By JAMES K. FITZPATRICK
It was almost 50 years ago, but I can still remember how exasperated an editor of one of my books became when I argued that Richard Nixon must be doing something right because of the left-wingers in the media and the academy who were aligned against him. My editor insisted that American conservatives who made that case were too willing to overlook Nixon’s failings, setting back the conservative cause in the process.
It was a sound argument. But I felt then, and continue to feel the same way today, that the nature of a person’s enemies is not irrelevant. That thought came to mind as I listened to the teacher union leaders fulminating against Donald Trump’s selection of Betsy DeVos as the new secretary of education. The National Education Association issued a press release contending that DeVos supports “failed schemes, like vouchers” and a “corporate agenda to privatize, de-professionalize, and impose cookie-cutter solutions to public education.”
The American Federation Teachers joined in the attack. It argued that Trump’s appointment of DeVos illustrates his focus on “privatizing, defunding, and destroying public education in America.” AFT’s president Randi Weingarten tweeted: “Trump has chosen the most ideological, anti-public ed nominee since the creation of the Department of Education.”
Wall Street Journal writer Jason L. Riley also argues there is something to be said about DeVos on the basis of these attacks. He wrote, “Since what’s good for the unions is often bad for the schools, and vice-versa, Ms. Weingarten’s apoplexy is reason to cheer. Ms. DeVos is chairwoman of the American Federation for Children, an organization dedicated to helping parents choose the best school for their kids. Ms. Weingarten leads the American Federation of Teachers, which is focused on what’s best for the adults.”
Star Parker, president of the Center for Urban Renewal and Education, agrees. On her website urbancure.org, she wrote that DeVos’ advocacy for charter schools reflects the views of large numbers of American parents:
“According to the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, more than a million children are on waiting lists to be accepted in charter schools. Betsy DeVos’ special interest is advancing freedom by bringing education opportunities to poor children. The union’s special interest is keeping a stranglehold on public schools and looking out for their members and their left-wing agenda.” Randi Weingarten’s salary “stands at $543,150.”
Riley notes that the charge DeVos is an “enemy of public schools” does not hold water. He cited a 2013 interview in which DeVos made clear her definition of educational choice includes schools of all kinds, including a healthy public school system.
In DeVos’ words, “What we are trying to do is tear down the mindset that assigns students to a school based solely on the zip code of their family’s home. We think of the educational choice movement as involving many parts: vouchers and tax credits, certainly, but also virtual schools, magnet schools, home-schooling, and charter schools.”
In the early 1990s, Mrs. DeVos and her husband, a former president of Amway, were involved in passing Michigan’s first charter-school bill. DeVos’ goal is not to eliminate public schools; it is to provide parents with an option to choose those schools, a dose of healthy competition.
Bill McGurn, another Wall Street Journal writer, described the choice we face in educational policy as a debate over “a different set of priorities.” On the one hand we have DeVos and her commitment to education choice. On the other, union leaders such as Randi Weingarten who has “fought to keep persistently failing schools open because they still provide jobs for her dues-paying members. Her top concern is better pay and working conditions for her members. Students don’t pay union dues. That doesn’t make her a bad person, but it should cast doubt on claims, too often swallowed whole by education reporters, that union interests are perfectly aligned with those of students and families.”
Michael Petrilli, a veteran of George W. Bush’s Education Department and who now runs the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, also backs the choice of DeVos. He wrote recently, “DeVos’ pick shows Mr. Trump’s seriousness. She was one of the first people in ed-reform to understand that we weren’t going to beat the teachers unions with op-eds and policy papers. She pushed the private school choice movement to invest in serious political giving much earlier than the mainstream reform groups did, and, so far, with far greater success.”
McGurn closes his column by pointing out, “Mr. Trump clearly has tapped a fighter, and education reformers are thrilled.”
We should not think that the liberal educationists will go down without a fight, however. They have a lot to lose in this debate. There have already been snarky comments about DeVos’ wealth and caricatures of her as a woman who “does not care about poor children.” It won’t be long before she is portrayed on the liberal talk shows and in editorial columns as someone resembling a steely-eyed matron in a Dickens’ novel doling out porridge in a London workhouse.
The first test cases for Trump and DeVos, wrote McGurn, will be the long list of “reforms” put in place by the Obama administration: the attack on the school voucher program in Washington, D.C., the imposition of Common Core curriculum standards, bathrooms for transgender students, and race-based school discipline policies. It is a challenging agenda, but one that has a fighting chance of success.
Wrote McGurn: “Mrs. DeVos embraces school choice writ large, and states interested in expanding educational options for low-income families will proceed knowing that Washington has their back.”
McGurn offers some words of warning to the incoming Trump administration: “Mr. Trump has proposed a $20 billion federal voucher program that students could use to attend public or private schools. But this idea presents hazards. Federal dollars will bring federal regulations, and reform-minded individuals like Betsy DeVos won’t forever be in charge of implementing them. Better to let the states lead on school choice. Now that Republicans control 33 governorships and both legislative chambers in 32 states, what’s stopping them?”
+ + +
Readers are invited to submit comments and questions about this and other educational issues. The e-mail address for First Teachers is fitzpatrijames@sbcglobal.net, and the mailing address is P.O. Box 15, Wallingford, CT 06492.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress