New Bush Education Secretary Pro-Abortion, Pro-Illegal Immigration, Not Worried About Decline Of Traditional American Family
The “Dallas Morning News” (9/2/01) once quoted self-described “earth-mother type of Republican” Margaret Spellings (then Margaret La Montagne) as having said: “I don’t like to be in the limelight. I like to be under the radar.” But, now the former Assistant To President Bush For Domestic Policy is in the limelight having been named Secretary Of Education.
Margaret SpellingsMatalin said: “Well, I’m pro-life.” Hughes said: “I’m personally pro-life.” Spellings said: “I’m pro-choice. But, I mean, I agree with Karen. It doesn’t really matter what I think. I mean, there are — are there things we can do that can really value life? I mean, abstinence education, character education, adoption, is really — is what — what we ought to be about, and what we will be about.” To which Hughes replied: “I didn’t know you were pro-choice.” Spellings said: “I didn’t know you were pro-life.”
The previously mentioned “Dallas Morning News” article says of Spellings and “her more liberal views” that columnist Robert Novak wrote this about her: “How much [she] is out of touch with Republican cultural values can be judged by her reaction, on C-SPAN last week, to census data showing a decline in the traditional family.” About this data, she said: “So what?”
When asked about this reply by the “Dallas Morning News” reporter, she said: “I said, unfortunately, something like, ‘So what?’ We’re here to develop policies for all American families, however they sort.”
In an interview on the “Cable News Network” (1/7/04), Spellings vigorously defended President Bush’s guest-worker amnesty proposal which would allow millions of illegal aliens to stay in our country. Incredibly, she spoke of Mr. Bush’s failure to enforce our immigration laws by saying that his amnesty scheme was needed because “we have to have laws and systems that reflect the reality of our country”!
Spellings is asked: But what is the incentive for immigrants to wait years and years to come here legally if Mr. Bush now allows those who are here illegally to rapidly get legal status? Spellings says, in a reply that in no way addresses this important question, that the President is calling for “workplace security” and “border security” is something he’s committed to. She says they are going to “reconcile the system, figure out a way to rationalize the system and enforce our workplaces and our borders so that those who come here unlawfully will be expected to return home, will be deported.”
Huh? Mr. Bush’s amnesty for illegal aliens proposal — like all amnesties have done — will increase the number of illegal immigrants in our country. It will make neither our borders nor our workplaces more secure. And if deportation for those here unlawfully is to be done, then Mr. Bush should be deporting the illegal aliens here now and not devising news schemes which are an incentive for more illegal alien law-breaking.
When asked about the problem of illegal alien cheap labor and how this will cost Americans jobs, Spellings says not to worry. She says their Council of Economic Advisers says “that immigrant and illegal or legal immigration has not caused Americans to lose jobs.”
An article in “World” magazine (11/27/04), reports that Tamera Jones, who lobbies on behalf of 1,000 schools for the American Association of Christian Schools, is critical of the appointment of Spellings. Noting that Spellings was not the first choice of “social conservatives,” Jones says Spellings “has never gone out of her way to promote alternatives to public education.”
Finally, in one of those online, real-time events (4/8/04) where people can instant message various Bush Administration officials about a variety of subjects, Spellings is asked a great question by “Mike” from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania:
“President Bush has repeatedly stated that he doesn’t believe that Washington has all the answers to our nation’s problems. How does this stated belief jibe with new Federal education requirements, spending, and programs, all of which share the underlying assumption that the solution to our problems does indeed come from Washington?”
Well, Spellings says, all the President is asking for is “that we get results for Federal tax payer dollars that we invest on various fronts.” He just wants to give states “more authority and flexibility” to serve workers in the states “so long as there is accountability for the number of workers placed, the retention rates in jobs and the earnings made.” And to do this, she says, “we at the Federal level have mandated various programs with lots of strings attached and have required layers of bureaucracy to administer the system.”
Just what we need, right? — more Federal red tape and more Federal bureaucrats running things! In other words, “Mike” is right on target. What Mr. Bush has said about Washington not having all the answers, and his Washington-run education policy, do not jibe.
A footnote: In her confirmation hearing, Spellings was praised by Sen. Edward Kennedy who called her “a champion for public education.” Spellings, who helped draft the “No Child Left Behind Act,” said: “We must stay true to the principles of leaving no child behind.” The “Washington Post” story (1/7/05) about Spellings’ confirmation hearing was headlined “Spellings Promises Fixes To No Child Left Behind Law.” This law, since it is blatantly un-Constitutional, cannot be “fixed.” It should be repealed.
—J.L.
Discuss this article