Usually, members of the President’s Cabinet go before Congress to defend their department’s budget and to explain the good works the department is doing.
Not Secretary DeVos! She went to a Congressional heading to ask the Appropriations Committee to cut her budget.
Much has been made of her plea to zero out federal support for the Special Olympics, which backfired. Not only were the families of 272,000 participants offended but so were the families of many millions of people with disabilities. Trump quickly res indeed the cut, which was a tiny sliver of the ED budget, equivalent to six weekend trips to Mar-a-Lago by Trump.
Many more programs were jeopardized, as Denis Smith writes here.
“In her testimony before the House Education Appropriations Subcommittee on Tuesday, Betsy DeVos, the anti-public education Secretary of Education, was present to defend $7 billion in proposed cuts to her department. The cuts in the education budget are seen as measures to offset billions in lost revenue from tax breaks for the wealthy that have exploded the federal deficit.
“An examination of Trump’s FY2020 budget shows that the administration is asking to cut the Department of Education’s funding from $71 billion to $64 billion, eliminating 29 programs. In addition to zeroing out popular and proven programs like Special Olympics, which has garnered strong support during its 50-year existence, Pell Grants for higher education tuition assistance, literacy and after-school programs would also be adversely affected by new budget statements.
“Broadcast and print media were all over the story about a cabinet secretary who was as heartless as Genghis Kahn in laying waste to her department’s budget so that money could be freed up for other purposes. The one area that stood out the most was the elimination of $18 million in federal funds for Special Olympics and the added support the program provides for students with special needs….
”The Secretary’s propensity for cluelessness is seen in defending a budget that harms so many children with program cuts yet reserves a huge amount of public funds for charter schools, many of which are run by for-profit management companies. Her advocacy for increased funding for charter schools at a time when massive cuts are proposed for children with special needs is appalling, and when the Department of Education’s own inspector general examined the efficacy of the Charter Schools Program for state education agencies, where federal start-up grant funds are available to establish new charter schools…
”If there was any value in the Education Subcommittee hearing, it is that all should know without any doubt where the priorities of Republicans are in the area of education. Forget about kids and learning. Forget about being civic-minded and making investments in the community through public education. Instead, profit must be the result. In this model promoted by Republican budget priorities, students come in third behind profit/shareholder value and executive compensation for the for-profit school leaders. In this alternative universe, it’s all about people who look at market activity and portfolios and concern themselves with calculating yield on investment.”
The bottom line: Greed is good.
Fortunately, the Democrats who control the Appropriations Committee will not approve any of DeVos’s proposed cuts. Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut is chair of the Education subcommittee. She questioned DeVos closely. DeVos will not get anything past DeLauro, a champion for children and public schools.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I’m salivating and it’s not from hunger!!!!!
I imagine someone in the Trump administration targeted this program because it was a conspicuous legacy of the Kennedy family–Democrats, don’t you know. Add the public riducule Trump enjoys heaping on people with visible disabilities. http://www.nytimes.com%2F2009%2F08%2F12%2Fus%2F12shriver.html&usg=AOvVaw17CjDFywv136LbM3rZmSfG
Cutting the federal budget MAY be the only time Betsy DeVos and I agree. Hear me out. The wasted billions in grants and other awarded funds must stop. Non-profits such as TFA are getting these grants in the name of ‘innovation’. The fed. imposes but essentially makes states beg for funding. Governing from afar does not work.
This is an extraordinarily narrow and skewed view. The issue is smart spending, not spending in general. TFA is certainly bad, but to bundle it as a standard for other effective spending is narrow-minded parochialism. And sweeping generalizations like “Governing from afar does not work.” are also not helpful. In every issue under the sun there are strategic and tactical concerns and approaches. Effective policy is when those concerns work in tandem. Let me try an issue not related to education of which I know a little: medical research spending. Funding for the National Institutes of Health is strategic. It is tax money parceled out to researchers and institutions throughout the nation and, in limited instances, the world. It is supposed to follow and fund the best ideas, regardless of where they might be. It is not supposed to be divvied up according to geographical or political considerations. It is not supposed to be economic stimulus spending per se, although it most certainly is a part of the benefit for those receiving funding. As a potential patient and citizen, I want those funds to go the places where the ideas are best, not because they are in my state or city. Effective research from afar definitely benefits people regardless of where live or where their community civic interests might be.
I think both of you are right. I don’t think that the department that Jimmy Carter created has turned out to be what he intended. There are parts that are good and should be continued, but there are many parts that have become a huge waste of tax payer dollars and should be abolished (Special Olympics is NOT one of them!). Great idea by Jimmy Carter, but the implementation has been awful.
Dern.
Of course I meant DoE, not federal spending in general. 😬
Yes, my focus is narrow—because federal grants—including Race to the Top—are where I see the biggest problems. Have taught @ Title I schools in an urban district for over 30 years. Thank you.
DeVooDoo should start by CUTTING HER OWN SALARY. That would save money. DeVoodoo has so much $$$$$$ she purchases yachts.
A couple of weeks ago you posted a graphic from Politico that showed the administration’s requested funding levels for all federal departments and agencies. The few increases were colored green, the cuts were red. Every department and agency head representing one of those red circles have said, in one form or other, “Cut my budget, please!” While we focus on education here—rightly so—this is an assault on all aspects of federal spending excepting the military. Knowing the advocacy game as I do, it saddens me that the various supporters of the programs in those red circles will stand up for their interests and ignore the others, especially the threat of military spending to them, rather than build strong, comprehensive social and scientific spending coalitions. Because the will and leadership build these coalitions does not exist—after all, all the professional advocates have narrow boards and constituencies that pay their fees and salaries—I am not hopeful. Regardless of the actual outcome at the end of this annual process, military spending will be untouched, some departments and agencies will either avoid cuts and remain at or close to level spending as compared to the current fiscal year, while others will lose. Those who avoid draconian cuts will, in essence, be abandoning their natural allies.
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education and commented:
Let’s just cut her loose.
Randy Rainbow grills Cruella DeVos (apologies if this was already posted)
DeVos complained that was attacked unfairly for this budget, because it’s “just” a proposal and everyone knows it’s not passing.
But it’s her budget! If she doesn’t want to be judged on her own submitted work then what can we judge her on?
It doesn’t matter if it passes. She submitted her annual goals to the public and her annual goals include cuts to education funding. If those aren’t her goals she should submit a different proposal.
Chiara,
Somebody else wrote her budget and she just reads the words.
Actually I think Mick Mulvaney at OMB wrote her budget but it’s her job to fight for what she wants. Obviously she didn’t
There is solid support from many people in this nation, to de-fund and eliminate the federal Dept of Education. Support for elimination goes all the way back to Pres Ron Reagan.
Education can and should be a state/municipal operation, and the feds need to get out of it (at the policy level).
So if they need to get out of it (at the policy level), where should they get into it?
I would like to see the feds drop out of education at the K-12 level, as much as possible. The feds could give basic grants, to some economically-distressed areas, on the condition that the recipient would have maximum discretion in how to use the funds.
The feds could provide statistical and analytical services, so that states/municipalities could develop their own education programs.
I have read the federal US constitution, and I cannot undertake to lay my finger on any specific federal authority for education. On the other hand, many (or all) of the states have either constitutional or legislative mandates to provide publicly supported educational services.
I think we can trust the states, when it comes to K-12 education.
No, Charles, we cannot trust the states because of the huge sums of money autocrats and oligarchs like the Koch brothers and Walton family are spending to elect their minions and puppets to local school boards, state legislatures, and state Governors’ mansions.
Once they are elected and take over, they ignore what the people think and rule as if they are fascist tyrants.
@Lloyd: Many people on this blog claim (with some justification) that public education is a cornerstone of our democracy. They also state (correctly) that local school boards and municipalities are answerable to the people. They go on and on about how wonderful it is, to have public schools under local control. I tend to agree with this sentiment.
That is why I advocate having the feds get out of K-12 education as much as possible. I find it bizarre, that federal bureaucrats claim to have more insight, that individual states, municipalities and local school boards.
Sometimes it seems like everything the feds have done in past several years, like ESSA, NCLB, Common Core, etc. have been detrimental, and a failure. The imposition of mandatory testing, is crammed into the classroom, by federal mandate.
Are you advocating a federal takeover of K-12 education? Since you seem to have given up on state/municipal control, it looks like you do.
During the recent spate of teacher strikes, the striking teachers took their grievances to the state capitals. No striking teacher marched on Washington.
90%+ of the funding for K-12 education is state/municipal. How can you claim that we cannot trust the states to operate our nation’s public schools?
Some states like TN need to be protected from their local political leaders.
Just curious… has the Dept of Education ever had a thorough audit? We know how the Defense department manages to loose billions and spend large sums on cheaper items. I would think that this department and others are no different. I once lost a job through downsizing. My income was cut in 1/2. I was distraught for a while, until I reorganized my priorities, cut spending and actually looked at where my money was being spent and wasted. It worked out to my ultimate betterment.
I have assisted with Special Olympics events and donated to this organization. What is the purpose of the dept of education’s involvement any more than any other department? Is it because children (though some are over 18) are involved? How about the Dept of Health and Human Services or HUD or Transportation…can make arguments for to fund this group as well. Did John Kennedy REALLY intend for the government to pay for this? How about more cuts to administration of the Dept of Ed.? Is the ultimate goal to get rid of this department? I believe schools should have more local and state control.
Social Security has its own tax to fund that program and by law, if SS runs short and cannot meet its promised obligations to SS recipients, SS payments must be cut because SS cannot borrow money as the federal government can.
Unemployment benefits at the state level also have revenue streams to fund those programs
Medicare does too but is woefully underfunded because as medical expense skyrocketed the tax that funded Medicare didn’t budge the match the increases.
But funding for the military has no revenue streams. Most military funding is discretionary and the wealthy that benefit the most from endless wars pay no taxes to support those wars. Since World War II, military spending in the United States is responsible for MOST if not ALL of the federal national debt – not the underfunded social safety net programs.
I repeat, most if not all of the annual military budgets in the US have never had no established revenue stream to fund them.
Even during World War II, there was no revenue to fund the war and when that war ended, the federal government was left with a huge federal debt explaining why President Eisenhower’s tax base was as high as 94% for those making more than $400k a year.
The goal of that tax was to pay off the debt from WWII.
And that debt was being reduced and paid off UNTIL along came President Teflon Ray-Gun in the 1980s, the president that turned the GOP into a Vampire-Frankenstein Monster.
Here is another interesting and very important reason why school choice does not cut it
https://hechingerreport.org/opinion-vouchers-and-equality/
I agree, Margaret
“The experience of having to become someone else in order to get a chance at success, many would argue, is part of the American Dream — or maybe the American Myth. It doesn’t take too much insight to realize that this same process also teaches young people that who they are at home isn’t good enough.
I’d extend this view to higher ed as well. All schools, colleges should be of high quality. Parents try to send their kids to Harvard, spending a fortune on the tuition, instead of supporting local universities from a fraction of the cost.
Until this happens, we can talk about equal chance, cannot talk about democracy.
“Broadcast and print media were all over the story about a cabinet secretary who was as heartless as Genghis Kahn”
In fact, I think we have a new standard with DeVos: instead of saying “you are heartless” we’re gonna say “you are such a devos” or “you are such a betsy”.