Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has a storied history of saying things that fundamentally suck.
Prodded in January about why her name appeared on documents tying her to thirteen years of antigay discrimination, she shrugged it off as a “clerical error.”
During her confirmation hearing, she couldn’t altogether confirm that she was against guns in schools, druggily saying that “I would imagine that there is probably a gun in the schools to protect from potential grizzlies.”
Her reign of stupidity continued on Wednesday, with DeVos opining that states should be allowed to decide whether their schools can discriminate against LGBTQ students — even if those schools were given federal money.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
As Huffington Post reports, the palpably prickly convo between Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) and DeVos occurred during a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing.
Clark brings up Lighthouse Christian Academy, an Indiana private school that receives state voucher money but nevertheless doesn’t admit students from families that have “homosexual or bisexual activity” or people “practicing alternate gender identity.”
Related: ‘Clerical error’ to blame for Betsy DeVos’ 13 years of antigay donations — really?
DeVos’s budget requests a $250 million increase for projects that include private school vouchers, which led Clark to ask if she’d step in if a school like Lighthouse Christian Academy applied for that funding.
Her response? She believes in giving flexibility to states:
“For states who have programs that allow for parents to make choices, they set up the rules around that.”
Looking mystified, Clark pressed DeVos further, asking if she saw any situation in which she’d overrule a school asking for federal voucher money.
What if they discriminated against students based on race? Special needs? Sexual orientation?
Related: Bear foe Betsy Devos gets memed and mocked as she’s handed the keys to our children’s futures
DeVos responded:
“The Office of Civil Rights and our Title IX protections are broadly applicable across the board. But when it comes to parents making choices on behalf of their students….”
“This isn’t about parents making choices,” said Clark, interrupting her. “This is about use of federal dollars. You would put the state flexibility over our students.”
DeVos: “I think a hypothetical?”
Clark: “It’s not a hypothetical. It’s a real school.”
Eventually, the chairman intervened, allowing DeVos to answer the question:
“The bottom line is we believe that parents are the best equipped to make choices for their children’s schooling and education decisions. States and local communities are best equipped to make these decisions and framework.”
Clark offered one last jibe: “I am shocked that you cannot come up with one example of discrimination that you would stand up for students.”
Watch:
1EqualityUSA
Trump couldn’t manage his way out of a paper bag. What a loon he chose.
mhoffman953
I see nothing wrong with that answer. For instance, should we end federal funding for all black schools because they don’t allow white students? Should we end federal funding for all girl schools because they don’t allow male students? This is no different
Goforit
That is exactly what we are saying. I happen to belong to all 3 of you examples. I am a gay white male. I should not be forced to pay federal tax dollars to support any school or any other establishment that choses to discriminate against me. Does the phrase “no taxation without representation” sound familiar? Would you also support federal money going to fund Islamic madrasas? If you choose to send you children to an all black, all girl or religious school, be my guest. But don’t require me to pay for it.
ChrisK
I swear to god if she agreed with gays being put to death you’d be here defending that as well. You’
re the kellyanne conway of BS.
Brian
Can you name a few black schools that ban whites?
mhoffman953
@Goforit & @ChrisK
I never said I agreed with her answer. I merely pointed out the hypocrisy of the woman asking her the loaded questions. I guarantee that the woman asking the questions would be OK with defunding an all Christian school but would not be OK with defunding an all black or all girl school. That is hypocritical. If your argument is that schools who base entry upon sexual orientation should not get funding then it should also extend to schools who based entry upon race or gender. Imagine if a school popped up that only allowed entry for all white students or all male students, the left would flip out.
I never stated my personal opinion regarding the question, even though ChrisK seems to think I agree with what was said. I agree that you can’t pick and choose which you will defund, it should be all or neither. My personal opinion is that neither should be funded with tax dollars – meaning any school that has restrictions of entry based upon factors that we cannot change about a person such as race, gender, or sexual orientation should not get tax dollars. Yet, I can see the argument to say that all schools should get funding and understand that point of view as well.
DCguy
And once again the Trump Troll, one of Mo Bros other screenames does what he always does.
Defends any GOP member anytime they show they’re an anti-lgbt bigot.
ivanw222
“All black colleges” do accept white students. The schools were started as all black, but that is no longer true, however by enrollment they remain a higher percentage black. They have a very good track record with diversity, as opposed to “Christian colleges”.
SumSay
Sounds like someone needs a history lesson. Historical black colleges and universities have NEVER been in the business of discriminating against applicants because of their race. Do you even know why they exist to begin with? I’ll give you a hint. It has to do with slavery. Can’t say the same about American schools that have been around since the beginning of the country now, can we? Just because the majority isn’t participating, that doesn’t mean they’re excluded by default. Single sex education is an OPTION, not a right, and schools have to offer the same accommodations and objectives as the opposite gender if they want public funding. So yeah, no relation to what she’s saying at all.
rbernard
Betsy DeVos is not good person.
She is not dumb or dense, she was merely deflecting and is very religiously bigoted and anti-LGBTQ .
Her family and her brother, Erik Prince represents the 2 largest contributors to the Family Research Council (FRC), a SPLC designated hate group run by the nefarious Tony Perkins.
The FRC works with legislators to make government policy that marginalizes and discriminates against the LGBTQ.
The FRC has enormous influence over the republican party and it shows.
It is a catastrophe she was confirmed as the United States Secretary of Education and makes the case why Donald Trump is dangerous to a pluralistic democracy.
tommy4429
Ugh! Betsy DeVos is a bigot, a fraud and a liar. She is not an appropriate choice for education secretary. She does not know what she is doing and will cause more harm than good. Christian schools should not receive any federal money that should be a violation of the first amendment.
greybat
More particullarly, Public Money should not be diverted to Private Schools.
Sethjw75
Surely someone has a spare chimney they could drop on her.
TomChicago
Contrary to what DeVos stated, many parents are just not better qualified to make skillful decisions for the education of their children. q.e.d.
Billysees
” …many parents are just not better qualified to make skillful decisions for the education of their children. ”
Of course. I would say ‘the vast majority of parents’.
Holloway
And a bureaucrat in the government somehow *is*?
trelin
We all knew after the election that this was not going to be an easy four years of LGBT individuals. This woman is just a minion of that sentiment. She’s rich, violently-religious, egotistical, and sharply narrow-minded. The rights love her because of this “school choice” she’s fighting for. As a public school teacher, it’s frightening to believe that if she gets her way, parents can suck the money right out of their town’s Board of Education to pay for private and parochial schools for their children.
Unfortunately, we are at a time where parents basically run public schools, anyway. They get their way as soon as they threaten a lawsuit. It’s sick and dangerous how much the mindset went from “respect your teachers” to “I’m the parent, I pay your salary, I want my way, you’re wrong”.
I do believe we have enough smart individuals to put up a bloody good fight to this woman and her fire-breath. Or, we’ll just pie her right in the face…and make sure it’s a fruit pie.
neom1
She is a horribly bigoted ‘woman’ and an outright fraud, who knows nothing about the position she is in.
KaiserVonScheiss
If private schools are to receive public funds, then those schools should have to follow guidelines. I don’t know what the guidelines are in relation to LGBT students, if there are any.
I’m not a fan of giving money to religious schools, but I’m not opposed to school vouchers per se. I would like to see more competition between public schools themselves. Attaching funding to the child would be one way to do that. In other words, if parents don’t send their kids to that school, it loses funding. This forces schools to be better or simply lose funding.
However, this is something best done at the state level, not the federal level. It would be constitutionally dubious to do so at the federal level.
Hussain-TheCanadian
Maybe I’m missing something but why are there even “religious schools” in the United States? The whole concept comes off as weird to me, let alone funding these schools using tax payer money. Wouldn’t it be better to bolster schools in low income area schools, and tuition debt relief?
1EqualityUSA
It will change when other religions start growing in numbers. This is milking the government to push their religion, currently popular with Republicans, past financial finish lines.
Hussain-TheCanadian
@Equality – I’m very surprised that the Republican party, and continued by the democrats federally, are allowing Faith based schools funding, or even tax relief – Personally I don’t understand why.
When my parents wanted me to learn how to speak, write, and read Arabic properly, they sent me to the Mosque on the weekends, and we learned how to read and interpret the Qur’an there – I would prefer if my tax dollars went to feed, clothe, and educate our children – Religious institutions should be funded and supported by the perishers, not the government.
That’s my “Liberal” (read commonsense) 2 cents.
1EqualityUSA
Trump’s actions may push to resolve this, ironically. It unsustainable and must be rectified. This is why the GOP is gerrymandering, suppressing votes, usurping President Obama’s choice for Supreme Court, using the Supreme Court to green-light Citizens United, Hobby-Lobby, religious liberty, and excising Section 4 from the Voting Rights Act. Our Constitution may be tested, but it will not be defeated.
Mo Bro
Odd . . . I missed the part where she stated, “If states want to discriminate, that’s fine by me.”
Let me reread.
. . . . . . . . .
Nope, checked again and she still never said it.
1EqualityUSA
Folie a deux, Giving “flexibility to the states” is dog whistle language.
DCguy
I missed the part where you have ever spoken out against GOP anti-lgbt bigotry. Let me check,
Nope, checked again, and you have never done that.
Mo Bro
@1EqualityUSA:
Ah yes, the old liberal chestnut of “When facts don’t support your agenda, blame it on subliminal messaging.”
I must say, it’s ironic that someone with USA in his (her?) name has aligned him/herself with the most anti-American movement since communism was quashed. Somehow I suspect you’d prefer a one-party political system, which would be as far from “equality” as the USA could get.
1EqualityUSA
We’ll see what Alabama does with this flexibility.
Lvng1Tor
And yet she wouldn’t answer the question. If she was against discrimination, she would have said so, case closed but she didn’t. She refused to answer. That is as good as answering that she will not protect students and you know it. Smoke and mirrors and you fall for it because you want to.
He BGB
Is there ANYBODY in the New GUy’s, administration that is sympathetic to gays? Starting with Pence on down, they hate gays.
1EqualityUSA
Many do.
Mo Bro
It’s a common misconception among liberals that anyone who is not a Democrat must hate gays. It’s grossly untrue, and those of us who expand our circles beyond those who think exactly like us know it to be untrue.
Trump has stated his support for same-sex marriage . . . what do you want him to do, dress up like Marilyn Monroe and strut his way through a pride parade?
Goforit
mobro That would be an insult to Marilyn. But it could be entertaining if they distributed rotten tomatoes to the parade viewers.
1EqualityUSA
Mo, guys will form a human bridge over the subway vent to prevent Trump’s dress from flying up.
As for Republicans not hating gays, this week Neo____ has written:
#1 “Fudge packers”
#2 “Ooops, they are gays…..they do not know how to fight.”
#3 “Great cuts, there is no excuse to get HIV in 2017.”
#4 “The teenage girly interests of gay men……lol”
There may be more. I open political articles primarily. They know Trump is sinking. It’s ugly.
Mo Bro
@1EqualityUSA:
I’m not familiar with Neo ___, but I will say that for every Republican who uses a term like “fudge packer” against us, there are 5,000 Democrats using much worse language to destroy the president, his wife, his children, his cabinet, and anyone who voted for him. Seems to me the latter is a tad more dangerous to our society at large than a couple rednecks who’ve never met a gay man and have no idea how to react to one.
But that’s just me.
1EqualityUSA
Mo, Though I don’t agree with “destroying” his wife or child, his cabinet and the president must be thoroughly investigated, and should this destroy them, that’s prudent. The guy’s no good, Babe. He needs to go. The people he appointed were hideous all around, starting with Mike Pence, Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, Mike Flynn, and Betsy DeVos, the illegitimate Neil Gorsuch and on and on. I truly do not believe that Trump thought he would win. This administration is a disaster. What it does do, is show the world how our country deals with monsters, in that respect, I’m proud of the checks and balances. Let’s further build trust in our system by excising the dry rot out of the House and Senate. Turtle and Serf have got to go. Would you ever consider bailing on these clowns? You’re no dummy. Leave these asses!
Mo Bro
@1EqUSA:
I’m no fan of the Republican party, trust me, and I think the Democrats have become downright loopy. Philosophically I’m pure Libertarian. I think there should absolutely be term limits, preventing career politicians who’ve lost their idealism and believe they work for their respective parties rather than their constituents. Regardless of party, I vote to unseat the current incumbent, because complacency corrupts. I’m no fan of half of Trump’s appointees (although I believe you’re wrong about Gorsuch), and it’s apparent he’s not overly self-aware, but I voted for him because Clinton would have been nothing more than a sequel to Obama’s presidency, spending us into further oblivion, and since I might have kids one day, I was thinking more of their future than I was of my own personal needs.
Regarding Russia . . . oy, there are too many facets to get into on a comments board, but I agree that if there’s proof of collusion, it should be investigated. Problem is, there isn’t any proof so far—only speculation. But, we’ll see how all this plays out.
hansniemeijer
Some of those GOP “people” seem to live in Neanderthal times! Education is meant for all, the secretary of Education is the opposite of for all. I will be very happy when Trump and his administration disappear. The sooner the better!
Holloway
Is Betsy DeVos really against everyone like you think?
Or are the anti-choice teachers unions against students long-term success because it would mean the end of their collective power?
This is a labor dispute, don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. Parents are fighting tooth and nail to fix a corrupt educational system based in the industrial era of training people to be factory workers, and entrenched interests like teacher’s unions are trying to stop those parents from helping the students they supposedly serve.
Holloway
This has nothing to do with lgbtq issues. The rage directed at DeVos is part of an ongoing battle between the anti-choice teachers unions and the pro-choice school choice advocates.
Don’t let the partisans fool you into thinking otherwise, DeVos is a decent lady with nothing against our community. If anything, school choice helps reduce bullying and discrimination by letting kids go to a more tolerant school rather than being confined to one crappy school based on their zip code!
1EqualityUSA
Look! Out the window. No, not that window, the Overton window. (” a theory of how a policy that’s initially considered extreme might over time be normalized through gradual shifts in public opinion.”) Here’s an article for you, Holloway. Betsy is blurring separation of church and state.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/betsy-devos-christian-schools-vouchers-charter-education-secretary
“• Acton Institute for the Study of Religion & Liberty: Betsy DeVos once served on the board of this Grand Rapids-based think tank, which endorses a blend of religious conservatism and unrestrained capitalism. It is headed by a Catholic priest, Robert Sirico, who has argued that welfare programs should be replaced by religious charities. In a paper titled “America’s Public Schools: Crisis and Cure,” a former Acton advisory board member named Ronald Nash wrote, “No real progress towards improving American education can occur as long as 90 percent of American children are being taught in government schools that ignore moral and religious beliefs.” In November, Acton came under fire for an essay on its website whose original title was “Bring Back Child Labor.” (The title was quickly changed.) The Dick and Betsy DeVos Family Foundation contributed $1.28 million from 2000 to 2014, and the Prince Foundation donated at least $550,000.
…………………………………..
• Focus on the Family: Both the DeVoses and the Princes have been key supporters of Focus on the Family, which was founded by the influential evangelical leader James Dobson. In a 2002 radio broadcast, Dobson suggested that parents in some states pull their kids out of public schools, calling the curriculum “godless and immoral” and arguing that Christian teachers should also leave public schools: “I couldn’t be in an organization that’s supporting that kind of anti-Christian nonsense.” Dobson has also distributed a set of history lessons claiming that “separating Christianity from government is virtually impossible and would result in unthinkable damage to the nation and its people.” The Dick and Betsy DeVos Family Foundation gave $275,000 to Focus on the Family from 1999 to 2001 but hasn’t donated since; it gave an additional $30,760 to related groups in Michigan from 1999 to 2010. The Prince Foundation donated $5.2 million to Focus on the Family and $275,000 to its Michigan affiliate from 2001 to 2013. (It also gave $6.2 million to the Dobson-founded Family Research Council, a former division of Focus on the Family that became an independent nonprofit in 1992. The FRC has fought against same-sex marriage and anti-bullying programs—and is listed as an “anti-LGBT hate group” by the Southern Poverty Law Center.)
Additionally, the DeVoses have given millions of dollars to the Willow Creek Association, a group for church leaders “who hold to a historic, orthodox understanding of biblical Christianity” in more than 90 countries. WCA made headlines in 2011 when Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz canceled an appearance at an event sponsored by the association after a Change.org petition called it anti-gay (a claim WCA vehemently denied). And both the DeVoses and the Princes have been major benefactors of the Haggai Institute, an Atlanta-area organization that trains professionals abroad to become Christian missionaries in their home countries because, as the director of its Brazilian bureau explained to Christianity Today in 2013, foreign governments don’t mind “allowing their people to be part of leadership training, whereas they would never allow their people to be in an evangelistic seminar.””
Holloway
1EqualityUSA
I’m aware of the overton window and many people’s religious bent. In fact the overton window is something a lot of right wingers talk about. However for lgbt and other kids who are in actual physical danger in their local school, having a voucher is more than just a way to get an actual education and a decent chance at having a good life, it’s a way to stay safe!
There’s a good comparison of how school choice is no more radical than (and actually the educational analogue of) obamacare, which allowed opt-outs for people participating in christian health cooperatives. https://reason.com/archives/2015/06/10/the-case-for-school-vouchers
We need school choice, and despite Betsy DeVos flaws, her working towards greater choices for parents and kids and teens will actually make lgbt folks safer in the long run. Also, a gay teen is safer in a high-performing catholic school than in a violent underprivileged public school. Why? because while the teachers might frown on their sexuality, physical violence is not tolerated! I can attest to that, when I was 15 I went to a catholic school for a year and actually… people were nicer there. sure they said, “gay behavior is wrong” but they left it at that and never got physical like when I was in public school.
Holloway
Also I would question anything coming out of the Southern Poverty Law Center. They’re disingenuous at best, and fraudulent at worst. Morris Dees is a scoundrel who makes money by drumming up hysteria over tiny incidents in order to generate revenue (he gets paid over half a million dollars a year for running his “nonprofit”) while ignoring real issues.
Mo Bro
You’re right, and the NEA has even gone so far to state as much.
The following video shows the head of the NEA stating that their goal is not to teach children, but to gain more union power.
Enough said.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baM8N24K8kE