• About
  • The Poetry of Protest

Show Me Progress

~ covering government and politics in Missouri – since 2007

Show Me Progress

Tag Archives: Betsy DeVos

Can’t anyone keep Eric Greitens from trashing public education in Missouri?

23 Thursday Nov 2017

Posted by willykay in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Betsy DeVos, Board of Education, charter schools, Educational policy, Eric Greitens., K-12 Edcation, Margie Vandeven, missouri, Public Education, school funding

Governor Eric Greitens failed this week in his latest attempt to sell out Missouri education – the State Board of Education voted 4-4 not to fire the highly regarded Commissioner of Education, Margie Vandeven. This is remarkable because Greitens hasn’t even tried to hide the fact that he has attempted to pack the board with puppets who will do his political bidding and clear the deck, allowing him to bring a charter and school privatization advocate in from out of state to lead Missouri schools.

Of course this most recent failure does not mean that Vandeven and Missouri’s public School system are home safe. What it has done, though, has allowed us to witness a nasty little temper tantrum from the boy Governor – who seems to take his behavioral cues from our emotionally unstable and truth-challenged President. Not only was the public statement he issued after the vote an exercise in puerile ranting, but he also got lots of his facts wrong, or at the very least, twisted.

Greitens’ diatribe seemed to have two foci: (1) He praises himself, asserting that he’s responsible for putting “more money into schools than ever before in Missouri history.” (Who does that sound like?  Hint, starts with “T.”) (2) He accuses selfish and greedy administrators of grabbing all those extra goodies for themselves. Needless to say, this mix of self-glorification and spite needs to be taken with a grain of salt – make that a great big grain. Make that several great big grains.

Greitens is probably correct that Missouri spends about the national average on our schools. Education Week’s annual 2016 Quality Counts report ranks Missouri 31st in measures of K-12 financing.  Although Greitens toured the state last spring asserting that his budget would increase K-12 spending by 4.1%, Politifact Missouri dug into the facts and put Greitens’ proposed increase at 0. 613%. Some difference, right? It’s not likely that Greitens’ K-12 spending has moved the state too far from its slightly less than mediocre position. Are you satisfied with mediocrity? Evidently Greitens is. Better yet, do you trust a politician who exaggerates and misleads about things like education funding?

As for Greitens’ claim that he and his fellow Republicans have funded K-12 education fully “for the first time in years,” wise folks will keep in mind that that feat was accomplished by changing the funding formula downwards to fit the funds rather than fitting the funds to the established formula. Kinda bass ackwards, as the old guys say.

Nor should we forget that increasing K-12 education at a time when revenues are not adequate to fund state obligations entails not funding other programs. Greitens and his GOP pals threw elementary schools a pittance while decimating higher education. Our colleges and universities still count as “education” last I heard – and as a resource do as much and likely more to foster economic growth in the state than the tax cuts for businesses that Greitens champions.

Finally, I don’t think that there’s much evidence that greedy administrators are really the problem with the resource-starved Missouri schools. A report formulated using data through 2014 showed Missouri spending per K-12 student to be $9,418. Out of that sum only $1024 financed school and general administration – the lion’s share went to instruction and instructional support. The per student expenditure has increased in 2016 to $10,689 , but I can find no evidence that school administrators – folks with major responsibility for making schools function well in hard times – have been wallowing in the trough of Greitens’ financial largess. Top administrative salaries, such as that received by Vandeven – a nationally recognized educator – seem to be in line with those in similar positions nationally.

Nor is it clear, as Greitens claims, that no teachers have or will receive raises – teachers salaries are negotiated within various school districts and owe as much to property taxes as to putative state windfalls. I’m sure I’ve read reports of districts where teachers will receive raises next year. Overall, teacher salaries have bumped up 3.9% over the last decade – inadequate, but better than nothing.

If this represents the reasoning Greitens is using to justify privatizing and, at the very least, deregulating (i.e. deunionizing) public education via “school choice ” and charters, we should be very worried. Charters have not shown themselves to be the cure-all their advocates claim. But wanna know what does work? Adequate resources targeted where needed. And that means resources that can be utilized to provide social support – stressed out kids living in abject poverty do not perform well in school without environmental intervention.

So what does this mean for Greitens? If he’s really interested in improving education he should stop playing politics with the board, forget about more rich-folks tax cuts, stop exaggerating grand funding gestures that don’t amount to much, and make sure we really and truly fund education to the extent needed. That indeed might be an historical first in the state, at least when viewed over the past few decades. But don’t hold your breath.

In education, as in other policy matters involving Republicans nowadays, we need to follow the money trail. Greitens has taken scads of campaign funds from Betsy DeVos – the least qualified Education Secretary probably ever – and other school-choice advocates, so we can probably forget about honest efforts to reform education and resign ourselves to three years of politicized DeVos style education reform. Greitens clearly takes his orders from his bosses. Unless the courts step in and save us from his high-handed efforts to impose political control over the Board of Education, we just have to hope that we can undo the harm these folks will do if given free rein.

Roy Blunt’s (tele) town-hall: What he said and what he didn’t say

25 Thursday May 2017

Posted by willykay in Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

AHCA, Betsy DeVos, College loan programs, Obamacae, Pre-existing conditions, Roy Blunt, Russia, Tele-Town hall, town halls, Trumpcare, VA Choice Program, Veterans Administration

Missouri GOP Senator Roy Blunt entertained about 5000 constituents today (5/23) at one of the tele-town hall events that have become de rigeur for GOPers who want to avoid the messy give-and-take with outraged constituents that unpopular Republican policies can generate. When asked why he hadn’t met with some of us in person during last week’s congressional recess, Blunt huffed and puffed and observed that he had held some 2000 town halls during his last term – more than just about anyone else, he said. Of course, that was in the BT (Before Trump) Era and back in the days when, thanks to a Democratic majority in the Senate and President Obama’s veto pen, the GOP never had to face the  worst consequences of their horrible policies.

My impression of the format? It worked. Blunt and his staff had total control; no matter what he said, there was no opportunity for pushback, no inconvenient follow-up questions. We often got to see hear him practice the fine art of political evasion. He did, to be honest, let us know where he stands on lots of issues – although, thanks to the controlled format, he was also able to leave lots unsaid. The highlights, as well as I can reconstruct them from my notes, including what was not said, follow below:

Trump Budget Proposal:

Biggest takeaway? Blunt really seems to want to distance himself from the Trump budget. When asked about specific cuts – in health care, jobs training programs and support for the new NGA headquarters slated for St. Louis – the latter two of which he promised to support vigorously – he noted that the budget was advisory only, and reminisced about the way GOPers had ignored Obama’s proposed budget. The implication was clear that they would do the same to Trump’s financial fiasco.

Veterans Administration:

Blunt did, without specifically pointing it out, endorse some key elements of the Trump Budget spending. He observed, for example, that he wanted to make it possible for veterans to get their treatment from private doctors by expanding the same “choice” option for which the Trump budget increases spending.

Left unsaid: Choice programs haven’t been an unequivocal success, partly because of hasty implementation, but also in terms of expense. They are opposed by some veterans groups that would prefer to see the funds used to bolster the VA hospital system instead.

Trumpcare: pre-existing conditions

When Blunt was asked about Trumpcare’s callous destruction of existing protections for pre-existing conditions, he first trotted out a somewhat garbled verson of the standard, but misleading GOP talking point about providing “access” to health care rather than insurance. He then, laudably, expressed sympathy for those who suffer from chronic illness. When, however, he said, and I paraphrase, that when one is healthy, one may have many problems, but when one is ill, there is only one problem and one focuses only on that illness, I got the impression that he wanted to suggest that pre-existing condition talk was somewhat beside the point. He then quickly shifted the emphasis to his past support for increased funds for medical research.

Left Unsaid: Blunt didn’t address how the six million chronically ill folks who may, under Trumpcare, be unable to afford insurance will get “access” to those new treatments that increased research funding may discover.

Obamacare

As part of what struck me as an implicit and awkward apology for Trumpcare, Blunt resorted to the GOP all-time go-to: Obamacare is failing. This is an attempt to deflect attention from Trumpcare that works only because it has become an article of faith for the GOP true believers, facts be damned. Insurers, Blunt claimed, are pulling out of the market, leaving a shambles where soon nobody will be able to get coverage.

Left Unsaid: Blunt did not point out that by refusing to either continue or deny CSRs (cost-sharing reductions), subsidies paid to insurers to help cover low-income individuals, President Trump is creating uncertainty that is causing insurers to consider leaving the Obamacare market and pushing them to steeply raise premiums . Insurer groups even wrote a letter to Trump imploring him to do something about the situation.

Trumpcare in the Senate

In response to a question about why Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell had said that he would not work with Democrats in fashioning the Senate Healthcare proposal, Blunt, after patting himself on the back for all his bipartisan initiatives, rather reasonably replied that Democrats weren’t willing to work with McConnell – which why would they? Obamacare is still superior to anything Republicans have proposed, after all.

Left Unsaid: Why is the Senate, all male, all Republican, working group so secretive about what they are planning – and why does it consist of some of the most rightwing, anti-Obamacare Senate members? Why aren’t Senators like Susan Collins (ME-R), who has proposed her own version of a replacement bill, included in the working group?

Student Debt

Blunt ignored the new Trump budget proposal as if it were really as irrelevant as he earlier indicated and boasted instead about current Pell grant funding increases and legislation that allowed students to use them year around. He said some nice words about how the federal government recognizes the desirability of creating a skilled citizenry, but, in so many words, said if you can’t pay back those huge educational loans, too bad, baby, you’re on your own.

Left Unsaid: What does he think of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos’ proposals to cut student loan funding, cut current debt forgiveness programs, cease government subsidies to pay student loan interest charges, and help students who fall behind in repayment?

Trump Russiagate scandal

Blunt is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee and he was emphatic that Russian interference in U.S. elections needs to be investigated and all questions must be answered as a matter of national security. He stated, not surprisingly, that the best place for that to happen was the Intelligence Committee.

Left Unsaid: No mention was made of possible Trump campaign collusion with the Russians. Nor was any mention was made of the recently named Special Prosecutor, Robert Mueller, whose investigation, as far as Blunt’s presentation went, might not even exist.

Afternote

A gentleman asked about the “leakers” who so trouble Donald Trump. He observed that he could write a program himself and catch the miscreants, so why couldn’t the big-time government folks catch them and put them in jail where they belong? Blunt agreed that unsanctioned leaking was bad and might compromise security in some instances. To his credit, Blunt, unlike many of his GOP colleagues, did not minimize the RussiaGate scandal by suggesting that the real evil-doers were the whistleblowers.

Left unsaid: Blunt did not offer the questioner a job writing that program to catch the leakers. Wonder why.

*Typos corrected and format edited slightly (12.56 pm, 5/25/2017)

That’s two

07 Tuesday Feb 2017

Posted by Michael Bersin in US Senate

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Betsy DeVos, Claire McCaskill, Donald Trump, missouri, Roy Blunt, Secretary of Education, U.S. Senate, vote

One of the worst Trump nominees in a field of abysmal nominees.

Senator Claire McCaskill (D) [2016 file photo].

Senator Claire McCaskill (D) [2016 file photo].

Today in the United State Senate:

[….]
Vote Summary
Question: On the Nomination (Confirmation: Elisabeth Prince DeVos, of Michigan, to be Secretary of Education )
Vote Number: 54
Vote Date: February 7, 2017, 12:02 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2
Vote Result: Nomination Confirmed
Nomination Number: PN37
Nomination Description: Elisabeth Prince DeVos, of Michigan, to be Secretary of Education
Vote Counts:
YEAs 50
NAYs 50
Vice President Voted Yea
[….]
Missouri:
Blunt (R-MO), Yea
McCaskill (D-MO), Nay

[….]

[emphasis added]

From Senator Claire McCaskill (D):

Senator Claire McCaskill
Betsy DeVos is the wrong choice for Missouri, and anyone who voted for her today gave our rural communities the back of their hand.
Claire stood up for small towns across Missouri today by voting NO on Ms. DeVos, and she’s going to fight tooth and nail to protect Missouri’s schools…
[….]

Well, actually, those who voted to confirm Betsy DeVos today voted to give all of our public school students, all of our public schools, and all of our communities, wherever they’re located, the back of their hand.

Previously:

That’s one (February 1, 2017)

Roy Blunt and GOP sugar mama Betsy DeVos

03 Friday Feb 2017

Posted by willykay in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Betsy DeVos, corruption, Department of Education, education, Eli Broad, republicans, Roy Blunt

Orange Buffoon’s nominee to Head the Education Department is so unqualified that at least two normally compliant GOP Senators can’t bring themselves to hold their noses long enough to vote for her. Here’s how unqualified she is: DeVos has been supportive of shifting public financial support to charter schools. Yet a major supporter of charter schools, philanthropist Eli Broad,  thinks she is so unqualified that he has written to U.S. Senators imploring them to deep-six the nomination.

DeVos will probably make it through the process and end up running the Untied States’ educational system as long as no more than two Republicans defer to a preference for the public good. Why? The lady’s rich. Really rich. And she’s showered many of the very Republican senators who will be voting for her with lots of rich folks special type of pocket-book love. That means very large direct donations as well as big PAC spending.

One of those Senators is Missouri’s Republican Senator Roy Blunt. DeVos has assisted Blunt’s electoral efforts with $33,100. It’s a foregone conclusion that our Roy will vote “yea” when DeVos faces the final confirmation vote. To be fair, Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) got more dosh than Blunt, $43,000, to be exact, and she has elected to follow her conscience and oppose DeVos’ appointment. But she’s the exception that proves the rule.

There’s more going on, of course. There may be some Republicans who are just as ignorant as DeVos and/or are so ideologically blinkered that they think she’s just fine. Our Roy, of course, seems to want to climb the leadership ladder in the Senate, so we can count on him to toe the line even when we suspect he’s smart enough to know it’ll lead to disaster. To judge by his past deportment, Roy’s rule has always been what’s good for donors is good for him, what’s good for him is what he went to Washington for and devil take the hindmost. Missourians are, of course, the hindmost.

Nevertheless, there’s a big question raised by DeVos’ candidacy and the almost lockstep Republican support for a manifestly unqualified, but rich and generous – to Republicans – nominee. Shouldn’t the senators who have benefited most significantly from her largesse recuse themselves from voting on her nomination? Who’s to say if it’s just an “appearance” of corruption or the substance – does any fool really think we can trust the beneficiaries of that appearance of corruption to tell us the truth? Nevertheless, we’re expected to take their assurances of their own probity at face value and shut up about the impropriety of their actions.

DeVos herself has been pretty unequivocal about the fact that she expects her greenback “free speech” to do some big talking, observing in 1997, when asked what she expected to receive from politicians who accepted her money, that ” we expect a return on our investment.” Looks like she’s going to get it. Big time.

Selling government? It’s pretty clear that this is just the beginning. We’ve entered the age of Trump, folks. Americans – or a particular minority of Americans, at any rate, wanted to shake things up. Who’d have guessed that what would get shattered in the process would be the ethical norms we’ve observed or tried to observe for generations?

Running government like an unfettered, unregulated business turns out to be a pretty ugly, cutthroat phenomena and the only folks who make out well are those with power and those with money enough to buy  power. For politicians like Roy Blunt the next few years should rival his heyday when he rode high with Tom DeLay.

Recent Posts

  • Uh, in case you were wondering, land doesn’t vote
  • Show us on your diploma where the professors hurt you…
  • Stormy Weather
  • Read the country, Mark (r)
  • Winning at losing…again

Recent Comments

Winning at losing… on Passing the gas – Donald…
TACO Tuesday | Show… on TACO or Mushrooms?
TACO Tuesday | Show… on So much winning
So much winning | Sh… on Passing the gas – Donald…
What good is the 25t… on We are the only people on the…

Archives

  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
  • January 2026
  • December 2025
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007

Categories

  • campaign finance
  • Claire McCaskill
  • Congress
  • Democratic Party News
  • Eric Schmitt
  • Healthcare
  • Hillary Clinton
  • Interview
  • Jason Smith
  • Josh Hawley
  • Mark Alford
  • media criticism
  • meta
  • Missouri General Assembly
  • Missouri Governor
  • Missouri House
  • Missouri Senate
  • Resist
  • Roy Blunt
  • social media
  • Standing Rock
  • Town Hall
  • Uncategorized
  • US Senate

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Blogroll

  • Balloon Juice
  • Crooks and Liars
  • Digby
  • I Spy With My Little Eye
  • Lawyers, Guns, and Money
  • No More Mister Nice Blog
  • The Great Orange Satan
  • Washington Monthly
  • Yael Abouhalkah

Donate to Show Me Progress via PayPal

Your modest support helps keep the lights on. Click on the button:

Blog Stats

  • 1,040,114 hits

Powered by WordPress.com.

 

Loading Comments...