Why Everyone Is All Worked Up About Betsy DeVos
The newly-minted Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, is a fabulously wealthy school choice advocate who has never attended or taught in a public school.
In world currently lousy with unprecedented American political maneuvers, we may now add another one to the pile. Betsy DeVos, Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Education, was just barely confirmed to her new role after a 51 to 50 Senate vote.
That fifty-first vote, by the way? That was Mike Pence. This is the first time in U.S. history that the Vice President has been summoned to cast a tie-breaking vote for a cabinet nominee.
Though Pence’s vote surprised absolutely no one, the two Republican senators who broke ranks to vote against her certainly raised eyebrows. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) were the only two Senators from their party to vote against DeVos.
So, why is everyone seemingly dreading DeVos’ tenure as Secretary of Education? Why are Republican congresspeople willing to break from their parties, despite sometimes rabid partisanship in U.S. politics? And what’s all this business about bears in schools?
The “bears in schools” gaffe came from DeVos’ confirmation hearing. She appeared to be ignorant of important educational laws, such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). When questioned about whether or not guns should be allowed in schools, DeVos gave a noncomittal answer. She stated that it would be best for individuals states to make such a decision.
She then said, “I will refer back to… [a] school in Wapiti, Wyoming… I think probably there, I would imagine that there’s probably a gun in the school to help protect from potential grizzlies.”
Wapiti Elementary, by the way, does not have a gun on its campus.
Don’t let the grizzly jokes distract you, however. DeVos’ record has many worried. For one, she has never taught in or attended public schools. None of her four children have ever attended public schools. Yet, she is a frequent critic of the public school system. Instead, she has advocated for private charter schools and school vouchers.
While DeVos and her supporters claim that this tactic gives parents greater freedom of choice, detractors argue that it only bolsters inequality in the school system. In fact, the United States school system of today is still highly segregated. White children are more likely to go to a majority-white school, and are more likely to have access to better-funded programming.
Indeed, the history of school vouchers is stained with racism. It is an ugly matter, regardless of how much supporters may couch it in terms of “choice” or wanting what’s best for your children. School vouchers often allow (primarily white) students to leave the public school system. When the families leave, so do their dollars. Without proper funding, many schools flounder, unable to fully support their remaining students. Those students are – surprise – often people of color. School vouchers can inadvertently work to enforce inequality and segregation within school systems.
There are a few more problems with DeVos’ championing of school choice. Private schools, including charter schools, do not necessarily heed the same standards as public institutions. They may not meet academic standards, for one. Furthermore, through various loopholes and backdoor practices, they may also flout civil rights laws. Families who do not have the means to send their students to private schools, even with vouchers, may face a difficult choice.
DeVos, who has no education degree of any kind, has no experience shaping statewide educational policies. She has never run a public school system or state university. What she does have, however, is a lot of money. Her family, which has been a powerful political force in Michigan for decades, has a fortune somewhere in the billions.
What DeVos does have, however, is a lot of money.
The DeVoses have donated large amounts of money to Republican candidates. It’s enough to give anyone pause, except for DeVos herself. When Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) asked her if the rumored total of $200 million in donations was correct, she replied, “That’s possible.”
Finally, Secretary DeVos has declined to support a number of important measures. Her fall-back tactic, in which she lays responsibility at the feet of state officials, is often unsatisfying. What harm is there, after all, in the Secretary of Education saying that she will uphold current rules about campus sexual assault policies? Some, apparently, or DeVos wouldn’t have been quite so cagey about her relevant plans (if she has any, that is).
Or is there an issue with supporting equal accountability rules for both public and private schools? It seems straightforward, and yet DeVos seems just as vague and possibly unprepared to address the issue as she is with anything else.
Essentially, her critics are concerned about a number of things. These include her lack of experience, possible cronyism, and unpreparedness. It doesn’t help that she supports a voucher system that is historically racist and unfair. She is astonishingly unqualified for the position, though DeVos admittedly has passion and drive. It’s just that her energies are arguably misplaced.
It’s easy to conclude that she got to where she was because of her name and fortune. Certainly, it is at least a little baffling to watch her confirmation hearing and realize that many Republican senators still voted for her. The unprecedented opposition to a Cabinet pick clearly speaks to many of these concerns.
Next: Maryam Mirzakhani Busts Stereotypes About Women and Science
Going forward, education advocates are concerned. Will DeVos go ahead with a Federal-level voucher program? How will that work with her preference for state-level decisions? Whatever happens, DeVos can substantially change the course of education in the United States.
Education is thoroughly intermeshed with issues of race and class, whether she wants to acknowledge it or not. Good teachers and strong educational systems can make a significant difference in the course of someone’s life. Making it more difficult for certain citizens to access those systems is not the answer.