• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Michael Steele: If Trump wants to drain the swamp, Pruitt must go

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
94,328
Reaction score
82,713
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Michael Steele: If Trump wants to drain the swamp, Pruitt must go

95447028f59a1e906472d4aa3004a7d8.jpg

Donald Trump and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt

By Michael Steele
April 10, 2018

In a crowded field of career politicians — whom Donald Trump said were all beholden to a rigged system of paybacks and favors — the billionaire stood alone as a Washington outsider, promising to give the government back to the people. Trump was so rich, his pitch went, that he didn’t owe anything to any political party or special interest and, therefore, would be loyal to the American people. He promised to “drain the swamp” and it resonated. Many Americans — especially those in the middle of the country — who had long felt overlooked or discarded by Washington, were energized by Donald Trump’s candidacy and propelled him to an historically improbable victory. But last week, many Trump supporters were left scratching their heads as things started looking awfully swampy at the Environmental Protection Agency. Over the course of a few days, we learned that married lobbyists from Oklahoma had supplied administrator Scott Pruitt a sweetheart deal on a Capitol Hill apartment even as one of them had business before the EPA. We also learned that EPA gave big pay increases to two of Pruitt’s favorite young staffers from Oklahoma even after the White House had opposed doing so. There is no way around it: these revelations about the EPA administrator paint a picture of a Cabinet official who is out of touch with his responsibilities as a public servant; who has little consideration for the judicious use of taxpayer dollars; and, who has no sense of the impropriety within his agency. Worse yet, now any action taken by the EPA is potentially tainted by these ethics scandals.

For example, news broke last week that more than one month ago, the EPA began issuing waivers — in secret — to some of the largest petroleum refiners around the country, allowing them to ignore rules governing the blending of renewable biofuels into the nation’s transportation fuel supply. The waivers, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, are being given to many of the nation’s largest refiners under the pretense that those refiners are experiencing “economic hardship” but many of those same refiners are posting massive profits. A refiner reportedly saved over $50 million dollars with the waiver while posting annual profits of $1.5 billion last year. But, Mr. Pruitt’s EPA has not released any information about the waivers, who authorized them, or the process used to issue them. One refiner said: “the EPA was handing out those exemptions like trick or treat candy. Anyone with a brain submitted an application.” So, is it any wonder that American farmers and domestic biofuels producers who are being hurt by this EPA decision, are now questioning the integrity of this policy change? After all, Scott Pruitt’s overly generous landlord is also a lobbyist who represents petroleum interests. In October 2016, then-candidate Trump tweeted his intention to “Make Our Government honest Again” but first he would have to “drain the swamp”. Well, if the President meant what he said and we are to take him seriously, then it is time for Scott Pruitt to leave the EPA. Besides being good politics for the White House, it is in the best interest of ensuring the public’s confidence in the Trump administration and restoring confidence in the idea of public service.

Note: Michael Steele is the former Republican National Committee chairman and former lieutenant governor of Maryland.

Probably the most corrupt of Trumps appointments, Trump is protecting Scott Pruitt like a big city gang-banger protects his turf.
 
Michael Steele: If Trump wants to drain the swamp, Pruitt must go

95447028f59a1e906472d4aa3004a7d8.jpg

Donald Trump and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt



Probably the most corrupt of Trumps appointments, Trump is protecting Scott Pruitt like a big city gang-banger protects his turf.
Nearly every single person appointed by Trump is so far outside the acceptable range that they shouldn't have even been considered.

I am highly concerned about DeVos, for example.
I think she can do more harm there than almost any other appointee.
 
Nearly every single person appointed by Trump is so far outside the acceptable range that they shouldn't have even been considered.

I am highly concerned about DeVos, for example.
I think she can do more harm there than almost any other appointee.

Afraid DeVos might ruin the state sponsered indoctrination system?
 
Afraid DeVos might ruin the state sponsered indoctrination system?
Afraid she might make it privately run, or at least allow more of such.
Afraid of what that will do to the quality of education, based on prior examples of it's negative impact.

Concerned what negative changes her corruption will allow.

And lastly, concerned she'll make it an actual state-sponsored indoctrination system, rather than the somewhat ramshackle thing which may occasionally do that, today.
 
Would you explain what that nonsense means?
It's a thing among some conservatives, that the public education system is indoctrinating the nation's children into the ways of the liberal/communist.

I call it teaching reality, generally speaking.
 
Afraid she might make it privately run, or at least allow more of such.
Afraid of what that will do to the quality of education, based on prior examples of it's negative impact.

Concerned what negative changes her corruption will allow.

And lastly, concerned she'll make it an actual state-sponsored indoctrination system, rather than the somewhat ramshackle thing which may occasionally do that, today.

It would be great if the school system were no longer run by the government but rather a public private venture where results mattered.
 
It would be great if the school system were no longer run by the government but rather a public private venture where results mattered.
The problem is that, in places where they allowed private charter schools, the education quality they provided was not sufficient.
I'm unsure details of reasons for that.

I personally am of the opinion that we should at the very minimum double the total funding for public schools, nationwide.
Some areas need it far more, so they would get more.

One major problem with public schools is under funding, in part because some of the funding is dependent on the prosperity of an area.
Which means poor areas get less funding.



Edit: Also, "results" is a subjective measure - what results are you looking for? Graduations? So make the requirements easier.
Oh, you meant quality of resulting education? How do you measure that? Standardized tests have some big issues, not least being that a child can be damned smart but still not meet those standards.

Personally, I'd like us to copy Finland, in many respects.
But to do that we'll need a MASSIVE increase in teacher numbers AND pay rates.
We need the best possible people teaching our kids.
 
Last edited:
It would be great if the school system were no longer run by the government but rather a public private venture where results mattered.

Results do matter. That’s why charter schools are regarded as an absolute disaster.
 
The problem is that, in places where they allowed private charter schools, the education quality they provided was not sufficient.
I'm unsure details of reasons for that.

I personally am of the opinion that we should at the very minimum double the total funding for public schools, nationwide.
Some areas need it far more, so they would get more.

One major problem with public schools is under funding, in part because some of the funding is dependent on the prosperity of an area.
Which means poor areas get less funding.



Edit: Also, "results" is a subjective measure - what results are you looking for? Graduations? So make the requirements easier.
Oh, you meant quality of resulting education? How do you measure that? Standardized tests have some big issues, not least being that a child can be damned smart but still not meet those standards.

Personally, I'd like us to copy Finland, in many respects.
But to do that we'll need a MASSIVE increase in teacher numbers AND pay rates.
We need the best possible people teaching our kids.

Yes, our education system is a stalwart of success so far across the country. Silly me.
 
Results do matter. That’s why charter schools are regarded as an absolute disaster.

Tottaly. They should instituted across the land.

WITH LITTLE FANFARE last week, the Department of Education announced $52 million in grants for the replication and expansion of proven charter schools and another $200 million in state grants for charter schools. On the day of the announcement, the department's 1.28 million Twitter followers saw two tweets about the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), one tweet announcing the 2017 Blue Ribbon Schools, one about Education Secretary Betsy DeVos meeting the Chinese vice premier and 23 quoting from the secretary's speech focused on private school vouchers – but nothing about the Charter Schools Program.

It is a shame to overlook the success of the Charter Schools Program and its long history of bipartisan support. The program made its first awards in 1995, just four years after the first charter school law was passed in Minnesota. Its original design made grants to states, which ran a second competition to provide start-up funds to open charter schools. This two-step process and limited funding meant it could take years for successful charters to access funds for expansion.
https://www.usnews.com/opinion/know...charter-schools-brings-more-education-success
 
Yes, our education system is a stalwart of success so far across the country. Silly me.
No, it isn't.

Which is why I made all those suggestions about how to fix it.
 
No, it isn't.

Which is why I made all those suggestions about how to fix it.

No, you basically said throw money at it. Schools can be improved the way any product or service is improved--competition. Allowing people trapped in crappy schools to escape is what anyone truly interested in children and education should support. That the left opposes it, tells you all you need to know.
 
No, you basically said throw money at it. Schools can be improved the way any product or service is improved--competition. Allowing people trapped in crappy schools to escape is what anyone truly interested in children and education should support. That the left opposes it, tells you all you need to know.
I was too unspecific.

More money is needed.
However, it should be used in ways that improve things, not just on whatever.

Private options and charter schools give government leaders an excuse not to fix the schools you call crappy.
And unless carefully regulated, do not necessarily provide a better option.
 
I was too unspecific.

More money is needed.
However, it should be used in ways that improve things, not just on whatever.

Private options and charter schools give government leaders an excuse not to fix the schools you call crappy.
And unless carefully regulated, do not necessarily provide a better option.

What excuse have government leaders used to allow these crappy schools to become crappy and stay crappy for decades? As long as the left opposes competition, you will have crappy, state run education for many Americans. Like most on the left, you seem more interested in maintaining the state monopoly than you are in educating the nations children.
 
What excuse have government leaders used to allow these crappy schools to become crappy and stay crappy for decades? As long as the left opposes competition, you will have crappy, state run education for many Americans. Like most on the left, you seem more interested in maintaining the state monopoly than you are in educating the nations children.
When did I ever mention anything about opposing competition?

Oh, I see, you meant my opposition to privatization of public education.

Competition in that respect means cutting corners that should not be cut.
 
No thanks. Ohio rid itself of one scam already. Remember ECOT, the charter school system with a 40% graduation rate (lowest in the nation) that bilked $80 million from the State for students they couldn’t prove existed?

Guess what, that school got shut down. How many public schools get shut down? I know you'll pout to outlier failures and say SEE SEE IT CAN FAIL. That's just how you are.
 
I was too unspecific.

More money is needed.
However, it should be used in ways that improve things, not just on whatever.

Private options and charter schools give government leaders an excuse not to fix the schools you call crappy.
And unless carefully regulated, do not necessarily provide a better option.

We've thrown millions and millions at the public school system. Guess what, it's still failing.
 
We've thrown millions and millions at the public school system. Guess what, it's still failing.
We haven't thrown enough, or not in the right places.

I'd argue that there are some key changes which are not as dependent on additional funds, as well.


But as an example.
Teachers should never need to purchase school supplies for their class.
That stuff should be provided by the school.
Textbooks should never be more than 5 years out of date, and even that is pushing it, depending on the subject. And they certainly should be replaced after use damages them.

Art and music should be available in every school, they are a necessary component of any education.
 
Last edited:
Guess what, that school got shut down. How many public schools get shut down? I know you'll pout to outlier failures and say SEE SEE IT CAN FAIL. That's just how you are.

ECOT is the rule not the exception. Remember the Indiana charter school funding scandal? ��
 
It's a thing among some conservatives, that the public education system is indoctrinating the nation's children into the ways of the liberal/communist.

I call it teaching reality, generally speaking.

You had it right the first time. Leftists ruin everything they touch.
 
Back
Top Bottom