Morning Wire Episode Summary: Prioritizing DEI Over Education | 1.5.25

Release Date: January 5, 2025

Hosts: John Bickley and Georgia Howe
Guest: Nikki Neely, President and Founder of Parents Defending Education

Overview

In the January 5, 2025 episode of Morning Wire, hosts John Bickley and Georgia Howe engage in a critical discussion about the allocation of federal funds towards Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs in K-12 public schools. The episode features Nikki Neely, a prominent parent activist and the founder of Parents Defending Education, who provides an in-depth analysis of the financial and educational implications of DEI spending under the Biden-Harris administration.

Massive DEI Spending in Public Schools

The episode opens with a startling revelation about the Department of Education's expenditure on DEI initiatives:

• Nikki Neely states, “At least $1 billion has been spent on DEI in public schools since 2021.” (00:03)
  This figure encompasses various grants allocated over the four-year tenure of the Biden-Harris administration.

Key Points:

• Misallocation of Funds: Neely criticizes the Department of Education for prioritizing DEI over foundational educational needs, asserting that such spending "hurts students" rather than aiding their academic progress. (00:51)

• Impact on Education: She emphasizes that the funds could have been directed towards essential areas like literacy and numeracy, which she believes are crucial for addressing learning loss, especially post-COVID. Instead, DEI programs have allegedly increased interpersonal friction and hostility among students. (00:51)

Contextualizing the $1 Billion DEI Expenditure

Georgia Howe probes the significance of the $1 billion spent on DEI relative to the Department's overall budget:

• Nikki Neely explains, “It's pretty significant... the Department of Education's annual budget is in the $80 billion a year.” (01:35)
  She highlights that approximately $250 million annually has been dedicated solely to DEI programs, suggesting that this may be just the "tip of the iceberg."

Insights:

• Budget Prioritization: Neely argues that every dollar within the Department should focus on core educational objectives rather than "DEI pet projects" that, in her view, foster division among students. (01:35)

• Academic Performance Concerns: She underscores that even before the COVID-19 pandemic, American schoolchildren were struggling with proficiency levels, and diverting funds away from academics exacerbates these issues. (01:35)

Breakdown of DEI-Related Expenditures

The discussion delves deeper into specific line items within the DEI budget:

1. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Hiring

   • Allocation: Approximately $500 million
   • Description: Funds designated for hiring personnel focused on DEI initiatives.

2. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Programming

   • Allocation: $340 million
   • Description: Financial support for various DEI programs implemented within schools.

3. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion-Based Mental Health and Social Emotional Learning (SEL)

   • Allocation: $169 million
   • Description: Programs aimed at fostering interpersonal relationships and emotional well-being among students.

Discussion on Social Emotional Learning (SEL):

• Nikki Neely critiques the current implementation of SEL, stating, “It makes them perceive these racial and gender and ethnic categories and to treat people differently based on those categories... it's teaching them to see enemies and hatred where it didn't exist to start with.” (02:52)
  She argues that instead of merely encouraging kindness, these programs introduce divisive elements by emphasizing immutable characteristics.

Controversial Practices: Restorative Justice in Schools

Georgia Howe brings up the allocation of nearly $4 million to Philadelphia Public Schools for restorative justice:

• Nikki Neely defines restorative justice as an approach aimed at reducing the school-to-prison pipeline by facilitating mediated discussions between perpetrators and victims. However, she contends that this method has been ineffective and counterproductive. (04:07)
  She describes it as forcing students into uncomfortable dialogues without adequate consequences for harmful behavior, leading to increased violence and danger within schools.

Key Criticisms:

• Lack of Accountability: Neely emphasizes that restorative justice does not deter bullies since there are “no consequences” for their actions, resulting in persistent negative behavior. (04:07)

• Impact on Victims and Teachers: She points out that victims are placed in precarious positions, where reporting harassment means directly confronting their aggressors without meaningful protection, thereby increasing the risk of further violence. (04:07)

Expenditure on Equity Consultants

Georgia Howe highlights a specific case where a Michigan school district spent over $38,000 in a single day on an equity consultant:

• Nikki Neely addresses the prevalence of hiring equity consultants across numerous districts, attributing their rise to the aftermath of the George Floyd incident and subsequent "equity audits." (05:38)
  She claims that these consultants often label districts as racist and push for ongoing consultancy without delivering tangible educational benefits.

Insights:

• Questionable Efficacy: Neely asserts that the presence of equity consultants has not improved educational outcomes but has instead deepened societal divisions within schools. (05:38)

• Financial Mismanagement: She argues that funds allocated to these consultants would be better spent on academic remediation and addressing learning loss caused by school closures. (05:38)

Trends and Future Outlook for DEI Spending

Georgia Howe inquires about the current trend in hiring equity consultants, noting a decrease in public outcry but seeking clarity on recent developments:

• Nikki Neely confirms a decline in the hiring of equity consultants, attributing it to the exhaustion of COVID relief funds and reduced availability of discretionary spending. (06:50)
  She explains that with federal funds drying up in September 2024, districts are compelled to prioritize essential expenditures over DEI initiatives.

Additional Factors:

• Shift in Educational Preferences: Neely observes an increase in homeschooling and private schooling, resulting in fewer students in public schools and, consequently, reduced funding for DEI programs. (06:50)

• Call for Administrative Cleanup: She emphasizes the need for the incoming Trump administration to rectify past misallocations and ensure that future funding prioritizes genuine educational needs. (06:50)

Incoming Trump Administration’s Education Policy

The conversation shifts to the anticipated changes under the Trump administration, particularly focusing on the new Secretary of Education, Linda McMahon:

• Nikki Neely praises McMahon’s appointment, highlighting her business and executive experience as assets for managing the Department of Education effectively. (08:11)
  She believes McMahon's background will help rein in inefficient spending and realign the department's priorities with the needs of American families and students.

Key Attributes of Linda McMahon:

• Support for Charter Schools and Career Education: Neely notes McMahon’s support for school choice and career and technical education, aligning with the Trump administration’s focus on practical workforce preparation. (09:46)

• Business Acumen: She underscores McMahon’s capability to manage a large federal agency by valuing assets and ensuring program effectiveness, contrasting this with previous administrations' approaches. (08:11)

• Responsive to Stakeholders: Neely asserts that McMahon is attuned to the needs of American parents and students, rather than prioritizing teachers' unions and education activists. (08:11)

Comparison to Previous Administration:

• Neely contrasts McMahon with Betsy DeVos, the former Secretary of Education under Trump, who was renowned for her focus on charter schools. She suggests that McMahon will continue this legacy while also addressing broader educational needs. (09:46)

Conclusion

The episode concludes with Nikki Neely expressing optimism about the reforms she anticipates under Linda McMahon's leadership. She reiterates her belief that the Trump administration will prioritize genuine educational improvements over divisive DEI programs, paving the way for a "new chapter in American history." (10:45)

Final Remarks:

• Gratitude to Guest: Hosts John Bickley and Georgia Howe thank Nikki Neely for her insightful contributions to the discussion, emphasizing the importance of re-evaluating federal funding priorities in education. (10:45)

• Closing Statement: The episode wraps up as a special edition of Morning Wire, highlighting the critical examination of DEI spending in public schools and the promising outlook for future educational policies under the new administration. (10:51)

Notable Quotes with Timestamps:

• Nikki Neely: "At least $1 billion has been spent on DEI in public schools since 2021." (00:03)

• Nikki Neely: "It's pretty significant... the Department of Education's annual budget is in the $80 billion a year." (01:35)

• Nikki Neely: “It makes them perceive these racial and gender and ethnic categories and to treat people differently based on those categories... it's teaching them to see enemies and hatred where it didn't exist to start with.” (02:52)

• Nikki Neely: “This is going to the principal's office and singing Kumbaya... violent incidents in school over the past couple of years go off the charts, this very clearly is not working.” (04:07)

• Nikki Neely: “we have found hundreds of districts... [that] say, guess what, your district's racist. The solution is hire us in perpetuity...” (05:38)

• Nikki Neely: “Linda McMahon is actually listening to American parents. And she had served on the Connecticut Board of Education as well. So she has that state education agency experience, which is critical in this role.” (10:45)

This comprehensive summary encapsulates the key discussions, insights, and conclusions drawn in the Morning Wire episode on DEI spending in public education. It provides a clear and detailed overview for those who have not listened to the episode, highlighting the critical viewpoints and proposed future directions in educational policy.