Betsy DeVos Confirmed as Education Secretary; Pence Breaks Tie

[Norm Lenhart]

Like it or not, that sort of "pre-arrangement" is an aspect of politics.

If you don't want to see what goes into the sausage, don't watch them making it.

Loose comparison to a quote from Otto von Bismark,

It is indeed an aspect, but with Trump having won a sizable portion of the indy/moderates, there isn't much purpose in letting a couple fish off the hook to cater to the squishy. Since he won, the congress should govern like he won.

[Norm Lenhart]

True, but at least we have the technical ability to have Pence override their stupidity with the GOP in the majority.

Only until one of them gets wise and starts horse trading another lib GOP'er over to their side. Which I'm sure will happen sooner before later.

[SirLinksALot]

Mike Pence’s vote would not have been necessary if Republicans Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, had not followed through on their plans to vote against DeVos.

They both cited opposition from teachers and parents who fear DeVos’ school choice advocacy will hurt public schools ( AKA, they have both received HUGE monetary support from the teacher’s union ).

[LonestarDream]

Teacher's unions apoplectic!  I'm SO happy!!!

DeVos is a member of the Republican Party known for her advocacy of school choice, voucher programs, and ties to the Reformed Christian community.[1][4][5] She was Republican National Committeewoman for Michigan from 1992 to 1997 and served as chairwoman of the Michigan Republican Party from 1996 to 2000, with reelection to the post in 2003. DeVos has been an advocate of the Detroit charter school system[6][7] and she is a member of the board of the Foundation for Excellence in Education. She has served as chairwoman of the board of Alliance for School Choice and Acton Institute and heads the All Children Matter PAC.


From her wiki page.  Perhaps she is ok with Common Core as long as folks opt in.  VERY strong record on vouchers, school choice and charter schools.

I seriously doubt that president Hillary would have picked someone with this platform.

[txradioguy]

Expect the Libs to start saying she has no "mandate" to put in whatever changes she has in store for the Education Dept.

Idiots. 

[SirLinksALot]

A LITTLE HISTORY:

http://www.npr.org/2017/02/07/513836576/pence-becomes-first-vp-to-break-senate-tie-over-cabinet-nomination


In the early days of the Republic, the first men to occupy the office of vice president were more inclined to preside over the Senate on a regular basis than veeps are today. John Adams, who was George Washington's vice president for eight years (and his successor in 1797), set a record for tie-breaking votes (29) that still stands today.

His successor as vice president, Thomas Jefferson, was also a well-known and highly respected member of the Founding Fathers fraternity. He was followed by the formidable but disruptive Aaron Burr.

These men were vice president by virtue of being the runner-up in the Electoral College vote for president. This was the original method of determining the vice president, and it may have seemed a good idea at the time.

But dissatisfaction set in fast, and the 12th amendment in 1804 made some big changes. Since then, candidates for president and vice president have run as a ticket, a system that has worked from the standpoint of presidents but often served to lessen the stature of their vice presidents.

Over time, the Senate grew restive with the presiding presence of the vice president. This became problematic enough that vice presidents largely stepped back from the daily business of the chamber. In the last few decades, as vice presidents have been given more substantial duties by the chief executive, they have had less reason than ever to spend their days listening to Senate debate.

[chae]

@LonestarDream

She’s a board member of Jeb Bush’s pro-Common Core think tank, Foundation for Excellence in Education, where she hangs out with prominent Democratic education reformers like Bill Gates and Eli Broad. But she says that somehow doesn’t mean she likes it.
She founded, funds and serves on the board of the Great Lakes Education Project (GLEP), an organization dedicated to the implementation and maintenance of Common Core. But somehow that doesn’t mean she’s for the standards.
She’s even spent millions lobbying politicians in her home state of Michigan asking them NOT to repeal Common Core. But somehow that doesn’t mean she’s in favor of it.

[chae]

@dfwgator

Let's wait and see what she does, irrespective of her record?  Sounds like "We have to pass the bill to know what's in it" to me.

[Norm Lenhart]

Expect the Libs to start saying she has no "mandate" to put in whatever changes she has in store for the Education Dept.

Idiots. 

It's situations like that I would really love to see Trump put on his arrogant as hell persona and say 'AS President Obama so famously told the GOP, and I'm sure you remember clearly as you all supported it, "We won". Then do a 'drop the mic' and walk away laughing.

It's a 'negotiating tactic'. ;)

[LonestarDream]

She does not have to share the views of all members of these boards.  My guess is that she will be an advocate for home schooling as a considered choice as well.

Which moots any 'association' with common core.

@LonestarDream

She’s a board member of Jeb Bush’s pro-Common Core think tank, Foundation for Excellence in Education, where she hangs out with prominent Democratic education reformers like Bill Gates and Eli Broad. But she says that somehow doesn’t mean she likes it.
She founded, funds and serves on the board of the Great Lakes Education Project (GLEP), an organization dedicated to the implementation and maintenance of Common Core. But somehow that doesn’t mean she’s for the standards.
She’s even spent millions lobbying politicians in her home state of Michigan asking them NOT to repeal Common Core. But somehow that doesn’t mean she’s in favor of it.

[txradioguy]

It's situations like that I would really love to see Trump put on his arrogant as hell persona and say 'AS President Obama so famously told the GOP, and I'm sure you remember clearly as you all supported it, "We won". Then do a 'drop the mic' and walk away laughing.

It's a 'negotiating tactic'. ;)

That would definitely be the proper time for it.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

And those two are the primary reason that the GOP and the country would be best served by having forfieted their seats and taken the loss. Collins has done massive damage to date to both the country and conservatism with her leftist voting sabotaging the GOP from within and Murky utilized the good old boy establishment we supposedly want to eliminate to circumvent the actual winner of her primary.

Norm, the problem is that is all hindsight.  You never know exactly how many Senate seats you're going to end up with until after the election is over.  Nor do you know exactly how many you're going to have after the next election.  And it's easy to say "we don't need them" when we've got 50 other Senators who will hang tough.  But we had no way of knowing that would be the case prior to the election.

It sounds like both of those women are on board for Gorsuch, which is great.  But what if we'd ditched Mukowski and Collins as you suggest, and either Blunt, Bennet, Burr, Toomey, Johnson, Rubio, or Portman had lost? And honestly, it pretty much shocked everyone that we ended up with 52 seats even counting those two women.  Your ditching of those two squishy GOP women would have put Schumer in as majority leader, and just try to picture that.   We wouldn't be getting Gorsuch, or likely any other conservative justices confirmed.

It's easy to dismiss their importance when we win votes without them.  But things could easily have looked much different if any of those other Senate races had come out differently.

[libertybele]

@LonestarDream

She’s a board member of Jeb Bush’s pro-Common Core think tank, Foundation for Excellence in Education, where she hangs out with prominent Democratic education reformers like Bill Gates and Eli Broad. But she says that somehow doesn’t mean she likes it.
She founded, funds and serves on the board of the Great Lakes Education Project (GLEP), an organization dedicated to the implementation and maintenance of Common Core. But somehow that doesn’t mean she’s for the standards.
She’s even spent millions lobbying politicians in her home state of Michigan asking them NOT to repeal Common Core. But somehow that doesn’t mean she’s in favor of it.

Praise by Jeb on Trump's selection of her was my red flag.  Common Core is a disaster and goes against any hope of ensuring that our students aren't exposed to  Sharia law and Islam in our public schools.

[Norm Lenhart]

That would definitely be the proper time for it.

In a perfect world I'd be loathe to actually want that kind of governance, but Democrats cannot be treated or dealt with like people. they have to be talked 'at' and not 'to'. They made that choice for themselves with repeatedly launching opposition to nominees before they are even named, promises to obstruct etc. They chose to not govern so as a minority, they should be as minimized as the majority can make them. Both in actual governing ability and in rhetoric.

TLDR: They earned it.

[LonestarDream]

That would definitely be the proper time for it.

In 2004, the Lansing State Journal described DeVos as "a political pit bull for most of [Gov. Jennifer] Granholm's 16 months in office", and said that if DeVos wasn't Granholm's "worst nightmare," she was "certainly her most persistent." Bill Ballenger, editor of the newsletter Inside Michigan Politics and a former Republican state senator, called DeVos "a good behind-the-scenes organizer and a good fund raiser" as well as "a true believer in core Republican issues that leave nobody in doubt on where she stands."[40] DeVos resigned the position in 2000. She said in 2000, "It is clear I have never been a rubber stamp... I have been a fighter for the grassroots, and following is admittedly not my strong suit."[41] In 2003, DeVos ran again for party chairman and was elected to the post without opposition.[41]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betsy_DeVos#Political_activity


Lots to like

[LonestarDream]

Praise by Jeb on Trump's selection of her was my red flag.  Common Core is a disaster and goes against any hope of ensuring that our students aren't exposed to  Sharia law and Islam in our public schools.

Good point.  We already have common core and my kids deal with it.

Common core most hurts disadvantaged kids who do not have all of the access to tutoring as common core often takes a very abstract approach to teaching the material.

[LonestarDream]

Norm, the problem is that is all hindsight.  You never know exactly how many Senate seats you're going to end up with until after the election is over.  Nor do you know exactly how many you're going to have after the next election.  And it's easy to say "we don't need them" when we've got 50 other Senators who will hang tough.  But we had no way of knowing that would be the case prior to the election.

It sounds like both of those women are on board for Gorsuch, which is great.  But what if we'd ditched Mukowski and Collins as you suggest, and either Blunt, Bennet, Burr, Toomey, Johnson, Rubio, or Portman had lost? And honestly, it pretty much shocked everyone that we ended up with 52 seats even counting those two women.  Your ditching of those two squishy GOP women would have put Schumer in as majority leader, and just try to picture that.   We wouldn't be getting Gorsuch, or likely any other conservative justices confirmed.

It's easy to dismiss their importance when we win votes without them.  But things could easily have looked much different if any of those other Senate races had come out differently.

Good point.  Wish someone would primary Murkowski. 

[DiogenesLamp]

Betsy DeVos Confirmed as Education Secretary; Pence Breaks Tie

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/us/politics/betsy-devos-education-secretary-confirmed.html?_r=0

Isn't it funny how the Democrats fight tooth and nail against all odds, down to the last man,  while a bunch of our guys can simply be counted on to side with them when the shoe is on the other foot.


Our side NEVER fights in a unified fashion.   We can always count on a Graham or a McCain to walk across the aisle and help the Democrats. 


We have two of them doing it today!   

[Norm Lenhart]

Norm, the problem is that is all hindsight.  You never know exactly how many Senate seats you're going to end up with until after the election is over.  Nor do you know exactly how many you're going to have after the next election.  And it's easy to say "we don't need them" when we've got 50 other Senators who will hang tough.  But we had no way of knowing that would be the case prior to the election.

It sounds like both of those women are on board for Gorsuch, which is great.  But what if we'd ditched Mukowski and Collins as you suggest, and either Blunt, Bennet, Burr, Toomey, Johnson, Rubio, or Portman had lost? And honestly, it pretty much shocked everyone that we ended up with 52 seats even counting those two women.  Your ditching of those two squishy GOP women would have put Schumer in as majority leader, and just try to picture that.   We wouldn't be getting Gorsuch, or likely any other conservative justices confirmed.

It's easy to dismiss their importance when we win votes without them.  But things could easily have looked much different if any of those other Senate races had come out differently.

No hindsight involved. You can't govern when someone has the numbers to sabotage your major initiatives. And thats what leftist Republicans give the Dems. The numbers.

Really, what good is advancing bridge naming level policies when your big issues are many times thwarted because of these people? You can say 'well we got 1 or three and thats better than Zero".

Not if it tables those issues permanently or drags them out from election to election. If politics is the art of give and take, then the right has to realize that sometimes they have to take a loss to ultimately win the bigger battle. The problem is that rather than face up to that long known reality, people do their best to pretend they can have their cake and eat it too. But look at the record. Look how much chaos that people like Collins and Mitch have caused and look at how many times they stopped the Right in it's tracks. The Democrats could not have done it better.

The reason Trump won is widely believed to be because people said "Turn it upside down/were sick of the BS in DC/sick of the meekness on the right to get crap done". Well, that BS was caused in large part by The Collins types. So if Trump won based on that, then it also stands that the same logic should hold for and be applied to the actual source of the chaos.

[don-o]

@DiogenesLamp  @Frank Cannon @don-o @Bigun

More winning!!!  Doubt we would have gotten a pick this good under President Hillary...

Ya think? I wish Trump would task her with the goal of abolishing the department.

@LonestarDream

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Really, what good is advancing bridge naming level policies when your big issues are many times thwarted because of these people?

I don't view having Chuck Schumer as Majority Leader as a "bridge naming level policy", nor do I view confirmation of Supreme Court Justices as that either.  And you can talk about the "long-term effects" of keeping them on, but the truth is that the likely selection of at least three Supreme Court justices this term alone is an issue of incalculable importance moving forward.

[LonestarDream]

Ya think? I wish Trump would task her with the goal of abolishing the department.

@LonestarDream

Would be a good riddance .   Next Perry can get rid of the other DOE and then the EPA.

Let the air force or navy manage the nuke labs.

[Norm Lenhart]

I don't view having Chuck Schumer as Majority Leader as a "bridge naming level policy", nor do I view confirmation of Supreme Court Justices as that either.  And you can talk about the "long-term effects" of keeping them on, but the truth is that the likely selection of at least three Supreme Court justices this term alone is an issue of incalculable importance moving forward.

And how many times in the past has it happened? WE still don't have a supreme court win. Mitch is making noises both ways and he should not be remotely doing that.

History is what it is. The GOP has tanked itself time and time and time and time again on major issues and there is simply no credible way to deny it. They don't need Majority Leader Chuck "Satan/boogeyman of the moment" Schumer to do it for them. I that regard they are supremely capable. And thats only possible because they are lousy with liberals in the ranks.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

And how many times in the past has it happened? WE still don't have a supreme court win. Mitch is making noises both ways and he should not be remotely doing that.

History is what it is. The GOP has tanked itself time and time and time and time again on major issues and there is simply no credible way to deny it. They don't need Majority Leader Chuck "Satan/boogeyman of the moment" Schumer to do it for them. I that regard they are supremely capable. And thats only possible because they are lousy with liberals in the ranks.

Wait a minute.  Mitch just rammed through DeVos' confirmation on a 50-50 vote.  I mean, that's inarguable, and that doesn't happen if he's not majority leader.  You can't just wave things like that away, and the same thing is going to happen with Gorsuch.  But if it doesn't, I'll concede the point. 

Will you do the same if he's confirmed?

Honestly, I'm a bit surprised by this.  We've basically been making chickensalad out of chicken____ with Trump's election, and you've seemed on board with that.  It may not end up working out, but as long as it does, lets run up the score as much as we can.  I see the Senate as the same way.  So far, they've been doing the right thing, and we ought to be cheering that on unless and until they fold.

[Norm Lenhart]

Wait a minute.  Mitch just rammed through DeVos' confirmation on a 50-50 vote.  I mean, that's inarguable, and that doesn't happen if he's not majority leader.  You can't just wave things like that away, and the same thing is going to happen with Gorsuch.  But if it doesn't, I'll concede the point. 

Will you do the same if he's confirmed?

Honestly, I'm a bit surprised by this.  We've basically been making chickensalad out of chicken____ with Trump's election, and you've seemed on board with that.  It may not end up working out, but as long as it does, lets run up the score as much as we can.  I see the Senate as the same way.  So far, they've been doing the right thing, and we ought to be cheering that on unless and until they fold.

I don't care if mitch 'rammed' this one thing through. He has a history that exists whether you acknowledge it or not. And it is exactly what I said above.

I'm on board with getting conservatism spread and conservative legislation passed, not liberallism empowered. As long as Trump is headed in that direction, I'm there. And Trump could KEEP going in that direction if not for people like Mitch sodomizing him on say national security issues like Trump's fully constitutional terrorist ban or Mitch aiding and abetting the liberals whining about Trump calling an idiot judge on his bullshit.