DeSantis's reign of terror on education is Trump's model
If Americans want a glimpse of Trump-style education policy in action, they should look to Florida.
Over the last six years, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) has turned the state into a laboratory for a hard-right agenda, disguised as 'parental rights' but aimed at systematically dismantling public education.
Under the banner of culture wars, Florida has censored classroom discussions, politicized school boards and driven teachers out of the profession, undermining not just what students learn but whether they learn at all. It's a blueprint for control, not for education.
Start with book-banning. Florida leads the country in book-banning, with 4,561 books banned in schools in 33 of the state's 67 school districts. Banned books, including award-winning authors like Maya Angelou, Saul Bellow and Toni Morrison, classics from Proust to Ovid, bestselling authors like Patricia Cornwell and James Patterson, and left-leaning social commentators like Jon Stewart.
This wave of book-bans aligns with broader efforts in Florida to reshape school curricula.
The state's new educational standards include language suggesting that enslaved people may have developed skills that 'could be applied for their personal benefit.' The state also placed limits on African American studies programs, claiming an Advanced Placement African American Studies course lacked educational value and violated state law.
Gay and transgender students and educators have come under increased scrutiny. Legislation and administrative rules have imposed restrictions on which bathrooms transgender students may use and have limited how gender identity and sexual orientation can be discussed in classrooms.
Under laws signed by DeSantis, teachers face legal risks for using the preferred pronouns of transgender students without explicit parental consent. One notable case occurred in Brevard County, where a beloved veteran teacher's contract was not renewed because she referred to a student by a name chosen several years prior to the adoption of the rule.
Meanwhile, new laws require parental consent for basic services like nurses' visits, accessing library books and watching PG films like 'Frosty the Snowman.'
Because of these rules, tens of thousands of Florida students lose out because their parents have not filled out consent forms. School nurses risk losing their jobs for something as simple as putting a bandage on a scraped knee without prior parental consent. The burden falls heavily on parents, who must navigate a maze of new forms, and on school staff, who are overwhelmed by the surge in paperwork. Many frontline educators and support workers live in fear of backlash from activist groups like Moms for Liberty, whose influence has turned everyday decisions into political flashpoints.
DeSantis has also gone to war with higher education, including the takeover of the New College of Florida. High-ranking administrators were fired and diversity programs eliminated. Scores of faculty have quit.
DeSantis's hostility toward public education knows no limits. His state ranks dead last in teacher pay, Florida just posted the worst national test scores in more than 20 years and Florida has a universal school voucher program that disproportionately benefits higher-income students.
None of this has escaped the attention of Trump, whose executive orders explicitly encourage states to turn federal block grants into voucher programs. His latest proposed budget also slashes $4.5 billion in support for low-income students, undermining programs that help with high school completion, college access and work-study opportunities.
He proposes cutting teacher quality initiatives, funding for Howard University, the Office for Civil Rights and bilingual student programs. His proposed budget explicitly prohibits funding for progressive nonprofits and DEI programs.
Will Republicans in Congress realize that Trump's assault on education hurts the very institutions their communities rely on? Schools and universities aren't just economic drivers in their districts, they're centers of local pride, identity and opportunity.
In places like Brevard County, where we recently held a town hall, hope is being replaced by fear. Parents, educators, students and community leaders all expressed shame and fury at the actions of their local school board and state policymakers.
Trump and DeSantis have taken the bullying approach to governing to new extremes. There is no honest debate, no give and take, no compromise. It is a relentless drive to push, divide and control. Cruelty is the point, and the negative consequences of children, families and educators aren't a side effect — it's a strategy.
Forty-two years ago, Republican President Ronald Reagan sounded the alarm on the state of American education by releasing 'A Nation at Risk.' Today, that title applies to much more than our schools: our economy, our democracy, our environment, our global standing and our moral compass.
But no one is more vulnerable than 50 million American school children living under an immoral, unethical and criminal president. They cannot vote. They have no lobby.
They are counting on us to fight back.
Jennifer Jenkins is a former Brevard County School Board member and chairwoman of Educated We Stand, a nonprofit committed to resisting right-wing extremism in Florida schools. Arne Duncan is a former U. S. Secretary of Education.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
8 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump's Net Approval Positive on Only One Key Issue
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump's net approval rating is negative on a range of issues except immigration, a new poll shows. According to political analyst and statistician Nate Silver, writing in his Silver Bulletin Substack, Trump has a net negative approval rating on trade, the economy and inflation but a slightly positive rating on immigration. Why It Matters Taking the temperature of the nation, approval ratings are good measures of the public's response to Trump's policies and his actions as president. In the first few months of his second term, Trump's popularity has fluctuated, with some polls more favorable than others. Sustained backlash to his policies could persuade the president to change his approach. Trump, who made immigration a central part of his campaign, has vowed to crack down on border security, carry out mass deportations and end federal benefits for people residing in the country illegally. President Donald Trump speaking with reporters in the rain after arriving on Air Force One at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland on May 30. President Donald Trump speaking with reporters in the rain after arriving on Air Force One at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland on May 30. AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson What To Know Silver aggregated dozens of recent polls and found that Trump's approval rating on immigration was +2.5 percent. The president did not fare as well on other issues, with a -9.5 percent approval rating on trade, -11.3 percent on the economy and -17.5 percent on inflation. May polling conducted by Verasight U.S. for Strength in Numbers found similar results, with Americans disapproving of the president's handling of all the policy areas they were asked about except border security. That poll also found that 49 percent disapproved of his immigration policy, while 47 percent approved. Overall, Silver found that when analyzing the polls, Trump had a -5.4 net approval rating. An RMG Research/Napolitan News poll, conducted between May 14 and 21 among 3,000 registered voters, showed Trump's approval rating at 48 percent, with 50 percent disapproving. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 1.8 percentage points. Other polls have found a more positive response to the president. According to a recent Rasmussen survey, 53 percent of respondents said they approved of Trump, while 46 percent said they disapproved. What People Are Saying Scott Lucas, a professor in international politics at University College Dublin, previously cautioned against reading too much into any one poll, telling Newsweek: "Opinion polls have their own biases." President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social on April 20: "We are, together, going to make America bigger, better, stronger, wealthier, healthier, and more religious, than it has ever been before!!!" What Happens Next The midterm elections, scheduled for November 2026, may offer a clearer indication of voters' attitudes toward the president's policies.
Politico
14 minutes ago
- Politico
The ‘Medicaid moderates' are the senators to watch on the megabill
The Senate's deficit hawks might be raising the loudest hue and cry over the GOP's 'big, beautiful bill.' But another group of Republicans is poised to have a bigger impact on the final legislative product. Call them the 'Medicaid moderates.' They're actually an ideologically diverse bunch — ranging from conservative Josh Hawley of Missouri to centrist Susan Collins of Maine. Yet they have found rare alignment over concerns about what the House-passed version of the GOP domestic-policy megabill does to the national safety-net health program, and they have the leverage to force significant changes in the Senate. 'I would hope that we would elect not to do anything that would endanger Medicaid benefits as a conference,' Hawley said in an interview. 'I've made that clear to my leadership. I think others share that perspective.' Besides Hawley and Collins, other GOP senators including Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Jerry Moran of Kansas and Jim Justice of West Virginia have also drawn public red lines over health care — and they have some rhetorical backing from President Donald Trump, who has urged congressional Republicans to spare the program as much as possible. Based on early estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, 10.3 million people would lose coverage under Medicaid if the House-passed bill were to become law — many, if not most, in red states. That could spell trouble for Majority Leader John Thune's whip count: He can only lose three GOP senators on the expected party-line vote and still have Vice President JD Vance break a tie. Republicans already have one all-but-guaranteed opponent in Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky so long as they stick to their plan to raise the debt limit as part of the bill. They also view Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson as increasingly likely to oppose the package after spending weeks blasting the bill on fiscal grounds. Meeting either senator's demands could be enormously difficult given the tight fiscal parameters through which House leaders have to squeeze the bill to advance it in their own chamber. That in turn is empowering the senators elsewhere in the GOP conference to make changes — and the Medicaid group is emerging as the key bloc to watch because of its size and its overlapping, relatively workable demands. Heeding those asks won't be easy. Republicans are counting on savings from Medicaid changes to offset hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts, and rolling that back is likely to create political pain elsewhere for Thune & Co., who already want to cut more than the House to assuage a sizable group of spending hawks. At the same time, Speaker Mike Johnson is insisting the Senate make only minor changes to the bill so as to maintain the delicate balance in his own narrowly divided chamber. Thune and Finance Committee Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) have already acknowledged that Medicaid, covering nearly 80 million low-income Americans, will be one of the biggest sticking points as they embark this month on a rewrite of the megabill. They are talking with key members in anticipation of difficult negotiations and being careful not to draw red lines publicly. 'We want to do things that are meaningful in terms of reforming programs, strengthening programs, without affecting beneficiaries,' Thune said, echoing language used by some of the concerned senators. Crapo voiced support in an interview for one pillar of the House bill — broad new work requirements for Medicaid beneficiaries — but rushed to add that he's 'still working with a 53-member caucus to get answers' to how the program can be overhauled: 'I can only speak for myself.' Complicating their task is the fact that some in the group — namely Collins and Murkowski — have a proven history of bucking their party even amid intense public pressure. The pair, in fact, helped tank the GOP's last party-line effort on health care, in 2017. Leaders view them as unlikely to be moved by the type of arm-twisting Republicans are planning to deploy to bring enough of the fiscal hawks on board. And then there's Hawley, who is playing up Trump's own warnings to congressional Republicans about keeping their hands off Medicaid. Hawley and Trump spoke shortly before the House passed its bill, with the senator recounting that the president said 'absolutely categorically, 'Do not touch Medicaid. No Medicaid benefit cuts, none.'' Hawley, like Crapo, has indicated he is comfortable with work requirements, but he is pushing for two major tweaks to the House language: undoing a freeze on provider taxes, which most states use to help finance their share of Medicaid costs, and new co-payment requirements for some beneficiaries that he has been calling a 'sick tax.' The provider tax changes would present an issue with multiple senators, who fear it would exacerbate the bill's impact on state budgets and slash funding that helps keep rural hospitals afloat. Justice, a former governor, called it a 'real issue.' 'They haven't done anything to really cut into the bone except that one thing,' Justice added. 'That's gonna put a big burden on the states.' Moran grabbed the attention of his colleagues when he warned in a pointed April floor speech that making changes to Medicaid would hurt rural hospitals. A 'significant portion' of his focus, he said, 'is to make sure the hospitals have the capability and the revenues necessary to provide the services the community needs — Medicaid is a component of that.' Collins, who is up for reelection in 2026, has also left the door open to supporting work requirements, depending on how they are crafted. She has also raised concerns about the provider tax provision, noting that 'rural hospitals in my state and across the country are really teetering.' Murkowski, meanwhile, isn't as concerned about the provider tax, because Alaska is the only state that doesn't use it to help cover its share of Medicaid spending. But she has expressed alarm over the House's approach to work requirements, including a decision to speed up the implementation deadline to appease House hard-liners. She said it would be 'very challenging if not impossible' for her state to implement. As it is, any effort to water down the House's Medicaid language will face steep resistance in other corners of the GOP-controlled Senate, where lawmakers are pushing to amp up spending cuts, not scale them back. Some senators, in fact, want to further tighten the House's work requirements or reduce, not just freeze, the provider tax. 'I'd be damned disappointed if a Republican majority with a Republican president didn't make some reforms,' said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). 'The provider tax is a money laundering machine. … If we don't go after that, we're not doing our jobs.' Ron Johnson and a few others are continuing to push to change the cost split for those Medicaid beneficiaries made eligible under the Affordable Care Act. The federal government now picks up 90 percent of the cost, and House centrists nixed an effort by conservatives to reduce it. One idea under discussion by conservatives is to phase in the change to appease skittish colleagues and state governments, but that is still likely to be a nonstarter for 50 GOP senators. Hawley warned that 'there will be no Senate bill if that is on the table.' Adam Cancryn contributed to this report.
Politico
14 minutes ago
- Politico
Murphy launches ambitious anti-Trump PAC as 2028 rumors swirl
Sen. Chris Murphy is launching a new PAC aimed at taking on President Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress — the latest sign the Connecticut Democrat is eyeing higher office, according to plans that were first shared with POLITICO. Murphy will announce Monday that his group, American Mobilization Project, is doling out $400,000 to organizations that oppose cuts to Medicaid and register young people to vote. Two of the early recipients of his funds are based in battleground states. In an interview, Murphy said that his PAC is unique because it is not focused on funding campaigns and instead is looking to mobilize people against Trump's agenda. 'All of us have to realize that if we don't act aggressively right now to organize and mobilize, we may not have our democracy in 2026,' said Murphy. 'I'm a believer that the only thing that is ultimately going to stop Trump's corruption and his destruction of democracy is mass mobilization.' Murphy's PAC expects to spend upwards of $2 million in the 2026 midterm cycle, an aide to the senator said. In the wake of Trump's reelection, Murphy has worked to grow his profile and staked out ground as one of the Democratic Party's most outspoken critics of the president's efforts to bend institutions to his will. Murphy has appeared on numerous podcasts, held town halls across the country and churned out a steady stream of content on social media. In the run-up to presidential campaigns, would-be candidates often launch new PACs or outside groups, which can be used to expand their visibility, build their email lists and cultivate political relationships. But Murphy insists his recent moves are not designed to lay the groundwork for a future presidential bid. He has argued that it's no guarantee that there will even be a race for the White House in 2028, in fact. 'I don't think it's a foregone conclusion there's going to be an election in 2026 or 2028 for anybody to run in if we don't do the work right now,' he said, adding, 'I hope that this PAC is going to act very differently than everybody else's PAC because it's not about banking money or using money for a political campaign or for other people's political campaigns. It's about mobilization.' The first recipients of contributions from Murphy's PAC include Georgia Youth Justice and Project 26 Pennsylvania. His group is also backing the Committee to Protect Health Care's work organizing doctors and nurses to support Medicaid in Michigan, Louisiana and Utah. Murphy is far from the only Democrat who has positioned himself as a future leader of the party as it struggles to find its way back to power. Several potential 2028 candidates have traveled to critical battleground and early-voting states in recent weeks. Last week, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz both visited South Carolina to attend a key Democratic dinner.
