Why Trump education nominee’s agenda is dead on arrival

Has there ever been a Cabinet nominee whose agenda was deader on arrival than President-elect Donald Trump’s choice for education secretary? To understand the disappointment that awaits Betsy DeVos, a billionaire Michigan education activist, consider the two most dramatic developments in federal education policy this century.

In 2001, at the behest of President George W. Bush and Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, Congress approved the No Child Left Behind Act in lopsided votes (87-10 in the Senate, 381-41 in the House). The landmark measure thrust the federal government into state decision-making on public education in unprecedented fashion. It required the U.S. Department of Education to hold schools accountable when it came to the academic progress of every student and emphasized the responsibility that school districts have to help struggling poor and minority students. States that didn’t participate weren’t eligible for some federal grants.

Twelve months ago, No Child Left Behind was scrapped by Congress and replaced by the Every Student Succeeds Act — once again in lopsided votes (85-12 in the Senate, 359-64 in the House). While still requiring states to measure academic progress and to commit to improving troubled schools, it sharply limited federal influence over education decisions. Republicans embraced the argument that federal micromanagement infringed on states’ rights. Democrats embraced the argument that No Child Left Behind’s obsessive focus on testing actually hurt schools.

So what does DeVos want Congress to do? Go much, much farther than No Child Left Behind did in forcing states to comply with federal education mandates. DeVos and Trump hope to establish a massive $130 billion account, mostly funded by the states, to provide $12,000 vouchers to every impoverished K-12 student in the nation to allow each to attend private or religious schools. This would massively defund public school systems in states with considerable poverty, be they blue (California, New York), red (Texas) or purple (Florida).

This isn’t going to happen. Trump is likely to get some showy early wins out of Congress, but he’s hardly going to be able to reverse lawmakers’ overwhelming antipathy to Washington telling state governments how to run their schools.

The idea of forcing public schools to face competition to get them to improve still makes sense. Some charter schools are so accomplished they play this role. But charters have also provided a distinct enough alternative to public schools in many states that they have deprived the school voucher movement of an opportunity to develop momentum.

Perhaps the Trump administration can introduce a version of the Obama administration’s Race to the Top program to provide federal incentives to get states to pursue education reforms. Or perhaps it could provide a bully pulpit to advance (but not impose) reform ideas, such as starting the school day later or sharply increasing K-12 schools’ emphasis on job skills.

These ideas aren’t as bold as what Trump or DeVos want to do. But they do have one thing going for them: They’re within the realm of the possible.

Twitter: @sdutIdeas

Facebook: UTOpinion