Political confirmation hearings are usually sideshows with little bearing on what actually gets done later. But like real sideshows, they can still be interesting, especially as a barometer of political thought.
Washington Post:
Most of this article is just political back-and-forth between preening legislators and Betsy DeVos, but there were some useful moments:
-DeVos refused to agree with a Democrat that schools are no place for guns, citing one school that needs one to protect against grizzly bears. (She really said this.)It is hard to believe the Washington Post actually said "(She really said this.)" in a news story. Bias much?
When Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) asked her whether she would agree that guns don’t belong in schools, she said: “I will refer back to Sen. [Mike] Enzi and the school he was talking about in Wyoming. I think probably there, I would imagine that there is probably a gun in the schools to protect from potential grizzlies.”
And when asked whether she would support President-elect Donald Trump if he, as he has promised, moves to end gun-free zones around schools, she said: “I will support what the president-elect does.”
Seriously, is it so hard to believe that a school could have a gun to protect against bears? Not everyone lives in Washington.
As for the question of gun-free zones around schools, why would we not want to protect our children against the worst predator of all, mankind? Gun-free zones around schools is a classic case of "trust the government above your own common sense", which the socialists love.
Continuing:
DeVos said that states should have the right to decide whether to enforce IDEA, but when Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) later told her that IDEA is a federal civil rights law and asked DeVos if she stood by her statement that it was up to the states to follow it, DeVos responded, “Federal law must be followed where federal dollars are in play.” Hassan then asked, “So were you unaware when I just asked you about the IDEA that it was a federal law?” DeVos responded, “I may have confused it.”Considering how many federal laws there are, it would be a miracle if DeVos had been aware of this one.
Continuing:
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) asked DeVos how she planned to protect waste, fraud and abuse from for-profit universities, citing Trump University, which President-elect Donald Trump founded; he ultimately paid $25 million to settle lawsuits by students who said they were cheated. Trump said he paid the money so he could focus on getting ready to run the country.
DeVos said, “If confirmed, I will certainly be very vigilant.” Warren persisted, “I’m asking how.” When DeVos said “individuals with whom” she will work in the department will ensure that federal money is properly used, Warren further dug in, and then explained to DeVos that there is actually a group of rules already on the books, the gainful employment regulations. “All you have to do is enforce then,” Warren said, asking DeVos if she would do so. She wouldn’t commit.
The gainful employment regulations are meant to protect students and taxpayers by withholding federal student aid to career training programs that leave students buried in debt with few opportunities to repay. Asked by Warren if she would enforce the regulations, DeVos said: “We will certainly review that rule, and see if it is actually achieving what the intentions are.”
Warren: “I don’t understand about reviewing it. We talked about this in my office. There are already rules in place to stop waste, fraud and abuse. . . . Swindlers and crooks are out there doing back flips when they hear an answer like this.”Wrong question, wrong answer.
Why are we even supporting higher education with federal dollars? All we do is encourage the very fraud and abuse which was inherent in this question. And then we end up chasing our tails in yet another failed attempt at mass altruism. If we weren't throwing money at education, we wouldn't have criminal endeavors like Trump University. Neither Warren nor DeVos seem to get this.
Before you start singing the socialist song about "everyone deserves the right to an education", or the even better "an educated work force is a prosperous work force", please explain to me how someone learning "women's studies" or "African-american studies" or one of the multitude of fluffy degrees available is going to help our society? They won't, but they will incur lots of tuition debt which the federal government will have to forgive later. Meanwhile, socialist universities and criminal trade schools will flourish on the taxpayer's dime. And there is no amount of regulation or policing that will fix this.
On to other news, following up on the Chelsea Manning story:
Daily Mail:
President Barack Obama said Wednesday that he commuted Chelsea Manning's sentence because the punishment did not fit the crime.
Manning, an army intelligence analyst who shared classified documents with Wikileaks, was sent prison for 35 years. Obama said that was too long, compared to other leakers.
'I feel very comfortable that justice has been served and that a message has still been sent,' the president said.
Obama ordered that Chelsea, who went by the name Bradley at the time of the crime, be released on May 17, 2017, cutting her jail time down to more than six years.
He said today that his decision had nothing to do with pleas from Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who offered extradition in exchange for Manning's release.
Assange had challenged Obama to grant Manning clemency in a cryptic message on Twitter that mentioned a Department of Justice case and an offer of his own extradition.In the political calculus, this lets Assange off the hook for his offer. So if Assange wasn't the reason, then what was?
'If Obama grants Manning clemency Assange will agree to US extradition despite clear unconstitutionality of DoJ case,' a Wikileaks tweet said.
Obama denied today that Assange's offer was a factor in his decision.
'I don't pay a lot of attention to Mr. Assange's tweets, so that wasn't a consideration in this instance,' he said at his final news conference as president. 'And I'd refer you to the Justice Department for any criminal investigations, indictments, extradition issues that may come up with him.'
This was Obama appearing to be the merciful king which he considers himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment