Ben Mathis-Lilley, chief news editor for SLATE, points out what should be obvious: everyone is mocking Betsy DeVos’s clueless interview with 60 Minutes, but she echoed what Democrats have been saying for years.
Low-scoring schools should compete to get better, even if they have less funding and larger classes? More money for high-scoring schools? Charters are awesome?
“The bad news for Democrats who found DeVos’ performance appalling is that these principles have been a crucial part of their party’s education policy for 17 years. Broadly speaking, the regime of compelling competition between schools by creating charter-school or school-choice programs and by rewarding those whose students do well on standardized tests was launched at a federal level by the No Child Left Behind Act; the NCLB was co-sponsored by Ted Kennedy and passed the Senate in 2001 with 87 votes. When Barack Obama became president, he created the Race to the Top program, which the Washington Post described at the time as a “competition for $4.35 billion in grants” that would “ease limits on charter schools” and “tie teacher pay to student achievement,” i.e. direct extra funds to already-successful schools.”
He points out that Senator Cory Booker addressed DeVos’s pro-voucher, anti-public school organization twice. Yet Booker is shocked, shocked that she has the same views as he does.
”DeVos is not qualified for her job and has more than earned her reputation for cluelessness. But if you gave her a Harvard degree, a history of employment at McKinsey or Goldman Sachs, and a little more public-speaking finesse, nothing DeVos told Lesley Stahl above would have bothered the Democrats who’ve been setting their party’s education policy for going on two decades.”

This is the BEST read on the whole pathetic interview.
LikeLike
You’re right, JS.
LikeLike
Agreed. That is the greatness of Betsy DeVos, shining a light on the real problem.
LikeLike
Ouch! So true.
LikeLike
And “that” has been the issue. Thanks.
LikeLike
It is very sad, but very true. Far too many look at education as if tying it to a certain party is going to change anything. It is a greed thing. A corporate thing. There are so many players invested (literally) in education these days. It is a Gordian knot that, I fear, can no longer be unraveled. The sad part is students, as always, are the ones that suffer. Teachers as well. It would take a sea change in America to change this but we are so divided between blue and red and the corporate folks are laughing all the way to the bank.
LikeLike
Kevin, don’t give up. Never give up.
LikeLike
Kevin, you only lose when you say and believe that you give up. You have probably seen a lot of losing battles, but so many have been won in so many states on so many levels. Don’t let Delaware or Maryland color your overall views of the resistance. You’re better than that.
LikeLike
I will never give up attempting to educate those who aren’t aware of the power plays involved in education. From the school building level all the way to the top. There is too much at stake. Sometimes I feel like I’m trying to punch through a twenty-foot thick wall, but I’ll still punch.
LikeLike
OKAY!
I will say it here and now.
I will not wipe out the Democrats (I may as well do so with the GOP), but they are huge culprits in ed reform, and they either need to change their orientation to become far more egalitarian and public-commons oriented , or they will perish and burn up from their monied proximity to the sun that they have been flying far too close to for the past 20 years.
This will be a test for America: beat the phoenix to a pulp and let a new one rise from the ashes or try and incentivize it to get its act together soon and dramatically. Neither path will be easy. Both are worthy of consideration.
And there are shades of “Progressive” and “Democrat” which I will respectfully acknowledge, but the end product and overall gestalt are going to be looked at in terms of reversing the plutocratic trajectory America is on and the resistance we have been maintaining and growing. Simple as that.
LikeLike
This is a very reasonable comment to make. See how easy it is?
I will just add one thing to the good points you make:
I really dislike when people say “Democrats”. Every single “Democrat” in Virginia who won the last 3 elections for Governor is not saying the same thing that Corey Booker is saying.
Bill de Blasio is not saying the same thing about education as Andrew Cuomo is and they don’t fight for the same things in education.
Bernie Sanders is not saying the same thing about education as Tim Kaine is, and they don’t fight for the same things in education.
Elizabeth Warren is not saying the same thing as Diane Ravitch is.
So, rather than repeating ad nauseum that the entire Democratic Party is pro-charter, why not talk about those who strongly support public schools and fight for them.
Instead too many people jump on every issue to decide there is no difference between a de Blasio and a Cuomo. And there is. Recognizing those difference is necessary or you end up defeating the good with the bad. Pressure the politicians who support public schools when they aren’t doing enough. But don’t mis-characterize them as no different than the ones who would sell out public schools to charters.
LikeLike
Right. There are certainly good Democrats. Like Tim Kaine, for instance, a true supporter of public education. Here he is now, going to bat for the American people by supporting bank deregulation: https://theintercept.com/2018/03/12/tim-kaine-democrats-offer-last-minute-pretend-defense-of-fair-lending-laws-as-they-prepare-to-weaken-them/
LikeLike
Great point, Dienne. You won’t see Bernie doing that.
LikeLike
dienne77 and Norwegian Filmmaker,
You are correct. So you can either vote for a candidate who will support public education and also is not good on bank regulations, or you can vote for the candidate who won’t fight for public education, believes charters are good and don’t need any more regulation if they are non-profit, but will fight for bank regulations.
Elizabeth Warren supports bank regulations and charters.
Bernie supports bank regulations and charters.
Tim Kaine supports public schools and bank deregulation.
Are you willing to throw public schools under the bus? Do you want to defeat the few politicians who strongly support public schools and replace them with pro-charter folks?
It’s fine. Just admit what you both are saying. “We will throw public education under the bus if we can get someone who is more progressive than Kaine (like Bernie’s candidate, Tom Perriello) on banking.
I am very willing to state my views. I care about public education and I will support the Virginia governor Northam and Tim Kaine because right now I believe the public education is more important than anything else.
From what I can see from your posts, there are two major differences between us:
You don’t admit the compromises in progressive values you are willing to make to further what you think is most important. I do.
You attack and call names at the politicians willing to compromise on one issue and insist that it is only because they are corrupt tools who are lying to the American people and have absolutely no integrity and their character is awful and they are complete and utter “frauds”.
But when a politician you like makes huge compromises on public education or gun control, you say it’s perfectly fine.
I can recognize that just because a politician compromises on one issue that I happen to feel strongly about does not necessarily mean that he or she is a corrupt sell-out. I can look at the entirety of the candidate’s life and work and realize that just because that candidate is wrong about this issue does not mean it is because they are frauds and just taking a position because they are greedy and know that taking it will keep the money flowing.
And I don’t bash the compromised candidates who happen to be good on the issue that you believe is more important as frauds and sell-outs and repeat the same talking points that the right wing tries to push.
dienne77, I don’t care if you want to note that any democrat is “less than fully progressive”. After all, Sen Warren is “less than fully progressive” on charters. Bernie Sanders was “less than fully progressive” on gun control. Tim Kaine is “less than fully progressive” on bank regulations.
But I think you know how disingenuous it is for you to pretend that is all that you do. I hope you will stop so we can have a more productive discussion that recognizes that politicians make compromises but the reason they make those compromises is not always the same. And it is not always for corrupt and greedy motives.
LikeLike
Just like schools don’t want to be treated in a cookie cutter fashion, small, regional banks have been faced with regulations designed for large, multinationals. I don’t pretend to know how Kaine feels, but I do know that the issue is more nuanced than deregulate or not. The devil is in the details. It’s like candidates being condemned for passing certain legislation that included something that would seem contrary to what they claim to represent only to find out that said action was part of a much larger bill that included a lot of other things that were representative of the candidates stated positions. We don’t hear about those situations too often, but compromise is part of getting anything accomplished even when one party has control. Neither party is a monolith of like minded members. For the record, I am for the break up of the big banks. I have no idea how to do it in a financially sound way, but “too big to fail” means too big to me.
LikeLike
^^and Norwegian Filmmaker, one thing you should realize:
Voters in the Virginia Democratic primary defeated the Bernie Sanders “progressive” candidate in favor of one who you would certainly call very conservative but he was a much stronger supporter of public schools, whereas Bernie’s candidate was a favorite of the education reformers.
What would YOU have done in that case?
I really want to know. You seem to believe it is so simple.
LikeLike
“And there are shades of “Progressive” and “Democrat” which I will respectfully acknowledge, but the end product and overall gestalt are going to be looked at in terms of reversing the plutocratic trajectory ”
He’s trying, NYCPSP. Give him some slack. Maybe we need a safe word. 🙂
LikeLike
People create reaiity, and if they wanted it to be simpler, it would be.
LikeLike
I don’t even know what this reply means.
We live in reality. A new “reality” can’t be created just because you decide it should be.
It takes hard work. It takes compromise. You accept those compromises when it comes to Norwegian politicians. But somehow you think in America we should be able to create some reality.
Guess what? Maybe if Hillary Clinton had been elected and we had a Supreme Court that recognized the damage that Citizens’ United had done, that hard work to create a new reality might have been a little easier. But your and dienne77’s “reality” did not believe that mattered at all.
Now we have to fight to simply keep the right to keep fighting! And with a few more Trump Supreme Court appointments, that fight to keep the right to keep fighting is just going to get harder.
Talk about being short-sighted.
LikeLike
speduktr (and Norwegian Filmmaker),
Thank you for the reminder, speduktr. Norwegian Filmmaker is trying. I really do appreciate it and I did remember to mention that, but I need to do it more often.
(and I like your post about bank regulations)
LikeLike
The unfortunate fact is that Democrats have been less forthright about their intentions. Many corporate Democrats have tried to have it both ways. They have tried to court labor’s vote while working against public education. I can remember Obama making a speech about how competition will make public schools better. In a zero sum game public education loses with every student that leaves, yet the fixed costs to run schools remain the same. Other policy shifts made by Obama and Duncan were equally unfair like RTT and VAM, and the presumed value add teachers provide to students’ performance on standardized tests. All of these reflect unfair practice and unsubstantiated claims made by the Obama administration. Obama and Duncan embraced high stakes testing with punitive outcomes for schools, districts and teachers. None of what has been endorsed by these Democrats has improved education. However, the punitive, wasteful policies of Democrats helped set the stage for DeVos, more vouchers and other harmful policies.
LikeLike
retired teacher,
You articulate the situation well.
LikeLike
Ditto.
LikeLike
NCLB was an attempt to be bipartisan. Immediately both Ted Kennedy and George Miller realized the funding was not going to be available to do appropriate things — and the people in charge turned it into the republican policy …. I do not blame democrats the way this author does. That being said, we still do have neoliberal (democrats or whatever party) who think they have the solution and it is usually a corporate “fix” because they are poorly informed and many do not have the best intentions when they start looking for “profit schools”… That could be either party– it is most often someone who is pushing “change” as the only future option not realizing that they have responsibility for ensuring that change can be improvement (and not just technology). We have poorly defined the goal , the logic plan and the implementation. That could be across the board in either party. I do remember George Miller and Ted Kennedy both speaking out however on how good intentions are not always followed. Legislation is interpreted by the people in your state department; and it is mediate through the heads of the people involved in the policy, the state department, and the administration. “Mediated” is the word when it comes to any legislation that is passed. … how it gets interpreted and implemented.
LikeLike
I met George Miller in 2010 at a private dinner for the Dems on the House Education Committee. I was invited by Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro of Ct to speak about my recent book, “The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education.”
I was very critical of NCLB. George Miller was outraged. He considered it to be a great accomplishment that benefited black and Hispanic and poor children.
Miller, supposed a liberal Democrat, was a favorite of DFER, the hedge fund charter promoters. They held a very successful fundraiser for him in NYC, even though he had no opposition.
LikeLike
Miller was truly one of the dullest knives in the drawer and a consummate bully. The louder and more outraged he got, the more it belied his ignorance on a subject. A prime example of the disease of politosclerosis, a harding of the heart and brain caused by being in a safe district where voters voted for a legacy (his father was a prominent state senator) and believing he was entitled to his office, not accountable to petty voters.
LikeLike
Nancy Pelosi followed his lead on education. His senior staffer is now executive director of DFER in DC.
LikeLike
Nancy Pelosi lives in a house valued in the millions. She has no empathy for average every day people. Down with her, and done with her!
LikeLike
I’m sorry to be beating a dead horse here, but the above comment by Norwegian Filmmaker is exactly the kind of comment a Russian troll would make. How is this useful? What does the value of Pelosi’s home have to do with her “having empathy for average every day people”. To say that Pelosi has none is such an outrageously hateful thing to say. Pelosi is absolutely misguided when it comes to education, as are many people including Sen. Warren and Sanders. She has also fought for wage increases and health care. She has fought for DACA and immigration reform. She fought against Bush attempts to “reform” social security. She got Obamacare through the House. Not because she thought it had everything she would have wanted, but because she understood that it was urgent to get some major universal health care program, however flawed, in place when they had a chance.
It’s possible in hindsight to criticize some of her policy choices, but to claim that Pelosi “has no empathy for average every day people” is just outrageous. Please stop with this kind of nastiness and try to have a real discussion about how to achieve our goals.
LikeLike
If you want a little humor break, or humorous take on all this, check out this parody from THE NEW YORKER’s Andy Borowitz: (it’s only a slight exaggeration)
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/betsy-devos-calls-60-minutes-a-waste-of-a-half-hour
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Satire from The Borowitz Report
Betsy DeVos Calls “60 Minutes” a Waste of a Half Hour
By Andy Borowitz
12:44 P.M.
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) —
Furious about her treatment on the CBS news-magazine program on Sunday night, Betsy DeVos spoke to reporters on Monday, and called “60 Minutes” a “total waste of a half hour.”
“I had never watched ‘60 Minutes’ before, but I can tell you this, I will never watch it again,” the Education Secretary said. “I have better things to do with a half hour of my time.”
Calling her interviewer, Lesley Stahl, a practitioner of “gotcha journalism at its worst,” DeVos said that it was “very unfair of her to ask me so many questions about education.”
“She asked me one thing about schools, and then another, and another,” she said. “If I had to answer every question she had about schools, I would have had to bone up on education for a month.”
DeVos said that she was “frustrated” that Stahl neglected to ask her about any of her “really good ideas” for the nation’s schools, such as “purchasing guns for teachers with money that is currently being wasted on books.”
“If a bear comes into your classroom, throwing a book at him will only stun him momentarily, at best,” DeVos said.
LikeLike
Yes, I needed that. Thanks.
LikeLike
Jack,
Thinking about George Miller, one of the key sponsors of NCLB, I googled and found this:
https://dfer.org/hot-list-2012-the-funky-bunch/
This is a list of politicians that the Hedge fund managers raised money for.
Note Congressman Bobby Scott, now lead Democrat on the House Education Committee.
Senator Chris Murphy of CT, who made a last-ditch effort to keep AYP in the New ESSA, but fortunately failed because Republicans voted it down. Every Democrat supported the Murphy Amendment to Protect the worst aspect of NCLB, including Sanders and Warren.
LikeLike
Great article, Diane.
Great article Diane: https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/03/11/charter-schools-mayor-de-blasio-turning-mayor-bloomberg
LikeLike
I don’t think it is totally fair to Ted Kennedy to blame him because he believed NCLB was a good idea at the time. Did he double down and embrace the philosophy that all public schools needed was some “competition” from charters that could get rid of any kids they didn’t want to teach? Would he have recognized what was wrong with charters.
I don’t care if someone supported charters 15 years ago or 10 years ago. I care about what their opinion is now and whether they have recognized the problems or if they simply continue to be apologists for the entire charter industry.
I think we need to identify those politicians who seem like they might change their mind from the “charters are so wonderful as long as they aren’t for profit” embrace that they have.
Elizabeth Warren. Bernie Sanders.
To me, the test given to every single Democrat is a simple one: Do you agree with the NAACP’s moratorium on new charters until there is real oversight and reform in which suspension rates, attrition, and lawsuits from parents whose kids were unceremoniously put on “got to go” lists and shown the door?
When you get your answer, you might know which Dems should be defeated. But what happens if it is Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders along with Corey Booker?
LikeLike
“Handshake agreements”. Bush made a verbal agreement to dramatically increase federal education spending in return for support from Kennedy and Miller. There was a single year increase of $4billion in funding. ESEA appropriations went from 17.4 billion (2001 ). to $22 billion in 2002. Then, from 2002 – 2007 federal funding for education only increased $ 2 billion and Kennedy and Miller held a press conference saying that there had been a “violation of their agreement and trust”. We were left with “accountability” in the form of test and then they added the punish part. Ted Kennedy and George Miller did not sign on for this. I was working in teacher training and the faculty of BU and the State University actually discussed all of these issues. I remember distinctly — don’t paint the democrats with that brush. Different circumstances prevailed after that era ; Silber President of BU wanted every child tested — but he was trying to find those were not achieving in the wealthy suburbs just like the inner city. I don’t recall Silber ever bringing out the “punish” mode of “turn around”. That came later. It was a contentious era.
LikeLike
I thought the “punish” part was included in the 2001 NCLB act? Pls clarify.
LikeLike
NCLB was based on a theory of test and punish.
ESSA dropped AYP and VAM over the objections of Democrats
LikeLike
Remember when Katie Couric did a promo for that charter school that paid it’s teachers125K a year? The school failed, but 60 mins still gushed praise on the school. Now that Trump is in office 60 mins is suddenly gravely concerned with the draining of funds from the public school system by charters. The one saving grace in the Trump presidency is that democrats are now in complete opposition to the privatization policies that they had previously supported under president Obama.
LikeLike
That school is called The Equity Project Charter School, and it recently secured a full five-year renewal; it is about to complete an expansion from a middle school to a K-8; it was selected as a model school for charter-district partnerships, specifically around its successes in the practice of a restorative justice school culture; it still pays all teachers with 3+ years of experience $125,000 and all starting teachers a minimum of $65,000; and it is still hugely popular and has far more applicants than available seats.
This on-topic, terms-of-service compliant comment was originally submitted 3/12/18 at 11:03 pm; due to moderation it may not appear until a later time
LikeLike
As I recall, the Equity Project had very disappointing proficiency rates. And I frequently see ads for new teachers. Despite the salaries, turnover seems to be high.
LikeLike
But DFER has not gone away. It is now pushing for pro-charter Villaraigosa for Governor of California.
LikeLike
I hope that the supporters of public schools in California follow the lead of Virginia and turn the Governor’s race into a vote for or against public education.
It was a very successful issue for Democrats in Virginia who were actually supporters of education and it defeated the DFER candidate who wasn’t. I suspect that support for public schools could be a winning issue in most Democratic primaries. Defeat the Dems who don’t support public schools strongly in the primary and continue to make that an issue in the general election to defeat Republicans.
LikeLike
I wish they were in complete opposition. Prominent Dems still hold mostly neolib position, i.e. pro pub-priv partnerships, priv sector can more efficiently deliver public services. Epecially on ed — the ideology-wafflers tell themselves that charters are “public schools” (hence support closing ‘poor-performing’ pubschs/ opening charters to take up slack) – few have gotten the memo, esp at fed level. Cf Booker, Sanders, Warren who call themselves progressives. Granted, most of these Dems have nixed vouchers… Let’s see how they hold that position as ed-reformers churn up a huge pro-voucher breeze.
LikeLike
And that is why I do identify as a Democrat, but as a Progressive Democratic Socialist. The so-called “Democrats” are far too right wing rethuglican for me.
LikeLike
That should rrad “do NOT IDENTIFY AS A DEMOCRAT”. Could not edit the original.
LikeLike
Without a member ID and party dues it really does not matter, one name or another.
LikeLike
There was a really popular game a few years back called the “6 Degrees to Kevin Bacon”. The premise of the game was that Kevin Bacon is such a prolific actor that any Hollywood actor/actress can be linked through their work within 6 steps.
https://oracleofbacon.org/
I think we have reached the point where DeVos has become so popular/infamous that she qualifies as prolific actor of “edreform”. Linking Democrats to DeVos in 6 or less steps should embarrass them publicly and require them to clarify their stance on public education. It would be silly not to use this moment to weed out the “reformers” of the Democratic party before they start winning elections as a result of our current president.
Just for the record, Kevin Bacon rocks. DeVos not so much.
LikeLike
Six degrees?
I’d be surprised if Betsy has even one degree.
LikeLike
May your message Diane become a public education “war cry” in the upcoming elections!!!!! The democratic party MUST take the time to ACTUALLY look at themselves collectively “in the mirror” and own up to their role in this horrific “reform” period in public education. These politicians must put our nation’s children above corporate money. “We the American People” do vote and are waking up to the reality teachers have understood for way too long! Bravo on pointing out the hypocrisy in democrats calling out DeVos and her strong lack of knowledge. She has greed and perhaps genuine lack of intelligence on her side. But what about the democratic politicians??? Did they have “genuine lack of knowledge”??? Or … was it pure greed and lack of concern for those they are supposed to be representing! One thing is for sure… teachers unions MUST make demands on politicians and not rush to support candidates without the actual support of the teachers they represent. Now is the time for insisting on HONESTY and the vital role that public education has played and needs to continue playing for the health of our nation. Americans must turn this “buzz” into a loud never-relenting “ROAR” to remind democratic politicians that they were “DeVosing” long before Betsy DeVos came on the Education Secretary scene and it is time to represent The People and to end the hypocrisy!!
LikeLike
There are a bloc of voters who use politicians’ stands on the 2nd amendment as a litmus test… and a bloc of voters who use politicians’ stands on abortion as a litmus test… why couldn’t there be a bloc of voters who use politicians’ stands on “reform” as a litmus test? “Reform” as it is now defined means the privatization of public utilities and services… and ALL public sector employees should find a common cause in opposing this privatization pitched as “reform”. The privatization movement underlies the abandonment of net neutrality, the private-public partnerships that will turn interstate highways into toll roads, social impact bonds that are designed to supplant government agencies, the union-busting cases presented to the Supreme Court, and— yes— the privatization of public schools.
LikeLike
You make an interesting point. Are the only successful political attitudes extant today those who focus a significant portion of the electorate on a particular issue? Is that a necessary prerequisite for success at the ballot box?
The abortion issue and the second amendment have certainly been the focus for extreme propaganda campaigns. Would school issues be as good a draw for the talk radio guys or the talking heads on TV? Hard to say.
LikeLike
I was JUST thinking this, and here is a Slate article pointing it out. Nice.
I maintain that DeVos has been a boon for public education, not because of what she advocates or believes, but because she is a step up from Arne Duncan in that she will never be able to do as much damage as he did. She lacks his skill at deception and public speaking. Also, more importantly, she cannot wrap herself in “Democrat Blue” in order to stymie any dissenting views, as Duncan was able to do.
LikeLike
“The Democrats lost their voice”
They lost their voice on Wall Street
In talks with Jamie Dimon
It made them hoarse to oft repeat
“I soadore your diamond”.
LikeLike
So adore
LikeLike
” I can look at the entirety of the candidate’s life and work and realize that just because that candidate is wrong about this issue does not mean it is because they are frauds and just taking a position because they are greedy and know that taking it will keep the money flowing.
And I don’t bash the compromised candidates who happen to be good on the issue that you believe is more important as frauds and sell-outs and repeat the same talking points that the right wing tries to push.” thanks, I can leave the discussion based on my agreement with this statement.
LikeLike