Speaker 1: Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast today.
Speaker 2: I am excited because we have the US Secretary for
Speaker 2: the Department of Education, Linda McMahon with US Madam Secretary,
Speaker 2: thank you for joining me.
Speaker 3: Tudor, thanks for having me. I've been looking forward to this.
Speaker 1: Well, I am excited too.
Speaker 2: I wanted you to know that we have people here
Speaker 2: in the state of Michigan who are wondering exactly what
Speaker 2: it means what you're doing. They have heard that the
Speaker 2: Department of Ed is going to shut down, and they're
Speaker 2: concerned what does that mean for my kids' education? And
Speaker 2: that's why I thought you can explain this better than anybody,
Speaker 2: that this is not something to be afraid of, but
Speaker 2: there is a lot of fear mongering from Democrats. So
Speaker 2: give us the lowdown on what that means.
Speaker 4: Well, thanks Tudor for asking. And it's not an uncommon question.
Speaker 4: But clearly the President believes, as do I, that the
Speaker 4: best education is that it's one closest to the child.
Speaker 3: And so.
Speaker 4: His reference is let's give education back to the States.
Speaker 4: What that means is let's get rid of the bureaucracy
Speaker 4: that is in Washington. That does not mean get rid
Speaker 4: of Title I funding that will come to the states.
Speaker 4: It does not mean get rid of IDA funding, which
Speaker 4: is for our handicapped or special needs children.
Speaker 3: So that is not the.
Speaker 4: Goal or the mission of getting rid of the bureaucracy
Speaker 4: and education.
Speaker 3: But it puts education more.
Speaker 4: Squarely in the state's hands, working with parents, working with teachers,
Speaker 4: working with local superintendents, and that's where it ought to be.
Speaker 1: I think that's the confusion.
Speaker 2: I think people don't understand that the Department of Ed
Speaker 2: on your state level is really what is managing all
Speaker 2: of the decisions statewide, like those decisions that come from
Speaker 2: the federal level. The funding that comes from the federal
Speaker 2: level is much smaller compared to the state level.
Speaker 1: We are on a state level funding our own schools.
Speaker 4: You fund about ninety percent and about ten percent comes
Speaker 4: from the federal government. And that you know that funding
Speaker 4: often comes with strengths attached.
Speaker 3: So a lot of the states will say to.
Speaker 4: Us, you know, we really love to get the funding,
Speaker 4: but we would like to have the ability to spend
Speaker 4: that money in the way that we see fit. Because
Speaker 4: one superintendent might say, I'd like to take that money
Speaker 4: and spend it in District X, because I know that
Speaker 4: that's where that funding is needed. So at that point
Speaker 4: there would be more flexibility to utilize the funding, you.
Speaker 3: Know, for the states. And I think that's I think
Speaker 3: that's a big goal.
Speaker 2: If the Department of d is no longer there, where
Speaker 2: does the funding come from? Does it go through a
Speaker 2: different agency? And is the reason behind that that you
Speaker 2: don't really need an entire four thousand person department to
Speaker 2: decide where these funds go because you already have Treasury
Speaker 2: and other departments that could easily decide where funds go.
Speaker 4: Well, that's correct, and there are other agencies that I
Speaker 4: think the entire programs could be managed through. But you know,
Speaker 4: the Department of Education does not educate one child. We
Speaker 4: don't decide on curriculum, we don't hire teachers, we don't
Speaker 4: decide what books to buy. We really are a funding
Speaker 4: channel and helping to develop policy. That is, you know,
Speaker 4: if it's approved by Congress or you know, it's passed
Speaker 4: through to the states. But that's the function of the
Speaker 4: Department of Education and it really hopefully would be improved
Speaker 4: at the state level because you would have eliminated the
Speaker 4: bureaucracy of it.
Speaker 3: And that's really the goal.
Speaker 2: And when you talk about bureaucracy, I think some people
Speaker 2: don't necessarily know what that means. I mean, there are
Speaker 2: a lot of people that are in Washington, these these
Speaker 2: big agencies, they've become overbearing, they become hard to take
Speaker 2: care of in and of themselves because the cost is
Speaker 2: so great to have four thousand or forty six hundred
Speaker 2: whatever it is at the Department of d or whatever
Speaker 2: was when you took over at the Department of ED
Speaker 2: that are really just making decisions that don't affect the
Speaker 2: individual child.
Speaker 3: Well, that's correct.
Speaker 4: As a matter of fact, when I did take over
Speaker 4: as the secretary, we did have about forty one forty
Speaker 4: two hundred people. We're down about half of that now
Speaker 4: because we've gone through a restructuring process here as was
Speaker 4: the goal and it is the goal across all of
Speaker 4: government at this point too, look at where we might
Speaker 4: cut expenses without you know, cutting services, and that every
Speaker 4: agency in government has been involved in doing that. So
Speaker 4: we're dealing right now with many fewer people.
Speaker 3: Than we had when I first began.
Speaker 4: But you know, the bureaucracy is if you've got people
Speaker 4: sitting in Washington trying to make decisions about what's happening
Speaker 4: in the state.
Speaker 3: I'll give you a perfect example.
Speaker 4: I was asked by one parent in a state or
Speaker 4: a teacher, I don't remember which it was, relative to
Speaker 4: special needs funding, and I said, well, let me ask
Speaker 4: you something.
Speaker 3: I said, who better to determine that? Would it be
Speaker 3: at the.
Speaker 4: State level or at the local level where the teacher
Speaker 4: is working with that child with special needs and understands
Speaker 4: what kind of programming how they should adjust through their
Speaker 4: individual you know, learning program for that student. Or is
Speaker 4: it someone sitting in Washington, DC that has absolutely no
Speaker 4: connection with that child. So I think the answer is
Speaker 4: absolutely obvious. So the bureaucracy in between the money that
Speaker 4: has been appropriated in coming through Congress and the state
Speaker 4: level of execution and employment of those dollars is I
Speaker 4: think a better path if we don't have the bureaucracy
Speaker 4: of the Department of Education in between.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I think the fear that parents have as well,
Speaker 2: if it's not there, then that money can't come to us. Anyway,
Speaker 2: the money will still come, it's going to be decided
Speaker 2: on the state level. Everybody has a state superintendent, you
Speaker 2: have a state Department of Ed that this is one
Speaker 2: of those states rights issues where we really want to
Speaker 2: do it locally, and there should be nothing more local
Speaker 2: than education, because your community is different than the community
Speaker 2: next to you, and that's how the state decides what
Speaker 2: each area needs for funding and what they need when
Speaker 2: it comes to specialists and teachers and all of that
Speaker 2: that should go to the state level. Now, there is
Speaker 2: a big controversy right now over protecting women in sports.
Speaker 2: We know that the president that's one of his top
Speaker 2: issues is to protect women in sports. I know that
Speaker 2: you obviously have a sports background. You are our very
Speaker 2: top of mind for protecting women in sports.
Speaker 1: But let me ask you this.
Speaker 2: Like in Michigan, we have the MHSAA, the Michigan High
Speaker 2: School Athletic Association, and they are saying they're not going
Speaker 2: to comply with what the President has said. They oversee
Speaker 2: Michigan sports. They're an association, but they are actually funded
Speaker 2: by the school district. So how do you manage that situation.
Speaker 4: Well, they're in the finance of the law because Title
Speaker 4: nine was clearly established to protect women in sports and
Speaker 4: to make sure that they were not discriminated against, and
Speaker 4: so it's simply following the law at this point.
Speaker 3: So they're breaking the law.
Speaker 4: So if that case was referred to the Department of Justice,
Speaker 4: there could be an investigation there, or there should there
Speaker 4: could be some defunding mechanisms that put in place relative
Speaker 4: to you know, the state or the districts which are
Speaker 4: not complying.
Speaker 2: I'd love to say that, I would think that there's
Speaker 2: a chance on the state level that someone would do something.
Speaker 2: But in this state, we have an Attorney general that
Speaker 2: I don't think would side with Trump on this. In fact,
Speaker 2: she's come out and she's been pretty hostile. So that
Speaker 2: is what I mean. That is the situation. And I
Speaker 2: think for some conservatives, they say, we still need that
Speaker 2: protection from Washington, d C. Because we don't have if
Speaker 2: we are in a blue state or a purple state
Speaker 2: that has blue leaders, we don't have that protection. And
Speaker 2: that's where there are some conservatives that are kind of
Speaker 2: holding out hope that there is some protection from the
Speaker 2: federal government.
Speaker 1: But you say, that will still be there.
Speaker 4: For sure if the law is broken, no different than
Speaker 4: any other federal law that gets broken, there is a
Speaker 4: you know, there's a consequence to that, and so that
Speaker 4: consequence is still in place.
Speaker 2: I've got more coming up with the Secretary of Education
Speaker 2: Linda McMahon. But first I want to talk to you
Speaker 2: about my partners at American Alternative The markets have been
Speaker 2: experiencing some volatility with these brief rallies and then they're
Speaker 2: quickly erased by the sharp selloffs, and the dollar continues
Speaker 2: to weaken on the international markets, but gold has surged
Speaker 2: to a new all time record high. Wall Street analysts
Speaker 2: are warning of persistent market stress and advising their biggest
Speaker 2: clients to seek safety. Now, when markets swing this violently,
Speaker 2: your retirement savings are extremely vulnerable. It's during these uncertain
Speaker 2: times that people need stable assets. For thousands of years,
Speaker 2: that asset has been gold, and that's why I'm proud
Speaker 2: to endorse American Alternative Assets. They take a different approach
Speaker 2: to precious metals. They know you, they get to know
Speaker 2: your family, they get to know your needs, and they
Speaker 2: know precious metals protection is not for everybody. That's why
Speaker 2: they only work with the people that they know they
Speaker 2: can help. They provide quarterly check ins to ensure your
Speaker 2: strategy stays on track, thirty percent of their customer's return
Speaker 2: and refer family and friends. American Alternative Assets is offering
Speaker 2: our lessners a free Wealth Protection Guide and up to
Speaker 2: a five percent bonus on your first purchase.
Speaker 1: So call today.
Speaker 2: It's eight seven seven five to two gold, or you
Speaker 2: can get visit tutors goold dot com right now.
Speaker 1: Don't wait until it's too late.
Speaker 2: Protect your wealth and secure your future today again, that's
Speaker 2: eight seven seven five to two gold, or visit Tutorscold
Speaker 2: dot com now, stay tuned, we'll be right back.
Speaker 1: So what is your response to the Trump administration?
Speaker 2: The administration that you're part of freezing this money that's
Speaker 2: going to hire it, that's going to Harvard.
Speaker 1: Because of the campus activism.
Speaker 2: And this is something that there's been folks on both
Speaker 2: sides of this issue, but there are certainly a lot
Speaker 2: of people who have suffered from this. I would say
Speaker 2: it goes beyond activism. We're talking about harassment on these
Speaker 2: college campuses that is being allowed. So can you explain
Speaker 2: a little bit to us about the mindset behind freezing
Speaker 2: those funds.
Speaker 4: Well, it actually started with Columbia University, and I think
Speaker 4: it was it was very evident when we saw last
Speaker 4: year and then again just a few months ago, students
Speaker 4: on campus that not only were just being harassed, I
Speaker 4: mean locked in libraries, other students pounding on glass walls
Speaker 4: saying death Israel, Death to USA faculty was attacked. I mean,
Speaker 4: this was a safety issue. Not only was it, you know,
Speaker 4: a civil rights issue, but it was a safety issue
Speaker 4: as well. Not to be confused, it was definitely not
Speaker 4: a First Amendment issue because the president and this administration
Speaker 4: certainly does not disagree with anyone to have the right
Speaker 4: to peaceful protests or differences of opinion or on campuses,
Speaker 4: you know, having public and open debate. But when you
Speaker 4: start impacting the safety and welfare of members of you know,
Speaker 4: the campus community, that can't be tolerated. And so we
Speaker 4: brought those issues forward to the President of Columbia and
Speaker 4: our work continuing to work you know, with them. So
Speaker 4: other universities now have come under that same review, a
Speaker 4: Harvard being one, and so we'll continue to make sure
Speaker 4: as the president promised during his campaign that he will
Speaker 4: not tolerate discrimination of any kind on campus, but especially
Speaker 4: you know, anti semitism, because it was just so flagrant.
Speaker 2: I think it's interesting the way that you present that,
Speaker 2: because it's so important for people to understand because the
Speaker 2: other side actually agrees with you, even though they're not
Speaker 2: going to I just mentioned our radical attorney general, but
Speaker 2: let me be very clear that a few months back,
Speaker 2: when this was happening on the University of Michigan's campus,
Speaker 2: she did arrest these people that were harassing students.
Speaker 1: She arrested them, and she's coming down pretty hard on them.
Speaker 2: There has been a lot of pushback from Democrats in
Speaker 2: the state of Michigan, some Democrats, more of the progressive side,
Speaker 2: saying this is ridiculous. She shouldn't have They were peacefully protesting.
Speaker 2: That's the difference. They weren't peaceful, and that's what you're saying.
Speaker 2: You have to be peaceful.
Speaker 3: It does have to be peaceful.
Speaker 4: And when you jeopardize, you know, the safety and welfare
Speaker 4: of other students, that is.
Speaker 3: An infringement on their civil rights.
Speaker 4: And so we just we just absolutely cannot allow that.
Speaker 4: And I think that college professors have to take very
Speaker 4: I'm not professors, college presidents have to take pretty swift
Speaker 4: action to make sure that those kinds of protests don't
Speaker 4: get out of hand, because we you know, we have
Speaker 4: seen that there can be more and more injuries if
Speaker 4: it's not dealt with right away.
Speaker 2: And even preventing students from getting an education. You should
Speaker 2: not be able to borrow students from going to their classes.
Speaker 2: That should not the university should not be accepting that
Speaker 2: there are students who are paying for an education that
Speaker 2: can't actually get into their classroom because a protester is
Speaker 2: stopping them. Yeah.
Speaker 4: Absolutely, there again, that's a civil rights issue, there is.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 4: It's just like you said, the students, or scholarship payments,
Speaker 4: or parents who are expecting to be able to send
Speaker 4: their children to a safe environment and get the education
Speaker 4: that they're paying for. And that's not an unrealistic expectation.
Speaker 1: Right exactly.
Speaker 2: Stay tuned for more with Secretary Linda McMahon, But first,
Speaker 2: let me tell you about a great story from my
Speaker 2: partners at Genusel. It's heartwarming and refreshingly true. Twenty five
Speaker 2: years ago, a woman just like us wanted her youthful glowback.
Speaker 2: Phillis walked into her neighborhood pharmacy in Colonia, New Jersey,
Speaker 2: and asked the pharmacist for an antioxidant cream for her wrinkles.
Speaker 2: But instead of grabbing something behind the counter, he was like,
Speaker 2: let me make you one overnight. So Phyllis uses this
Speaker 2: cream for three days and then she goes to her
Speaker 2: dermatologist and he literally thought she had work done. So obviously,
Speaker 2: Phyllis was so happy she wanted to brag about the
Speaker 2: pharmacy and the pharmacist.
Speaker 1: Who made the life changing cream.
Speaker 2: And that is, believe it or not, how Genusel Skincare
Speaker 2: was born was twenty five years ago. Genucell has shipped
Speaker 2: millions of orders and they still have that same philosophy, antioxidants,
Speaker 2: that same natural base, and the same chef in the kitchen.
Speaker 2: Celebrating twenty five years, Genucel is now offering the best
Speaker 2: pricing since Phyllis walked into George's pharmacy. And right now
Speaker 2: you can save over seventy percent off Genucell's complete skincare
Speaker 2: packaged featuring the Genucell under eyebags and puffin a serum.
Speaker 1: It's awesome. I love it.
Speaker 2: The dark spot corrector you really do see a change.
Speaker 2: And some of these products you get immediate results, results
Speaker 2: in minutes and you'll look five, ten, even fifteen years younger.
Speaker 2: That's guaranteed or your money back. So go to genucell
Speaker 2: dot com slash dixon. That's genucell dot com slash dixon.
Speaker 2: Every order includes free shipping, so use Dixon at checkout
Speaker 2: for that extra discount. Again, that's genucell dot com slash Dixon.
Speaker 2: It's g E n uceel dot com slash Dixon. Now
Speaker 2: stay tuned, we'll be right back. Before I let you go,
Speaker 2: I want to ask you if there's anything you can share.
Speaker 2: You were in the first administration also, you were you
Speaker 2: went from that to the Secretary of Education, so different roles,
Speaker 2: and you were in the small business before that. Now
Speaker 2: you are in education, different roles behind the scenes. Can
Speaker 2: you tell us a little bit about what it's like
Speaker 2: when the president comes to you and says I need
Speaker 2: you to.
Speaker 4: Serve Well, it was very interesting because when the President
Speaker 4: and I did have this discussion and he talked to
Speaker 4: me about serving as the Secretary of Education. I told you,
Speaker 4: I said, you know, mister President, and I'm I don't
Speaker 4: come from the world of education.
Speaker 3: I've been in the business world.
Speaker 4: And that's why, you know, the SBA seemed to be,
Speaker 4: you know, such a good fit for me. And he said,
Speaker 4: but here's the thing, he said, I really do want
Speaker 4: to close the Department of Education. He said, I want
Speaker 4: to get rid of the bureaucracy of it. He said,
Speaker 4: I don't need an educator, he said, I need a
Speaker 4: business executive leader, a manager, someone who.
Speaker 3: Knows how to do that. He said, you're a perfect
Speaker 3: for this job. And so I agreed.
Speaker 4: To take on this role and to serve him in
Speaker 4: the country to the best of my ability.
Speaker 2: And I think it's meaningful that you did agree to
Speaker 2: serve twice because there have been a lot of criticisms
Speaker 2: of Donald Trump. And I was actually just talking to
Speaker 2: someone about this over the weekend. I said, how many
Speaker 2: people who have worked with him in his businesses or
Speaker 2: even in the White House have really come out and
Speaker 2: ever said anything negative about him?
Speaker 1: People love him.
Speaker 4: Well, he's he's a great boss. And I'll tell you what,
Speaker 4: it's really good. He understands so much what he is
Speaker 4: asking you to do, and he's very probative in his questions.
Speaker 4: I expect you to fully know and understand what it
Speaker 4: is that you're doing. He listens very well when when
Speaker 4: you're with him, but you know he expects action, and
Speaker 4: so we do work very well together. And plus I've
Speaker 4: known him for almost thirty years now.
Speaker 2: Well, we have been impressed with what the administration has
Speaker 2: done so far, and very impressed with what you've done.
Speaker 2: I'm so grateful you were here today to talk to
Speaker 2: us today. US Secretary Linda McMahon, thank you, Thank you, Tutor,
Speaker 2: and thank you all for joining us on the Tutor
Speaker 2: Dixon Podcast. For this episode and others, go to Tutor
Speaker 2: dixonpodcast dot com, the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever
Speaker 2: you get your podcasts and join us next time.
Speaker 1: Have a blessed day.