The Washington Post reports that Betsy DeVos has been very generous with several of the senators who will vote on her nomination.
Emma Brown writes:
Betsy DeVos, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for education secretary, is not just a prospective Cabinet member seeking confirmation from the U.S. Senate.
She is also a billionaire Republican donor whose family’s donations have funded the campaigns of many of the senators now tasked with voting on her nomination, including members of the committee overseeing her confirmation hearing on Jan. 11.
During the 2014 and 2016 election cycles, DeVos and her relatives gave at least $818,000 to 20 current Republican senators, including more than $250,000 to five members of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), according to a Washington Post analysis of Federal Election Commission records.
DeVos personally made a relatively small percentage of those donations: at least $31,400 to committee members and $96,000 to all senators. But her giving appears to have been coordinated with her family: In most cases, senators received donations from more than a half-dozen DeVos family members, including her husband, his parents and his siblings, on the same day.
To money-in-politics watchdogs, the DeVos family’s contributions create a conflict of interest for senators now charged with judging Betsy DeVos’s fitness to helm the federal education department.
“She’s acknowledged that her family gives, and gives a lot, because it’s aiming to buy influence,” said Robert Weissman of Public Citizen, who said the scale of the DeVos family’s political donations is unusual for a prospective Cabinet member. “Against that backdrop, how are the senators supposed to evaluate her nomination in an unbiased way? They can’t.”
Trump transition officials and DeVos supporters say that members of the DeVos family have been exercising their right to support candidates who share their political views, and that it’s nothing new for senators – including Democrats – to vote on the confirmation of wealthy nominees who make donations to them.
On Friday, two groups that advocate for reform of money in politics – End Citizens United and Every Voice – called on senators who have received donations from DeVos to recuse themselves from voting on her confirmation. Absent those recusals, “it is impossible to be sure she will receive the scrutiny this important position deserves,” said David Donnelly, of Every Voice.
This is the DeVos way: Find out the price tag for compliance and buy it. That’s what they did in Michigan, where DeVos and her husband lost in 2000 on a voucher referendum, lost in 2006 when Dick DeVos ran for Governor and lost, then decided it was easier to buy the legislature.
These people make me sick!
Pay for Play. We have the best government MONEY can BUY.
Click ‘like’. Obey.
I need to puke now. Where’s the bucket?
Sorry they are all full .Get in line or find a Republican office holder to puke on .
Hey, at least she was honest about buying politicians—oh, legally of course! Why of course of curse!!
This is something we should be bothered about. Money shouldn’t control our politics. It is the major problem in our political system. Politicians cannot serve us because they are indebted to the people who pay their way.
Yet, to many public education defenders who are disturbed by this specific issue with Betsy DeVosy: were all these people disturbed by who funded Hillary Clinton?
Many who would condemn Betsy DeVos here, previously defended “big money” in Hillary Clinton’s favor.
Condemn political bribery universally, or not at all. Otherwise, it looks like hypocrisy.
To Ed Detective:
Your logic is illogical. Betsy DeVos intends to destroy Public education in action whereas Hillary Clinton tries her best to sustain Public Education.
When you have a choice or NO choice, you would focus on a choice and improvise it according to your ability.
In a corrupted capitalism, you still can survive whereas, in fascism, you will be forced to be starved to death.
In the same vein, with Hillary’s winning, Public Education will be improvised whereas in Trump’s winning, Public Education is being intentionally destroyed through/by Betsy DeVos. Back2basic
I do not accept your binary proposal that Hillary good, DeVos bad. Nor did you address the fundamental “logic” of my statement that money corrupts the political process, whether it involves Hillary Clinton or Betsy DeVos.
Our choices are not “corrupted capitalism” or “fascism.” I choose neither. I hope you also choose neither.
Hillary tries her best to sustain public education. Where is the evidence?
Abigail,
It is unfair to suggest that Hillary and Atrump would be equally contemptuous of public schools.
Trump went to private schools.
Hillary went to public schools, K-12.
Trump promised $20 billion for vouchers and charters. Hillary promised to prohibit funding of for-profit charters.
What percentage of charter schools are for profit? All charters steal money from public school districts. Hillary said she was for high quality public charters and she used the zip code dog whistle. I did not state that Hillary would have been as disastrous as Trump. As far as I am concerned, Obama caused great harm to public schools and Hillary was intending to continue his legacy. I would not have expected her to bring about Kingdom gain and it is my impression that she believes in science. The fact that she attended public schools has little bearing on her support of charters. She and Booker appeared to be pretty chummy, which was yet another red flag for me. I understand that you hold Hillary in high esteem, but her views of public education are not in alignment with mine.
Abigail,
To be clear, I oppose charters. Hillary said she opposes for-profit charters. That’s a start. I do not believe she has contempt for public schools, unlike Cuomo, Emanuel, Booker, and Duncan. It matters that she went to public schools. Also, I am certain of two things: 1) I could have gotten a meeting with her. 2) she would have listened.
About Trump, I feel sure that he has never given a thought about education. I could never meet with him. If I did, he would not have listened. As he did not when he met amicably with Gore, then appointed climate change deniers.
Just tried leaving Lamar Alexander messages. Message box full and email site under repair. Hmm.
Which senators specifically took the funds? Which Republican senators could we persuade to go against her nomination?
Can’t anything be done? Surely, the conflict is clear and should disqualify her – or the Senators, at a minimum. If everyone she or her family has given money to couldn’t vote, would there be enough to block the nomination? How about any of the other nominees?
If the senators she paid recused themselves, she would not be confirmed.
And, of course, this has been going on in all aspects of legislation since 1973 (I believe I have the correct year, because A.L.E.C. celebrated it’s 40th birthday in July, 2013, {again, I think it was 2013} in Chicago, at the very fancy Palmer House Hilton). There was a BIG protest downtown but, of course, no one knew anything about it…not reported by the msm/local news (perhaps it was on DemocracyNow!, but hadn’t watched it at that time).
Anyway, paid-off legislators? American Legislative Exchange Council…still going strong, & therefore, must be mentioned at any/all resistance rallies.
Correct date–yes, “founded 2013,” according to Wikipedia. Make sure those who don’t know about it (& I’ve had to tell SO many people!) DO!
The ethics office hasn’t completed it’s reviews of several candidates up for confirmation… but this evidently ISN’T a problem for Republicans:
I wish it weren’t so… but I fear that every one of Mr. Trump’s nominees is going to be railroaded through ASAP…