That is an easy question. Betsy DeVos believes that parents can choose really dreadful ”schools,” where their children won’t learn anything about the modern world and it’s okay.
But Betsy’s not a pundit on FOX News. She is Secretary of Education. People listen to her incoherent babbling and try to make sense of it.
As the AP reports, Betsy has decided to ignore evidence that her own Department—during the Obama Administration, wasted nearly $1 billion on failed charter schools. She can’t defend this outrage. Where are the other charter cheerleaders?
Why is it okay to fund charters that never open or close within a year?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
These questions need to go to others as well.
(Thank God for you, Secretary DeVos.)
Thanks to NPE’s efforts, we actually have some some idea of the scale of the federal waste on charters that never opened. While the $1 billion figure is shocking, there is so much more waste and fraud in the charter sector that have cost many more millions in state and federal funds. The unregulated charter sector is a drain on public education, and most of those that are guilty of waste and fraud are those that are already getting six figure salaries. In addition to enhancing segregation, privatization contributes to income inequality. Turning education over to the private sector is an example of reckless, short sighted policy. DeVos cares nothing about quality education. Under the guise of “choice” she only cares about transferring public funds into private pockets.
Ditzy DeVoid, Secretary of The Department for the Privatization of American Education, formerly the USDE
The only logical answer: Because she can.
I don’t think charters want local facilities funding. If they had local facilities funding they would have to go through the same kind of public analysis and comment that public schools have to go through when they close or build schools.
I think they want to build what they want, where they want, which is why their donors and charter cheerleaders in states and the federal government set aside special funding for them.
They couldn’t just plop down a new school in the area they deem best if they had to get local public approval to build. People would ask real questions, like “why are you building a school where there’s declining enrollment?” or “why are you replicating an existing public school, across the street?” or “do we really need another whole layer of publicly-funded managers?”
The no-strings grants from their powerful supporters in state and federal government work out well for them. Gets around that pesky “meddling” by the locals.
We built a new public school here. It took 3 years and 2 plan revisions for the public to approve it. The public refused to approve the plans unless the cost dropped – the plan costs ended up 20% lower as a result of public input. Charters skip that step. That’s deliberate.
I read that Melinda Gates wants “20%” charter schools. They’re “agnostics” but they set a hard number? That’s ridiculous. They’re not “agnostic” at all- they want “20%”, which has absolutely nothing to do with “quality” or “demand” but is PURE ideological preference.
The charter sector is full of ideologues, grifters, wealthy egomaniacs and fanatics.
YES: once huge public educational money is deregulated and opened up to new “opportunities” it is opportunists who are first in line
The worst part for me of the complete and utter capture of the US Department of Education by this “movement”, as a public school graduate, parent and supporter, is how these public employees constantly denigrate public schools and promote charter and private schools.
I’m sick of it. I think they should start doing some work on behalf of the 90% of families who attend the schools they disfavor and work to eradicate. Why is the public paying for this anti-public school campaign? Maybe they could think about doing their jobs instead of promoting their ideological preferences.
They treat public school students and families like second class citizens and I’m tired of paying for it.
The US Department of ED turns their attention to the students in the public schools they on two issues- illegal drug use and “safety”.
Which tells you all you need to know about how they view our students.
They’re really wrong about public school students. Despite their belief, our kids are not all drug addicts and violent thugs. I understand they want to promote charter and private schools, but smearing all public school students to reach that goal is appalling. At the very least I wish they would refrain from conducting anti-public school student campaigns while they’re collecting a public paycheck. That seems like a reasonable request.
According to the grant docs, the giant charter chain, KIPP, plan to build 52 new schools to add to their national system.
Will these just go anywhere the board decides, or will the public have any say at all where they plunk them down?
How are local schools supposed to compete with a federally-funded giant chain? Can I expand my local school district into KIPP’s market area in another state? If not, why not?
This isn’t “markets”. It’s yet another variation of crony capitalism.
The federal government PREFERS these schools over any existing public school. That’s why they don’t support existing schools and lavish support on charters and vouchers.
Why indeed? What motivates someone who has more materially than anyone could ever hope to possess? It must be power. Once a person has all the wealth that could ever be desired, that person will find the experience vacuous and turn to the other human desire, power. Personal power. Legacy. The feeling that the immortality of ideas will guile you into a immortal moment in time.
Students deserve to choose waste, fraud, and abuse. And c’mon, baby, Betsy needs a new pair of yachts!
Choice is everything”
The goal is not
To win or lose
The goal is but
To simply choose
To simply choose Amway