Betsy DeVos, the right-wing activist who the Trump administration has nominated to lead the Department of Education, criticized Bernie Sanders’s plan to offer tuition-free education at public colleges and universities during her Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday.
“Senator I think that’s a really interesting idea,” she said when asked by Sanders about his plan. “And it’s really great to consider and think about, but I think we also have to consider the fact that there’s nothing in life that’s truly free, somebody’s going to pay for it.”
The proverb about nothing in life being free is ironic coming from DeVos, whose wealth is built off of inheritance and marriage. She is the daughter of Edgar Prince, who founded the Michigan-based Prince Corporation, an auto parts business that sold for $1.35 billion in 1996; she also married into the massive Amway fortune by marrying Dick DeVos, whose father co-founded that company.
“Somebody will pay for it,” Sanders replied.
He called attention to GOP plans to lower tax rates for wealthy Americans while many students cannot afford to pay for college. “Do you think that makes sense?”
DeVos avoided the question. “Senator, I think if your question is really around how can we help college and higher education be more affordable for young people as they — ”
“Actually, that wasn’t my question,” Sanders interjected. He once again repeated his question about tuition-free college, and DeVos once again deflected.
Watch Sanders question DeVos:
Here's @SenSanders full Q&A #BetsyDeVos #DeVosHearing #DumpDeVos pic.twitter.com/PFOyOdw8Xt
— People For Bernie (@People4Bernie) January 17, 2017
It’s true that somebody does have to pay to subsidize tuition-free education for America’s students — but it’s actually pretty cheap, all things considered. Sanders’s plan would cost the federal government approximately $47 billion annually. That’s a small fraction of a nearly $18 trillion U.S. gross domestic product. His proposed bill includes a small speculation fee on stock trades of about 50 cents for every $100 of stock, as well as a 0.1 percent fee on bonds and a 0.005 percent fee on derivatives to pay for his legislation, which would actually raise hundreds of billions of dollars annually, easily paying for tuition-free college and other reforms Sanders has called for.
Sanders and DeVos also sparred over her family’s fundraising for the Republican Party over the past several decades.
“Would you be so kind as to tell us how much money your family has contributed to the Republican Party over the years?” Sanders asked.
DeVos thanked Sanders for the question, then said: “I wish I could give that number, I don’t know.”
“I have heard the number was 200 milion. Does that sound in the ballpark?”
“Collectively, between my entire family? That’s possible.”
Sanders then pivoted to the obvious question, asking if these sums had anything to do with her nomination.
“My question is, and I don’t mean to be rude, but do you think if you were not a multi-billionaire, if your family had not made hundreds of millions of dollars of contributions to the Republican Party, that you would be sitting here today?”
DeVos answered: “Senator, as a matter of fact I do think there would be that possibility. I’ve worked very hard on behalf of parents and children for the last almost 30 years,” she replied, rattling off some of her education activism.
The DeVos family has indeed given over $200 million to the GOP over the years, and she has in the past explained why. “My family is the biggest contributor of soft money to the Republican National Committee,” she wrote in Roll Call in 1997. “I have decided to stop taking offense at the suggestion that we are buying influence. Now I simply concede the point. They are right. We do expect something in return. We expect to foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government and respect for traditional American virtues. We expect a return on our investment.”
Top photo: DeVos at her confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill on Jan. 17.
I think we should be having a discussion about why our children can not learn enough in the first 13 years of public education to be able to do something more than assembling burgers.
In New York State we average around $18,000 per student per year in education costs. We are getting close to spending a quarter of a million Dollars on a child’s education and this child will not have any marketable skills.
The largest group of people that will benefit from free college tuition will be members of the educator’s unions. The increased funding that has been made available for public education has not resulted in higher quality educators as much as increasing the salaries of the tenured educators that we were hoping to improve upon.
Our education system needs a objective revamping with the student’s benefit first and foremost. Rather than the interests of the teacher’s unions.
If school vouchers and charter schools are what it takes to breath life into our schools, then I am all for them. Competition may be the impetus to make schools strive for excellence.
Of course there is no free stuff.
The courts that her family uses to prove up their contracts and the police power that enforces their judgments and protects their holdings cost something, too.
“My question is, and I don’t mean to be rude.. ” Sanders
This is just no good. If you want Americans to hear you when dealing with America’s Medieval Revival Party, you can’t give your opponent a way out with courtesy so they have an opportunity to be unapologetic – that’s what sells their records and tshirts.. that’s what buys the bubble gum.
It is how they been so successful changing laws in America.
If you’re accused of being rude for goodness sakes, you’re supposed to say whatever, or “the shoe fits the princess.” , or something. I guess you couldnt say that but you know what I’m saying. Better luck next time.
By the way, I checked Betsy was never in Devo, perhaps a fan. :-)
this condescending pos is a prime example why the estate tax in our country needs to limit inheritance to 10 million. she would as john oliver said “still be a world class assh@!# but probably not a threat to public education.
the billionaire class have become a threat to society. capitalism is approaching its’ ultimate endgame. currently 8 subhumans own as much wealth as the poorest half of the people on earth. they have used their wealth to further their own personal gain to the determent of society as a whole. think about what Walmart or amazon has done to destroy competition and job creation.
Excuse me, what about love? What about speech?
(and no I did not just make her point, sour persons out there)
That you had or made a point is less than apparent.
Hi. That was testing the forum waters for what I was originally going to say which had a few parts, (I’m getting lazy ) but its not as fun if a lawyer responds. (no offense intended)
Although this site is getting so problematic to read or use, I absolutely HAVE to comment on this, because or my personal connection.
Free college for all students was my late Mother’s dream. WHY? a) She knew the economic problems faced by many of her elementary students and that affording college would be difficult to impossible for many; and b) She knew that SHE had been blessed by just such a system. She graduated from a NJ State Normal School, which was tuition free. The charge of Normal Schools was to train future teachers.
The idea of Normal Schools was to INVEST gov’t funds into education and see the benefits. YES, benefits. These teachers trained so many students over their careers; students that went on to become adult citizens – and – taxpayers. Now to me, investing in education is so much more worthy than investing in: mass surveillance, guns, bombs, drones, militaristic equipment for police, etc..
I, myself was a product of (mainly) public ed.; started college at the CC where I later taught because Mom said: “I can afford to send you there.” So I am so upset that this nominee is even being considered. We need to strengthen public ed, not dismantle it. And don’t be fooled: charter schools or private schools often are not as good options as they might seem.
all People of her class need to be taken care of…
So true.
That’s so true.
When referring to government provided “free” stuff, it’s sometimes, as others here note, better couched as being at “no cost to the recipient”. But there is an old saying that doers sum it up succinctly.
“There is no such thing as free stuff, only stuff paid for by someone else.
She’s right. Nothing is free. College education should be funded by the government tax dollars, just as is public K through 12 education. If Ms. Davos can’t recognize the public good and economic benefit of an educated America, she isn’t qualified for office. Make America great again by educating future scientists and engineers from poor and middle class families instead of filling the shortage with foreign H1-B visa competitors.
lol lol lol this is what pitchforks were made for.
Don’t forget the torches, we may have to march to the castle after dark.
I have one I use for manure I would like to use on them.
Nothing is free, true.
In America, the word free is supposed to mean free of complete indiviual burden. This is the meaning that Bernie Sanders ascribed to public education. If there is a better word for equal education for all citizens then let’s hear it.
As an aside, from a logical standpoint, John Lewis made an identical argument to Ms. Devos about free college as well during the primaries to attack the Sanders proposal.
Of course, Lewis did not invoke the ever present threat of grizzly bears to support guns in schools, so I would tread carefully in any further comparisons.
There was a time when California higher education, UC, Cal State, the community colleges, charged no tuition. (Yeah, yeah, way back in the days of Pat Brown, Jerry’s father, 1950s and 60s, another era.) The reason may be simple enough: it’s not a welfare system but a subsidy that might produce a generation of innovators and inventors. California certainly had a good run after that, although now if they’re having to use work-visa talent these days, it may be a result of the later “reforms” that began with Gov. Reagan.
There is a good short piece in NYT today regarding the rise of the “meritocracy” that has a profound bearing on both the issue of public education policy and the future of the Democratic Party.
(https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/17/opinion/the-rise-and-fall-of-european-meritocracy.html)
The term “meritocracy” came from Michael Young’s short book, ”The Rise of the Meritocracy” published in 1958. Ivan Krastev, the author of the NYT piece, refers to the work in analyzing the basis for the current rise in populism, stating, ” It would create a society of selfish and arrogant winners, and angry and desperate losers. The triumph of meritocracy, Young understood, would lead to a loss of political community.”
“What makes meritocrats so unbearable to their critics is not so much their success but their insistence that they have succeeded because they worked harder than others, because they happened to be more qualified than others and because they passed the tests that others failed.”
DeVos is certainly one of those “unbearables” who recognizes the education is where the winners and losers get sorted out. By taking control and privatizing education the elite will gain full authority over that sorting out process.
And it’s unfortunate that the Democratic Party has cast its lot with the “meritocracy”
Yup. This right here.
Woman is a scummy See You Next Tuesday.
“Nothing is Free”.
DeVos payed 200 million in donations to get her job so to her nothing is free but on the other hand the Banks received a 750 Billion Bail Out in 2008 so some things are free. Guess it all depends on how much wealth you’ve squandered away.
Education is the heart’s blood of the America dream for worker, soldier, professionals, everyone. This lady has no idea of self-made-person and Bernie has no way to make his plan happen and yes it all costs money.
Compromise is key but no one wants that. A hybrid Bernie-National Scholarship program with repayment by students as tax deductible percent of salary. If your education yields more wealth you pay more for the boots that gave you the bootstrap to pull your self up. If you are born or marry rich no need you got the means to buy the best.
Public school or otherwise each child must get the best education experience and opportunity, right of National necessity no matter.
A version of this should be available to workers as education and internships to increase job based knowledge and earnings. It is all so important to control tuition, education can be a Spartan experience with fewer luxuries and more hard work. Hint life long family, system and most important self motivated education is the only way to stay on your top game and adapt to new realities and opportunities.
But Bernie does have legislation in the works, listed in the article above; a small fee added to stocks, bonds, and derivatives that would easily raise the needed funds.
What reason would anyone have to oppose that, other than the wealthy looking to keep more money in their pockets?
What I was saying use Bernie’s plan but add some individual responsibility. Everyone has and should gave skin in the game, makes for better chooses.
Isn’t this the fallacy of conflating “eductation” and “schooling?”
Days the woman who INHERITED a billion dollars (that’s FREE folks) and married into a billion more to a husband that runs a ponzei scheme (that was free too).
Wow. Rich folks could tell you their FARTS are expensive perfume and you’d believe that shit!
Ms. DeVoss is correct when she says somebody has to pay and nothing is free. In her case her privileged life and education was paid by millions of consumers and investors to her billion dollar daddy and husband. That’s fine because it was private wealth used to help the children of the few.
It would be wrong in the eyes of the self entitled to use the wealth of the nation to create opportunities for the unwashed masses. If they wanted an education, they should have picked richer parents.
I am disgusted by the mindset created by excessive wealth in those who grew up in luxury. They can’t be condemned too harshly because that is how they were raised to believe they were more equal than the others, just as Napoleon explained in “Animal Farm”: there is no way they could consider themselves as lowly as those in an inner city slum, it must be they are superior from birth and they would have made billions even if they had been orphans because novels show that happens all the time.
This woman will be poison for public education. Without a quality public education system, America will die.
>That’s a small fraction of a nearly $18 trillion U.S. gross domestic product.
In other words, we are already spending waaaaay more than we ought to be, what’s a few billion more? Excellent logic…
i think it rather posits the question of where our priorities lie.
$47 million is 0.00000261111 of $18 trillion, btw.
whoops! i missed a few zeros.
$47 Billion is 0.00261111111 of $18 trillion.
Then why not say that? By suggesting nearly $50 billion is insignificant the author absolves legislators of doing their jobs–specifically to debate and vote on how to allocate federal funds. One of the reasons Bernie isn’t tenable to many is because his answer isn’t to figure out where we’re spending too much and cut back, it’s to further tax and/or pile on to the debt.
“Then why not say that?”
that’s the point that i’m disputing. he IS saying that. that is precisely what he is saying.
That is what he’s saying.
I see. The richest nation in the world cannot do what the entire rest of the civilized West and non-West do, is that right?
Is extensive. Among other things, paid for by imposing a tax on Wall Street speculators that would generate about $300 billion in revenue.
“One of the reasons Bernie isn’t tenable to many is because his answer isn’t to figure out where we’re spending too much and cut back”
Wait, really ? He keeps hammering how the US defense budget is waay to big (especially compared to the results) and also too much unaccountable (which it is, the sums the Pentagon loses tracks off every year could pay for this plan and more). He does say where we can reallocate budget spending, you’re simpy strawmaning here.
You’re also not understanding his plan, a tax on stocks, bonds and derivatives isn’t government spending, it’s an infinitely small tax (0.5% is infinitely small and therefore has not impact on national economic capabilities) to create more funds for a federal program. Instead of reallocating funds in the budget, why not create new ones where you can easily do it ? That’s what you’re not getting
You can’t spend more because the US is drowning in debt. You’re best bet for your long-term national defence, would be to cut 1-2 Ford-Class CVNs . At ~$13 Billion per ship plus another $8 – 10 billion for the air wing, and there’s your savings right there.
A highly educated and skilled population is a far better defence than a couple of carriers designed for global force projection
“A highly educated and skilled population is a far better defense than a couple of carriers designed for global force projection.”
Amen
$47B is not even half of what the pentagon WASTES every year!
The GDP is the total US economy not government spending
Has she “worked very hard on behalf of parents and children for the last almost 30 years,” or has she worked to ” foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government.” by helping to syphon money away from students in public schools? Who profits in a public school? Who profits in a charter school?
Bernie is one of the really intelligent politicians
More politicians should team-up with Sanders in the coming years towards the next elections. This could result in a party that can take on the Reps. and Dems. and bring the change we need so badly.
“I have decided to stop taking offense at the suggestion that we are buying influence. Now I simply concede the point. They are right. We do expect something in return. We expect to foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government and respect for traditional American virtues. We expect a return on our investment.”
indeed. she’s just about clarified the point that what American Conservatives mean by “limited government” isn’t “smaller government” or “less expensive government.” Conservatives have no more aversion to government than American Liberals.
they just want to be the guy holding the leash.
Not surprised to see Trump pick cabinet members who were born on 3rd base and thought they hit a triple.
Al Franken did a nice job of exposing her as a fraud today.
It’s good to be a BernieBro™.
This nominee never answered the questions. How can anyone of modest income means raise an educated child in the US. She is so wrong to this appointment and I applaud Sanders for raising excellent points. We are a 3rd world country governed by the wealthy elite.