DeVos Moves On, and So Does Choice vs. “Accountability” Debate
In a committee vote the tightness of which surprised no one, this morning President Trump’s nominee for education secretary, Betsy DeVos, was approved on a purely partisan basis by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee. DeVos’s nomination now moves to the full Senate.
While the rhetoric surrounding DeVos has been heavily targeted at her competence, the main issue seems to be that Democrats generally oppose private school choice programs while Republicans generally do not. Even questions about the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) at DeVos’s confirmation hearing — would she support attaching IDEA rules to public funding that disabled students could take to a chosen school? — were primarily about choice.
Choice is fundamentally different from public schooling. With choice, families have real power — the power to leave a school not serving them and take their education dollars elsewhere. This is why Florida’s McKay scholarship program for children with disabilities — which DeVos tried to defend before being cut off in questioning at her nomination hearing — has very high satisfaction levels among parents using it. Public schools, in contrast, get taxpayer money no matter what, and require seemingly endless political, bureaucratic, and legal combat to hopefully — just hopefully—get improvements made.
Of course, choice needs freedom from stultifying rules and regulations to be meaningful. Specialization, competition, innovation — none can meaningfully exist without educators having the freedom to engage in new and different ways of delivering education.
The powerful inclination to wrap programs in incapacitating layers of red tape…er, “accountability”…is a major reason that the federal government should not try to deliver school choice, or govern education at all. (The Constitution is the other big one.) It is simply too dangerous to have one government — the federal government — supply choice nationwide. But there is good reason to fear that the Trump administration will try to do it nonetheless, based on Trump’s promise to make a $20 billion choice “investment.”
Empowering parents with choice is the right way to deliver education. But the clear and present danger of freedom‐smothering rules and regulations, as we’ve seen brightly illustrated by the debate over DeVos, accompanies any government funds. Which is why choice must not be delivered by Washington.
