Worst Secretary of Education in U.S. History Calls for Total Shutdown of the Dept of Ed!

If the public cannot see the idiocy of her argument, I am DONE

The latest issue of Bari Weiss’s questionable publication features an op/ed from the worst Secretary of Education in U.S. history, Betsy Devos. I thought we had seen the last of her after the implosion of the first Trump administration (she voluntarily resigned after the January 6th fiasco). But she’s like a roach who has returned, with The Free Press platforming her. In her piece, she makes the argument that the Department of Education should be shut down completely.

I know it feels like a lifetime ago now, but I want us to go back for a moment to 2017, when Trump announced Devos as his appointment to the Secretary of Education position. She was not qualified in the least for that role, her background being that she had served as chairwoman of the Michigan GOP and that her family donated a portion of their billions to various foundations hell-bent on destroying public education. She had never worked in the field of education. She had never struggled to pay for anyone’s education. She had never managed any budgets related to education.

I seem to recall that she was the most demonized Trump appointee among the general public at that time. She then made a fool of herself at her confirmation hearing before the Senate confirmed her anyway. Big surprise.

I will not take the article line-by-line, except to point out one passage in particular that really pissed me off as someone who has dedicated myself to the field of higher education:

“Finally, put the student loan program in the hands of bankers, not education bureaucrats, ideally at actual financial institutions, or at minimum, under the purview of the Department of Treasury. The private sector, in particular, can offer better rates, terms, and quality than the federal government has proven capable of doing. This would also serve to curb runaway tuition increases, which have been fueled in no small part by the perception of “free” government money.”

This suggestion is based on a complete and utter lie—as if throwing around terms like “bureaucrats” (bad) and “bankers” (good) lends legitimacy to this claim. American universities currently lack incentive to control their costs and put caps on their tuition prices because of a student loan system administered both by the federal government and by private banks. Student loans are debt tied totally to the student’s name until every cent of the principal plus interest gets paid off; that’s the case no matter where the debt comes from. Everyone involved—the banks, the government, the school administrators—is collectively working as a team on this grift, whether they realize it or not.

I happen to believe there should be no such thing as student loans at all, and in a universe where they must exist, private banks should probably be the last institutions on Earth offering them. Here’s an idea: why not have the actual schools currently receiving the loan funds tied to their students’ names instead provide all financing from their untaxed endowments that often run into the billions? The idea that colleges and universities might feel incentivized to lower their tuition costs because private banks become in charge of the entire loan system is ludicrous.

I have advised hundreds of students through the financial aid process. and have reviewed numerous financial aid award letters from various universities. In my experience, the federal government’s loan terms are almost always the best available compared to what private banks offer. I usually advise students and their families to avoid private banks for this type of financing, unless they are members of a financial institution (such as a credit union) where they can secure more favorable rates than what the federal government offers.

Currently, the fixed interest rate for undergraduate federal loans is 6.5%. Compare that to the highly variable interest rates of Sallie Mae, the most popular private student loan servicer, which max out at 16% (pro tip: if a bank offers you student loans at that interest rate, RUN!!!). Just because private banks have the option to provide “better terms” doesn’t mean that they do. I’m wondering where Devos got the idea that private banks are “better” for this type of service. “Better” for whom? Certainly not for most borrowers! I understand that Devos and her billionaire family do not know what borrowing to fund one’s education is like, but I would expect her to have at least some empathy for ordinary Americans after four years of service (as pathetic as it was) to the Department of Education.

Let me be very clear: there is no shortage of problems with the Department of Education, several of which Devos identifies in her article. The solution lies not in shuttering the agency or “leaving it all up to individual states,” but rather to hire qualified and dedicated people to fix them. Hasn’t been tried yet from what I’ve observed. Addressing educational problems on a national level is literally what the Department of Education exists to do.

If Devos would like an explanation for why the U.S. Department of Education is broken “beyond repair,” she can start by looking into a mirror. The reason for its failure—and this is the true of any failed institution, really—is because of poor leadership. That doesn’t mean that the agency shouldn’t exist at all. If the President appoints unqualified people that our elected officials in the Senate then approve, then they’re all contributing to the problem. But to have one of those (former) leaders of the Department now call for its demise is an affront to us all. Why? Because it happened on her watch.