for specifics:
“She was Republican National Committeewoman for Michigan from 1992 to 1997 and served as chairwoman of the Michigan Republican Party from 1996 to 2000, with reelection to the post in 2003. DeVos has been an advocate of the Detroit charter school system[6][7] and she is a member of the board of the Foundation for Excellence in Education. She has served as chairwoman of the board of Alliance for School Choice and Acton Institute and heads the All Children Matter PAC.”
Sure, its not as good as John King Jr. but we’ve seen worse without much controversy. You might be convinced that the controversy is about her qualifications, but its not. Its about her policies.
I just posted the snippets of all the education secretaries appointed since the position was created (I skipped acting) and the majority do have educational backgrounds. Some were educators, some were in charge of large educational systems administratively, but most had something. What’s hers, again?
She has advocated for school choice and served on foundations and political action committees?
Why does she even want the job?
Sure it bothers me. I don’t see why it should bother the Republicans. We’ve had less qualified secretaries and frankly cabinet positions are the ones that normally get sold.
Large donations usually result in ambassadorships to one of our NATO allies where all you have to do is attend fancy dinners. I doubt this choice was based on donations alone. I don’t even know that this was Trump’s first choice.
BTW The bolded first choice, above, was a professor.
She sees education as a way to advance God’s kingdom.
But according to that , Falwell was Trump’s first choice, but he declined.
I agree with your predictions of what school choice (as envisioned by DeVos) will do to our schools and our kids. And I think that is a valid reason to object to her appointment. I also don’t think Republicans have a problem with this because school choice doesn’t gut well functioning suburban white neighborhoods, its guts failing inner city neighborhoods.
School choice doesn’t always mean vouchers. Vouchers are the most extreme form of school choice, I strong objections to the policy. DC has charter schools and where it is done well, the neighborhoods are better off. Of course the public schools turn into juvenile detention centers as all the trouble makers get kicked out of the charter schools and have to return to the public school system. So for the kids who are disruptive and make trouble, the system sort of abandons them. On the flip side, the vast majority of the kids get to go to schools where performance starts to close the gap with the Northwest schools where all the white people live.
The position has also been held by people less informed than her. Do you think that Lamar Alexander could have answered those questions any better? She certainly seem better qualified for her position than Trump is for his.
I don’t defend her. I defend the notion that Republicans could support her without putting party over country.
My sense is that the only reason she is controversial at all is because of her vocal position on school choice.
Oh, snap! You told me!
(post shortened, underline added)
As CEO of CPS, Arne Duncan took over a failing public school system, and in only 9 years, left behind a failing public school system to join his basketball playing teammate, Barack Obama, in the WH as Obama’s choice for U.S. Sec of Education.
When Duncan announced his resignation the president of the AFT teachers union said, “there’s no question that the Department of Education’s fixation on charter schools and high-stakes testing has not worked.” Nevertheless, he enjoyed strong support from U.S. President Barack Obama who praised his work as Secretary of Education by saying, “Arne has done more to bring our educational system – sometimes kicking and screaming – into the 21st century than anybody else.”
Arne Duncan was in favor of charter schools!?!? Isn’t DeVos in favor of charter schools? They seem to have something in common. If DeVos could play basketball, do you suppose she would have been nominated years earlier?