Betsy DeVos, the wealthy Republican donor and proponent of school choice, has been a polarizing figure since her nomination as Secretary of Education. With no prior experience in teaching or public schools, her connections run deep, including a brother who founded the contentious private security firm Blackwater. During her confirmation hearings, DeVos became a target for criticism due to her inadequate responses and a bizarre suggestion that firearms might protect schoolchildren from grizzly bears.
Her views on education reform have raised eyebrows; she has referred to these efforts as “a way to advance God’s kingdom” and likened the choice of schools to selecting between ride-sharing apps like Uber and Lyft. DeVos’s characterization of historically black colleges and universities as “real pioneers” of school choice is troubling, considering their inception during a time when students of color were barred from white institutions. Yet, these statements have largely been theoretical, leaving many to wonder about her actual plans as education secretary.
Recent policy actions, however, provide more clarity on DeVos’s approach to education, and the outlook is concerning.
One of her first moves has made it more challenging for Americans to manage their student loan debt. DeVos has initiated measures that roll back protections for borrowers implemented during the Obama administration. These included safeguards against predatory student loan companies and a previous initiative that aimed to simplify the repayment process. DeVos has discarded plans for a centralized repayment system, leaving borrowers to navigate a complicated and fragmented landscape.
Additionally, her proposed budget cuts to education are significant, amounting to a 13% reduction, roughly $9 billion. Among the most affected programs are summer and after-school initiatives for at-risk youth, including the 21st Century Community Learning Centers that support 1.6 million children nationwide. Programs aimed at promoting diversity and assisting first-generation college students are also on the chopping block, while $1.4 billion will be redirected toward voucher and school choice initiatives. Critics, including former education secretary under Obama, have labeled these cuts an “assault on the American Dream,” disproportionately impacting low-income families and children of color.
DeVos’s unusual security arrangement, receiving taxpayer-funded protection from U.S. marshals at a cost of about $1 million per month, also raises eyebrows; this level of protection has not been seen for a Secretary of Education since 2009.
Concerning civil rights, DeVos has appointed Candice Jackson as the acting head of the Office of Civil Rights, a division responsible for investigating discrimination claims. Jackson is known for her controversial views against affirmative action and feminism. Her stance raises alarms about the administration’s commitment to upholding civil rights, particularly regarding Title IX and the handling of sexual assault cases on college campuses. Former Vice President Joe Biden expressed significant concern over the potential dilution of Title IX enforcement, emphasizing its crucial role in protecting students.
In the midst of the tumultuous environment surrounding the Trump administration, it can be easy to overlook the significant changes Betsy DeVos is implementing in our educational system. Her vision for the future of schools and universities appears to prioritize privatization and market-based solutions over the welfare of vulnerable populations.
For those seeking more information on home insemination and related topics, check out this helpful resource on infertility resources and consider visiting Make A Mom for expert insights. You can also read more about the process of insemination in our article here.
Summary
Betsy DeVos has stirred controversy since her appointment as Secretary of Education, rolling back borrower protections, proposing significant budget cuts to education programs, and appointing individuals whose views may undermine civil rights. Her actions signal a shift towards privatization in education that could adversely affect low-income and minority students.