Archives for category: Disruption

Peter Greene writes about the contradiction at the heart of Trump’s education goals. On the one hand, Trump says he will eliminate the Department of Education and turn federal funding over to the states, to use as they wish. At the same time, he says that he will punish schools if they persist in teaching liberal ideas that Trump dislikes, like diversity, equity and inclusion, or if they are insufficiently patriotic.

How will he punish schools if the federal funding has been relinquished to the states?

Greene writes:

It has been on the conservative To Do list for decades, and the incoming administration keeps insisting that this time it’s really going to happen. But will it? Over the weekend, Trump’s Ten Principles for Education video from Agenda 47 was circulating on line as a new “announcement” or “confirmation” of his education policy, despite the fact that the video was posted in September of 2023.

The list of goals may or may not be current, but it underlines a basic contradiction at the heart of Trump’s education plans. The various goals can be boiled down to two overall objectives:

1) To end all federal involvement and oversight of local schools.

2) To exert tight federal control over local schools

Trump has promised that schools will not teach “political indoctrination,” that they will teach students to “love their country,” that there will be school prayer, that students will “have access to” project-based learning, and that schools will expel students who harm teachers or other students. 

He has also proposed stripping money from colleges and universities that indoctrinate students and using the money to set up a free of charge “world class education” system.

Above all, he has promised that he “will be closing up” the Department of Education. Of course, he said that in 2016 with control of both houses of Congress and it did not happen.

Are there obstacles? The Department of Education distributes over $18 billion to help support schools that educate high-poverty populations, providing benefits like extra staff to supplement reading instruction. The Project 2025 plan is to turn this into a block grant to be given to the states to use as they wish, then zeroed out. Every state in the country would feel that pinch; states that decide to use the money for some other purpose entirely, such as funding school vouchers, will feel the pinch much sooner. The department also handles over $15 billion in Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) funding, which helps cover the costs of special education; Project 2025 also calls for turning it into an unregulated block grant to states with no strings attached, meaning that parents would have to lobby their state government for special ed funding.

Cuts and repurposing of these funds will be felt immediately in classrooms across the country, particularly those that serve poor students and students with special needs. That kind of readily felt, easily understood impact is likely to fuel pushback in Congress, and it’s Congress that has the actual power to eliminate the department.

Beyond the resistance to changing major funding for states and the challenge of trying to move the trillion-plus-dollar funding system for higher education, the Trump administration would also face the question of how to exert control over school districts without a federal lever to push.

Previous administrations have used Title I funding as leverage to coax compliance from school districts. In 2013, Obama’s education secretary Arne Duncan threatened to withhold Title I funds if a California failed to adopt an “acceptable” standardized testing program. In 2020, Trump himself threatened to cut off funding to schools that did not re-open their buildings. And on the campaign trail this year, Trump vowed that he would defund schools that require vaccines. That will be hard to do if the federal government has given all control of funds to the states.

The Department of Education has limited power, but the temptation to use it seems hard to resist. Nobody wanted the department gone more than Trump’s education secretary Betsy DeVos, who was notably reluctant to use any power of her office. But by 2018, frustrated with Congressional inaction on the Higher Education Act, DeVos announced a plan to impose regulations on her own. In 2020, she imitated Duncan by requiring states to compete for relief money by implementing some of her preferred policies.

Too many folks on the Trump team have ideas about policies they want to enforce on American schools, and without a Department of Education that has control of a major funding stream, they’d have little hope of achieving their goals. Perhaps those who dream of dismantling the department will prevail, but they will still have to get past Congress. No matter how things fall out, some of Team Trump’s goals for education will not be realized.

The Republican supermajority in the state’s General Assembly is shameless. They used their numbers to pass a bill that strips the newly elected Democratic Governor, State Attorney General, and State Superintendent of Schools of many of their powers.

Outgoing Democratic Governor Roy Cooper vetoed the bill, but Republicans overturned his veto.

The Republican power grab was embedded in a bill that shortchanged the victims of Hurricane Helene.

When will voters in North Carolina wise up and start voting for Democratic legislators? The ones they have now are not working on behalf of their constituents.

They are using their power to protect their power and perks. The public be damned! Vote them out!

After Trump fired FBI Director James Comey in 2017, he choose respected FBI veteran Christopher Wray to replace Comey. The FBI Director is appointed for a ten-year term, to insulate the Director from partisan influence.

Senator Chuck Grassley is the ranking Republican on the Senate Committee on the Budget.

In this letter, directed to Director Wray, Grassley says he is finished and it’s time to pack his bag. He explains why. The heart of the matter is that he failed to investigate Republican claims that Biden was corrupt, but approved a search of Trump’s home for classified documents.

Next up is the odious Kash Patel, nominated by Trump to be FBI Director. Patel is a MAGA ideologue who has said that if appointed, on day one, he would close the FBI Headquarters and re-open it as a “museum of the deep state.”

Let’s see what Senator Grassley says about the unqualified Patel.

Lisa Gray, an editor at the Houston Chronicle, interviewed Dr. Peter Hotez, a vaccine scientist and specialist in infectious diseases, about the major public health challenges facing the incoming Trump administration. Dr. Hotez shares the story of his effort to persuade Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of the importance of vaccines. This post is the first of two.

Gray wrote:

During the COVID pandemic, Americans came to rely on bow-tied vaccine scientist Peter Hotez for calm, scientific assessments of the virus and the vaccines being developed to fight it. With his team at Texas Children’s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development, Hotez develops low-cost vaccines for low-income nations. He’s also the dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine — and is arguably Houston’s most beloved doctor.

He still monitors the public-health landscape closely. To find out what public-health threats await the Donald Trump administration, Houston Chronicle videographer Sharon Steinmann and I interviewed him at his office at Baylor.

Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Q: What are the public health challenges that the Trump administration will face on Day 1? Are you monitoring any major health threats?

A: We’ve got some big-ticket concerns regarding infectious disease and pandemic threats. The new administration is not going to have the luxury of time to organize and think about it. They’re going to be confronted with this from the very beginning.

One of the big threats I’m following is H5N1, an avian influenza. The virus is widespread now in migratory birds that fly from the north to the south.

It’s spilling over into domestic birds and poultry. We’re now seeing a big increase in infections of domestic birds and poultry in California and elsewhere in the western part of the United States, as well as across the northern part of the country. 

An H5N1 strain has also crossed over from birds into cattle. It’s gotten into our herds, including in Texas, as well as in the Great Plains and other parts of the United States.

I’m concerned that, eventually, this virus could spill over to people as well. We’re starting to see human cases. In the last few weeks, we’ve had six human cases. I think eventually H5N1 could become a major human public-health threat.

It’s not there yet. We’re not seeing human-to-human transmission yet. But monitoring it and being prepared for it has got to be a big priority for the new incoming administration. 

Q: Oof. Is that all that’s on the horizon?

A: Guess what? That’s just the beginning.

The other thing that’s happening is, we still have COVID with us. Our COVID-19 numbers are low again, but I expect them to rise. You can protect yourself from that, of course, by keeping your immunizations up to date. If you got a dose of the vaccine in September, like I did, you’ll be due again around January.

But here’s the thing: COVID-19 isn’t the only COVID threat. There are other coronaviruses.

Remember that the name for the virus that causes COVID is the SARS-2 coronavirus. There was a SARS-1, the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome that came out of southern China in 2002. We had Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, also caused by a coronavirus, in 2012. And of course, we had SARS-2 cause COVID, the largest pandemic of them all, starting in 2019.

We should expect SARS-3 to come in the next few years.

Q: Why are we seeing these new coronaviruses in people?

A: Because these viruses are widespread in bats. Across China and East Asia, they’re jumping regularly to people. In some cases that’s through intermediate animal hosts. In some cases it’s directly from bats to people.

By some estimates, these new SARS coronaviruses are jumping from bats to people on the order of 66,000 times a year. Every now and then, one catches fire and ignites a pandemic.

So that needs to occupy the attention of the Trump administration. What kind of surveillance are we doing for SARS-3, which is brewing as we speak among bats in Asia?

Q: That’s a lot to take care of.

A: That’s not all we have to worry about. A third big-ticket item is the fact that we’ve seen a significant uptick in the number of virus infections transmitted by mosquitoes or other biting arthropods. We all know about the West Nile virus. Last year was a pretty bad year for infections in the United States, including Texas. But that’s just the beginning.

With these mosquito-transmitted viruses, which we call arboviruses, we know what to expect in the U.S. because we usually see it first in Brazil. In the Western Hemisphere, Brazil is the arbovirus epicenter.  And right now, dengue, Oropouche, Zika and even yellow fever are all expanding in Brazil. They’re even extending beyond the Amazon rainforest, where we typically see them, because of climate change and possibly because of deforestation. 

And unfortunately, what starts in Brazil doesn’t stay in Brazil. It will eventually make its way to the Gulf Coast of the United States, including Texas.  So for next summer, I’m worried about dengue. I’m worried about Chikungunya, and even the possibility of yellow fever. I wrote about the possibility of a yellow fever outbreak in the New England Journal of Medicine; it would be catastrophic. The virus affects pregnant women and could be transmitted to the fetus, causing horrible birth defects. And besides yellow fever, Oropouche virus [pronounced “o-ro-push”] is going to be yet another big-ticket item. It’s spreading fast in Brazil. 

Q: So we’ve got four big-ticket concerns.

A: Wait, wait: We’re not done yet. Anti-vaccine activism accelerated during COVID; we’ve spoken about it many times. Now it’s spilling over to childhood immunizations. We’re seeing unprecedented levels of vaccine hesitancy and of parents refusing to have their kids vaccinated. So guess what?

From 2023 to 2024, we had a nearly sixfold increase in pertussis, or whooping cough, cases. We went from four measles outbreaks in 2023 to 16 in 2024. We’ve even seen polio in the wastewater of New York state.

I’m expecting a big rise in illnesses that are preventable with childhood vaccines.

Q: And the Trump administration has to be ready for all five of these major threats?

A: All of that is going to come crashing down on them. It’s going to be important that they take all those threats seriously.

It’s not just public health that could be affected. We’ve learned that pandemics have all sorts of other aspects. There’s an economic impact. There’s the impact on our security. And if we have a serious epidemic here in the U.S., it could block our travel from the U.S. to other countries.

I don’t have the sense that these big-ticket infectious disease threats are being taken with the seriousness that they need to be.

Q: Is that based on the people Donald Trump has named to health positions?

A: I’m concerned that the Trump administration is picking individuals based on their ideologies rather than either their subject-matter expertise or their ability to get things done in government.

Lisa Gray is the op-ed editor and a member of the Houston Chronicle editorial board. During the pandemic, she was the Chronicle’s lead COVID reporter.

This is a sickening article that appeared in The Irish Times about a meeting on Capitol Hill between Congressional leaders and Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy.

Why is it sickening? It shows our elected Congressional leaders preening and groveling in the presence of the world’s richest man and a man who is only very rich.

Our Leaders? Who elected Elon and Vivek?

Why an article from The Irish Times? My good friend and executive director of the Network for Public Education Carol Burris is spending the holidays there and sent it to me.

As you read the article, you can feel the obsequiousness that these elected officials are expressing as they wait for the phony Department of Government Efficiency to tell them what to cut.

“Elon and Vivek talked about having a naughty list and a nice list for members of Congress and senators and how we vote,” reported Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene who offered a beaming smile that suggested she knew which list she’d be making. “And how we’re spending American people’s money. I think that would be fantastic.”

One wonders what Ted Kennedy or Henry Clay or Lyndon Johnson, during their Senate years, would have made of two billionaires with zero political experience or authority, breezing into the Capitol and explaining to them they had a chance to make the nice list.

Speaker Johnson promised that Thursday’s meetings will be the first of many visits by Musk and Ramaswamy. “We believe it’s a historic moment for the country and these two gentlemen are going to help us navigate through this exciting day. Elon and Vivek don’t need much of an introduction here in Congress for certain and I think most of the public know what they are capable of and have achieved.

“They are innovators and forward thinkers and that’s what we need right now. We are laying the new ground rules for the new Congress in the new year, and we are going to see a lot of change here in Washington of the way things are run. That is what this whole Doge effort is about.”

Should they cut Social Security? Medicare? Veterans’ Healthcare? Grants for higher education? Title 1? Headstart?

Everything is on their chopping block.

How many civil servants will they seek to terminate?

Musk cut 80% of the staff at Twitter. Will he aim to lay off a huge percentage of the people who keep government running?

Musk tweeted a few days ago that government “should be rule by democracy, not rule by bureaucracy.”

How is it democratic to allow two unelected oligarchs to decide which programs should be eliminated? Why do Elon and Vivek–who will never need Medicare or Social Security–get to decide whether the rest of us can keep the programs that we rely on? If they get their way, there will be more people dying of health conditions that could been treated, more seniors eating cat food for dinner.

The politicians eagerly await their marching orders.

Sickening.

Trump was interviewed by “Meet the Press” today.

He talked about his Day 1 goals.

He said he would pardon the January 6 insurrectionists, but the reporting did not clarify whether that would include those who brutalized police officers. If so, Republicans should stop calling themselves the party of law and order.

He said he would try to end “birthright citizenship,” the grant of citizenship to persons born in the U.S. He says he would achieve this goal by executive action but birthright citizenship is written into the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Trump said that no other country in the world has birthright citizenship but NBC said that 30 other nations do.

As usual, Trump ranted about immigrant criminals but NBC pointed out that immigrants are half as likely to commit crimes as native-born citizens.

He also said he would work with Democrats to protect “Dreamers.” These are children who were brought to this country as young children.

President-elect Trump appointed a man who has actively sabotaged global health to be in charge of our nation’s public health system. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is a dangerous quack, whose conspiracy theories put millions of lives at risk.

Why did Trump choose a man to lead HHS whose ideology subverts public health? Well, he promised RFK Jr. the job in exchange for his endorsement. Why does Trump fill key positions at HHS with others whose views or experience are derided by mainstream scientists? Clearly, he is being advised by RFK Jr., so he can surround himself with like-minded people.

The effect of these appointments on the career scientists and physicians at HHS will be devastating. There is sure to be a brain drain. Trump could cripple our nation’s public health system for years to come.

The New York Times reported:

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is in line to lead the Department of Health and Human Services in the next Trump administration, is well-known for promoting conspiracy theories and vaccine skepticism in the United States.

But Mr. Kennedy, an environmental lawyer, has also spent years working abroad to undermine policies that have been pillars of global health policy for a half-century, records show.

He has done this by lending his celebrity, and the name of his nonprofit group, Children’s Health Defense, to a network of overseas chapters that sow distrust in vaccine safety and spread misinformation far and wide.

He, his organizations and their officials have interfered with vaccination efforts, undermined sex education campaigns meant to stem the spread of AIDS in Africa, and railed against global organizations like the World Health Organization that are in charge of health initiatives.

Along the way, Mr. Kennedy has partnered with, financed or promoted fringe figures — people who claim that 5G cellphone towers cause cancer, that homosexuality and contraceptive education are part of a global conspiracy to reduce African fertility and that the World Health Organization is trying to steal countries’ sovereignty.

One of his group’s advisers, in Uganda, suggested using “supernatural insight” and a man she calls Prophet Elvis to guide policymaking. “We do well to embrace ethereal means to get ahead as a nation,” she wrote on a Ugandan news site this year.

These people, more than leading scientists and experienced public health professionals, have existed in Mr. Kennedy’s orbit for years. The ideas spread by him and his associates abroad highlight the unorthodox, sometimes conspiratorial nature of the world occupied by a man who stands to lead America’s health department, its 80,000 employees and its $1.8 trillion budget.

Please open the link to continue reading.

Jeff Bryant is a veteran journalist who covers education issues. He is the chief correspondent for Our Schools, a project of the Independent Media Institute. He shared the following article with this blog.

What a Podcast Killed by Houston Public Media Reveals About the State Takeover of the City’s Schools

A podcast about the state takeover of the Houston Independent School District (HISD), which Houston Public Media (HPM) produced, promoted, and then quietly killed before it debuted, has been shared with Our Schools. “The Takeover,” hosted by Dominic Walsh, an award-winning public education journalist, examines the takeover, the state’s installation of a new board and a controversial superintendent Mike Miles, and the subsequent series of reforms Miles rolled out that have frustrated and angered teachers, parents, and students.

Our Schools has thoroughly examined the recordings to ensure their authenticity and is reporting on the contents of each episode so that readers are better informed about the consequences of the state takeover of Texas’s largest school district—the eighth-largest district in the nation. We have decided not to make the podcast public for legal reasons.

In four episodes of what was meant to be Season One of the podcast, Walsh covers events that took place in the school year 2023-2024, beginning with the secret ceremony in which Miles was sworn in to serve as superintendent in June 2023. Episode four culminates in March 2024 when public outrage forced Miles to back down on an evaluation plan that could have potentially resulted in half of the district’s principals losing their jobs, including some who lead the district’s top-rated schools.

Walsh ended the Season by questioning whether widespread public anger at policies implemented by Miles could endanger a school bond referendum that voters eventually decided on during the November 2024 election. That bond referendum was defeated, and the Houston Landing reported that Texas voters had never before rejected a proposed school bond measure “totaling $1 billion or more.” HPM called the defeat “an unofficial referendum of state takeover.”

Much of the airtime in “The Takeover” is taken up by interviews that are critical of what Miles has implemented, including those with parents, teachers, librarians, and students, many of whom bitterly complain about the new reforms. Walsh points out that state takeovers of local school districts almost never produce positive results, as numerous studies have shown.

Walsh has given ample time to takeover supporters on the podcast as well, including Miles; Texas Commissioner of Education Mike Morath, who appointed Miles; state-appointed Houston School Board President Audrey Momanaee; and Texas lawmakers, both Democratic and Republican, who support the takeover. He also speaks about positive developments since the takeover began, including improved test scores in math and science.

Yet, while Walsh’s reporting can be described as balanced, he largely frames the takeover and the new reforms Miles has imposed as the latest iteration of the decades-long education reform movement that Walsh negatively characterizes as being “top-down.” He further points out that the reforms are overly reliant on standardized testing with punitive accountability measures that often lead to schools being closed, teachers and school principals being fired, and parents feeling alienated.

A request for comment was sent to HPM station manager Joshua Adams, but Our Schools is yet to receive a response.

Episode one of “The Takeover” is titled “School Reform, the Musical,” a reference to a musical skit Miles staged, and played the leading role in, to ease the district about his massive disruption efforts and to counter any criticisms. But the episode could easily have been called “Winners and Losers,” which is the theme Walsh keeps returning to while describing who gains in Miles’s new education system and who loses out.

The winners tend to be those school staff members who benefit from a tiered salary system Miles implemented and teachers who are comfortable with a centrally created and scripted curriculum. The losers? Parents who see their children’s favorite teachers being fired or leaving in frustration. Students who find the scripted curriculum less engaging. Librarians whose libraries are shuttered. Teachers who lament about losing their freedom to tailor instruction to students and miss the curriculum they felt most passionate about, like teaching the entire book in English Language Arts class.

A contrast Walsh repeatedly draws throughout the episode is Miles’s claims of knowing “the best way” to improve schools versus what Walsh observes as the “painful reality” on the ground when the reforms were rolled out.

Episode one, “School Reform, the Musical” states:“State installed superintendent Mike Miles says his plan will make schools better, raise test scores, and career readiness, especially in high poverty neighborhoods that need it the most. And who could argue with those goals. Everyone wants that. Right? But it’s complicated.”
—Dominic Walsh

In episode two, “The Law,” Walsh begins by examining the law that made the state takeover possible and delves into the “conflicting philosophies” over public education and the rampant inequity in the education system. His reporting reveals that the law, House Bill 1842, was mostly based on the low academic performance of just one school, which had started to improve just before the announcement of the takeover. Walsh questions whether the low performance in Houston schools might be due to a lack of resources and the rigid system Texas uses to assess its schools.

Another state law the episode considers—passed in 2017—was an attempt to incentivize school districts to partner with charter school management groups to operate their lowest-performing schools. This law kept the HISD and other districts with low-performing schools under constant pressure of being privatized. Walsh explains that Houston’s reform movement is based on strict accountability measures of schools, which were exported to the entire nation later on.

Episode two, “The Law” states:“This is a story about conflicting philosophies—deep-seated disagreements over the possibilities, potentials, and purpose of public education in a deeply unequal society.”
—Dominic Walsh

Episode three, “The Texas Miracle,” goes back to the 1990s to explore the origin of top-down education reform in Texas under then-Governor George W. Bush and the so-called Texas miracle that became the inspiration for the No Child Left Behind Act, enacted in 2002 by then-President George W Bush. These policies were furthered under the Barack Obama presidential administration, and, in Houston, under the leadership of former superintendent Terry Grier from 2009 to 2016. He was rewarded with school improvement grant money by Obama, which he used to force changes in some of the very same schools Miles is focused on today.

However, Walsh speaks with education researcher Julian Vasquez Heilig, who was an employee of HISD’s Office of Research and Accountability from 1999-2001. He explains that the acclaimed progress resulting from the Texas miracle was a “mirage.” In another interview, education historian Jack Schneider says that the positive results, of what he calls the “bipartisan, neoliberal” policy of NCLB and similar laws, have never really been achieved.

Nevertheless, Walsh explains that the reform agenda spawned a host of reforms, to which Miles is devoted. In fact, as Walsh reports, the charter school network that Miles created and led, called the Third Future Schools, uses an education approach almost identical to what Miles is trying to implement for Houston’s public schools system. Walsh notes that Third Future Schools struggled to meet all the progress measures in another Texas school district when the company was contracted to transform a school. Walsh concludes, “If Miles can pull this off in Houston, it will be a first.”

Episode three, “The Texas Miracle” states:

“In the eyes of some researchers, if we have learned anything from the past two decades of education policy, it’s that this type of top-down, test-based school reform does not work, largely because of what it misses. But others think Mike Miles may have finally cracked the code.”

—Dominic Walsh 

The Takeover’s final episode, “Reconciliation,” largely focuses on the behind-the-scenes players that will determine the fate of Houston schools. These include the state-appointed board that Miles answers to—it mostly functions as a rubber stamp for Miles’s reform agenda, according to critics—the Texas Education Agency that initiated the takeover, and Texas state lawmakers, including the legislature and Governor Gregg Abbott, who determine state education policy. In reporting on each of these entities, Walsh finds various “contradictions” that are hard to reconcile.

Walsh interviews Audrey Momanaee about the takeover board and questions how the effort can align with the “visions and values of community,” as she claims while delivering  “results,” like higher test scores and a narrowed curriculum, which don’t seem to be in line with the values of the local community. Walsh returns to this same contradiction in his interview with Morath in which Walsh notices how Morath’s emphasis on raising test scores clashes with his goal to raise “educated citizens.” Texas state lawmakers present an even starker contradiction, Walsh notes, as they pass laws that hold public schools to increasingly harsher accountability measures while attempting to pass a new voucher system that would redirect more education funding to private schools, which have no public accountability at all.

In the face of these contradictions, Walsh accuses leaders of the Houston takeover of “kind of operating as if they have blinders on” as they choose to ignore what education should be, instead, going for scripted curriculum, command and control managerial practices, and ever higher test scores. Walsh notes that Miles seems to waver from his agenda only when wealthier parents and representatives of the business community voice their dissatisfaction.

Episode four, “Reconciliation” states:

“How the state measures success, how it decides when to intervene, and when this takeover will end, is actually up in the air. In fact, the whole public education system in Texas is in flux.”

—Dominic Walsh

Why HPM decided to kill “The Takeover” before it had a chance to air is not immediately clear based on the content of the podcast.

According to a September 2024 article in the Texas Monthly, which called the decision to kill the podcast “head-scratching,” executives at the news organization pulled “The Takeover” the day before it was scheduled to debut when they learned that Walsh’s “long-term romantic relationship with an HISD teacher” presented, what they believed, was a “conflict of interest.” Through a series of public records requests, Texas Monthly reporters Michael Hardy and Forrest Wilder obtained copies of the podcast episodes and internal communications related to its cancellation.

In their investigation, Hardy and Wilder found “no evidence that HPM canceled the podcast because of external pressure, as some community members have speculated. No inaccuracies in Walsh’s reporting are identified in the internal communications we reviewed, and HPM executives did not respond to a question about whether they had identified any.”

Hardy and Wilder also note that “What constitutes a conflict of interest is a disputed subject among journalists.” They have interviewed experts on ethics in journalism who question HPM executives’ decision to cancel the podcast.

HPM still archives Walsh’s education reporting on its website, with no disclaimer. Walsh, however, no longer covers education and seems to be reporting on other beats for HPM.

But it’s hard not to sense the irony as Walsh signs off his reporting in “The Takeover” saying, “Whatever happens we will be here. Stay tuned.”

Trump is continuing to ignore the fact that some appointees serve for a set term, to insulate them from politics. Trump does not want his appointees to be insulated from his control. The current IRS commissioner’s term expires in 2027 but Trump announced his replacement today.

The same thing happened with the FBI. The incumbent, Christopher Wray, was appointed by Trump in 2017 to replace James Comey, who was fired by Trump. Wray is supposed to serve ten years but Trump has announced his choice, which suggests that he intends to fire Wray.

Trump’s choice for IRS Commissioner is Billy Long, a former Congressman from Missouri who never served on the tax-writing committee.

The New York Times reported:

President-elect Donald J. Trump said on Wednesday that he would nominate Billy Long, formerly a Republican congressman representing Missouri, to lead the Internal Revenue Service, effectively pledging to fire the tax collector’s current leader, a Biden appointee.

Mr. Trump’s choice, announced on his social media website, would shake up the I.R.S. at a pivotal moment. The Biden administration has poured billions of dollars into modernizing the agency and beefing up its tax collection efforts in an effort to improve customer service and crack down on tax cheats.

In 2022, President Biden chose Daniel Werfel, a former management consultant and civil servant who had worked in both Democratic and Republican administrations, to lead the overhaul of the I.R.S. His term was set to last until 2027.

Republicans have deeply opposed the Biden administration’s vision for the tax agency, which included providing roughly $80 billion in supplemental funding to the I.R.S. over a decade. G.O.P. lawmakers successfully pushed to cancel $20 billion of that money, and are eyeing further cuts. The I.R.S. is unpopular with the public, and Republicans have long attacked it as invasive and inept.

Additional funding for the I.R.S. helps raise the money for the government by more effectively enforcing tax laws and requiring Americans to pay the taxes they owe, according to budget experts.

Mr. Long, a former auctioneer, did not serve on the House tax-writing committee during his time in Congress. But he did put his auctioneering skills to use while in Washington….

Presidents do not typically select new I.R.S. commissioners when they come into office, and the Senate will have to confirm Mr. Long. President Biden waited for the term of Mr. Trump’s first choice to lead the tax agency, Charles P. Rettig, to end before selecting Mr. Werfel.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is a nonconformist. Also an oddball and a crackpot. He has fought against vaccines for years. Donald Trump chose him to oversee the federal department of Health and Human Services. There he will have the power to stop research on vaccines, to ban vaccines–to use his power to kills hundreds of thousands of people, mainly children and the elderly.

He was a heroin addict for many years. Watch the video from a few months ago where he explained how heroin improved his academic performance.

The Senate should not put this man in charge of the nation’s health.