Bill O'Reilly Forced Out; Ivanka Trump; Betsy DeVos

FIRST, BILL O'REILLY IS OUT AT FOX NEWS AND WOMEN'S RIGHTS GROUPS ARE CELEBRATING, WHAT IMPACT WILL IT HAVE ON SEXUAL HARASSMENT AT WORK.

AND, IS IVANKA TRUMP JUGGLING HER BUSINESS AND GOVERNMENT INTERESTS ETHICALLY?

THEN WE'RE STARTING TO SEE HOW BETSY DEVOS MIGHT CHANGE THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

HELLO, I'M BONNIE ERBE.

WELCOME TO TO THE CONTRARY, A DISCUSSION OF NEWS AND SOCIAL TRENDS FROM DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES.

UP FIRST, WINNERS AND LOSERS IN THE FOX NEWS SEXUAL HARASSMENT SCANDAL.

BILL O'REILLY, THE MOST POPULAR CABLE NEWS HOST WILL NOT RETURN TO THE FOX NETWORK.

HE REMAINS DEFIANT DENYING SEXUAL HARASSMENT CHARGES.

IN A STATEMENT O'REILLY SAID IT'S "TREMENDOUSLY DISHEARTENING THAT WE PART WAYS DUE TO COMPLETELY UNFOUNDED CLAIMS BUT THAT IS THE UNFORTUNATE REALITY MANY OF US IN THE PUBLIC EYE MUST LIVE WITH TODAY."

O'REILLY WAS FORCED OUT THIS WEEK AFTER MORE THAN 50 ADVERTISERS PULLED THEIR SPONSORSHIP OF HIS SHOW AND WOMEN'S GROUPS CALLED FOR HIS OUSTER.

IT ALL FOLLOWS REVELATIONS THAT HE AND 21ST CENTURY FOX PAID 13-MILLION DOLLARS IN SETTLEMENTS TO FIVE WOMEN WHO COMPLAINED ABOUT SEXUAL HARASSMENT OR OTHER INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR BY O'REILLY.

FORMER FOX NETWORK CHIEF ROGER AILES WAS LET GO IN JULY ALSO BECAUSE OF HARASSMENT ALLEGATIONS.

AT THE TIME THE MURDOCHS WHO OWN FOX PLEDGED TO CLEAN UP THE CULTURE AT THE NETWORK.

SO WHAT IMPACT WILL THIS HAVE ON EMPLOYERS?

>> WELL, I THINK IT GOES TO SHOW THAT WE HAVE MADE HUGE STRIDES IN GENDER EQUALITY BUT THERE WILL BE BAD ACTORS AND IT WILL CROSS INDUSTRIES.

THEY WILL GET WHAT THEY DESERVE.

>> THERE IS A CULTURE PROBLEM IN FOX NEWS AND AMONG A NUMBER OF EMPLOYERS.

IT DOES PROVE THAT WHEN THE PRESSURE OF THE PURSE AND ADVERTISERS COME TO BEAR AND THE PUBLIC THAT SOMETHING CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT.

BUT FOX HAS A PROBLEM NOT JUST ON GENDER BUT RACE.

THEY HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE WHOLE BANANA.

>> IT SHOWS WE NEED PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY FOR INDUSTRIES THAT FOSTER INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR.

>> I DO NOT THINK THAT FOX GETS CREDIT THEY KNEW ABOUT THIS AND GAVE HIM A $25 MILLION CONTRACT ANYWAY THAT IS WHY HE WALKED OUT THE DOOFER WITH $25 MILLION.

THE WOMEN BARELY HAVE THEIR DIGNITY.

IT IS APPALLING THERE'S MORE ACCOUNTABILITY HERE.

>> WAIT A SECOND.

BECAUSE OF THE CONTRACT WAS SIGNED LAST MONTH, AND THEY ALREADY KNEW GOING BACK TO 2004 THEY HAD A PROBLEM ON THEIR HANDS, THEY ARE OUT CLAUSES WE DON'T KNOW IT'S $25 MILLION.

IT'S SUBJECT TO WHATEVER NEGOTIATIONS THEIR LAWYERS MAKE.

>> THEY GAVE HIM A NEW CONTRACT KNOWING HE WAS A SEXUAL HARASSER.

IT WAS NOT UNTIL THE TIMES PUT IT ON THE FRONT PAGES THAT THEY FELT THE PRESSURE.

>> RUPERT MURDOCH IS IN HIS 80s AND HIS SONS ARE TAKING OVER AND THEY KEEP CLOSE TO THE VEST WHAT THEIR POLITICAL PROCLIVITIES ARE BUT THERE ARE RUMORS THEY ARE MORE PROGRESSIVE.

HOW MUCH DID LOCK LAND AND HIS BROTHER HAVE TO DO WITH THE DECISION.

>> THE WORD WAS ONE OF THE WIVES WAS PUSHING FOR THIS AND IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE BAD PEOPLE OUT THERE AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED NOT HAVING BEEN IN THE ROOM.

BUT IT'S GOOD TO KEEP IN MIND THERE'S GOOD PEOPLE.

I HAPPEN TO BE AT FOX A LOT AND THERE ARE A LOT OF NICE PROFESSIONAL MEN AND WOMEN WHO WORK THERE.

SO HELPFUL TO PUT INTO PERSPECTIVE IT'S AWFUL THAT HE WAS THEIR BIG STAR AND THE PRIMETIME 8:00 P.M. SLOT BUT HOPEFUL HE IS NOT THE ONLY ONE.

>> HAS THE ATMOSPHERE CHANGED SINCE HE LEFT?

>> HERE IN THE WASHINGTON STUDIO I DO NOT FEEL A DIFFERENCE BUT IT'S RUN PROFESSIONALLY HERE.

I HAVE POSITIVE EXPERIENCES.

THERE ARE A LOT OF GREAT GUESTS.

I CANNOT SPEAK TO NEW YORK.

>> SO WHAT DO YOU THINK EMPLOYERS ARE GOING TO DO?

>> WELL, I MEAN I THINK ESPECIALLY EMPLOYERS WHO ARE REALLY OUT IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC AND THEY DEPEND ON ADVERTISING, THEY WILL TAKE NOTE OF THIS.

AND THE PUBLIC KNOWS NOW THAT WE CAN HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WHEN THERE IS ORGANIZING BEHIND CHALLENGING WHAT WOULD BE THE CONVENTIONAL THEOLOGY WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN TO PUT HIM ON BREAK AND BRING HIM BACK AND THAT COULD NOT HAPPEN IN THIS CASE.

>> WAS IT A GAIN FOR WOMEN?

DID WOMEN CAUSE HIM TO BE PUSHED OUT FINALLY?

OR WAS IT RESPONDING TO ADVERTISERS?

>> HOW MANY WOMEN ARE LEFT AT FOX NEWS.

I THINK IT WAS A PUSH TOWARDS ADVERTISING AND IT WAS A BUSINESS DECISION ON THE PART OF FOX BUT SOME HAS TO DO WITH THE BILLY BUSH EFFECT WHEN YOU THINK WITH THE ACCESS HOLLYWOOD TAPES AND THAT DIALOGUE.

A LOT OF THIS YOU WOULD SEE MORE MEN IN THE WORKPLACE ENVIRONMENTS SAYING WOMEN ARE NOT COMFORTABLE ACCUSING SOMEONE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT MAYBE MORE PEOPLE ARE NOT BILLY BUSHESQUE IN THEIR NATURE AND BEING MORE ENGAGED AND THIS PERSON'S BEHAVIOR IS A PROBLEM.

>> AND I DO NOT THINK IT IS BECAUSE THEY ARE A CONSERVATIVE NETWORK.

I THINK THEY ARE A CONSERVATIVE BROADCASTERS THAT ARE PERFECTLY GENTLEMANLY TOWARDS WOMEN.

I THINK THERE'S GENERATIONAL INTEREST FOR ME BECAUSE WHEN I WAS GROWING UP IT WAS LIKE IT WAS A SKILL SET TO BE ABLE TO NAVIGATE SEXUAL HARASSMENT I DON'T KNOW ANY WOMEN MY AGE WHO DID NOT EXPERIENCE IT.

AND WHAT ALLISON SAID THIS WEEK WHEN SHE SAID WE USED TO THINK THAT SUCCESS WAS ACTUALLY NAVIGATING WHEN PEOPLE HARASSED US.

SUCCESS NOW IS TAPING IT.

AND THAT'S A CHANGE.

>> AND THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE FLIP SIDE, TOO.

BECAUSE PUTTING THIS CASE ASIDE, I THINK WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL NOT TO RUSH TO JUDGMENT BECAUSE LIVES CAN BE RUINED AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT GENDER EQUALITY MEANS WE ARE MAKING SURE THAT BOTH PARTIES TAKE RESPONSIBILITY WHEN IT'S NECESSARY.

AND THAT SOME SITUATIONS ARE HARASSMENT OR WORSE.

AND THOSE NEED TO BE TAKEN VERY SERIOUSLY BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT JUMPING THE GUN BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE CAREFUL NOW.

>> WE HAVE TO HAVE RULES IN THE WORKPLACE ENVIRONMENT THAT ENABLE WOMEN TO STEP FORWARD AND NOT DEPEND ON THE GRACIOUSNESS OF MEN TO STEP IN AND PROTECT THEM.

>> WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THIS, WILL THIS FIRING HAVE THE FOLLOWING EFFECT: AN AUDIOTAPE OF HIM SAYING SOME REALLY HORRIBLE THINGS TO HER.

AND YET SHE AT FIRST SHE WAS JUST IGNORED AND IT WASN'T UNTIL THE TAPE CAME OUT THAT FINALLY THEY DECIDED TO PAY HER OFF AND THEY DID SO AS QUIETLY AS POSSIBLE.

WILL THIS GIVE MORE TRUTHFULNESS AND MORE WEIGHT TO THE ACCUSATIONS THAT WOMEN MAKE IN THE FUTURE?

>> EVIDENCE IS EVIDENCE.

AND I THINK PART OF THE ISSUE IS WHAT SORT OF THE GOAL IS.

TOO MANY WOMEN FEEL LIKE THEIR CAREERS WILL BE RUINED IF THEY COME OUT PUBLICLY.

SO THEY ARE WILLING TO TAKE MONEY AND STAY QUIET.

AND I DO NOT BLAME THEM FOR THAT.

BUT I FEEL LIKE THAT HURTS THE SYSTEM.

BECAUSE YOU KNOW, WOMEN NEED TO FEEL THAT THEY WILL BE A HERO IF THEY COME OUT AND CLAIM THIS AND CLAIM THE TRUTH.

>> DON'T YOU THINK THIS WILL SERVE AS AN EXAMPLE?

I CANNOT REMEMBER HER NAME BUT I WAS IN LOCAL NEWS IN THE 80s AND WORKED FOR NBC AS A CORRESPONDENT, AND THERE WAS A WOMAN WHO SUED SHE WAS AT A LOCAL STATION IN THE MIDWEST AND HER -- JESSICA SOMEBODY.

ANYWAY, AND HER REPUTATION WAS RUINED.

JESSICA SAVAGE AND SHE NEVER WORKED AGAIN.

AND YOU KNOW, WAS THIS FAIR?

>> WELL, I'M SURE THAT IS A HUGE CONCERN FOR A LOT OF WOMEN AND IT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING HORRIFYING TO GO THROUGH AND I'M WONDERING ON THE FLIP SIDE BUT HOW MANY WOMEN ARE READING THE HEAD LINES AND THINKING WOW, I WONDER IF I SHOULD SAY SOMETHING NEXT TIME THAT IS NOT TRUE BECAUSE THEY ARE WATCHING WOMEN WALK AWAY WITH LARGE, LARGE SUMS OF MONEY.

>> MOST WOMEN DO NOT CLAIM RAPE FALSELY AND THEY ARE BEING ABUSED IN THEIR HOMES FALSELY.

>> IT'S TOO MUCH AT STAKE TO DO THAT AND I THINK IF ANYTHING WHAT THIS DOES IS IT FORCES THE REST OF US TO SAY THIS IS WHAT IS APPROPRIATE AND NOT APPROPRIATE IN A WORKPLACE AND IF THERE IS A GENERATIONAL SHIFT LET'S TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT RIGHT NOW.

>> IS THERE A MAN IN AMERICA WHO CAN SAY HE WAS NOT AWARE OF BILL O'REILLY'S FIRING AND WHAT HE DID?

SO WE HOPE MAYBE TO THINK TWICE OR PREVENT EVEN THEM FROM THINKING IT IS OK TO DO THAT KIND OF BEHAVIOR?

>> I WILL BE CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT COMES OF BILL O'REILLY IF HE GETS PICKED UP BY ANOTHER NETWORK.

IT SAID A LOT ABOUT THE RISK ASSOCIATED WITH HIM.

WILL A NETWORK PICK HIM UP AND IT WILL NOT HAPPEN IN THEIR NEWSROOM IF THAT IS TRUE.

THAT WILL BE -- >> AND IT MUST BE SAID SOME PEOPLE GET FIRED FOR THIS AND SOME PEOPLE GET ELECTED PRESIDENT.

THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS BAD BEHAVIOR FOR MEN ARE NOT ALWAYS ONES THAT MAKE PEOPLE AFRAID.

>> VERY GOOD POINT.

LET US KNOW WHAT YOU THINK.

PLEASE FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER @BONNIEERBE.

FROM BILL O'REILLY TO THE FIRST DAUGHTER.

IVANKA TRUMP FACES NEW QUESTIONS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOW THAT SHE'S A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE WITH A WEST WING OFFICE.

ACCORDING TO THE ASSOCIATED PRESS TRUMP'S BUSINESS WAS GRANTED PROVISIONAL TRADEMARKS FROM THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT THE SAME DAY SHE WAS HAVING DINNER WITH HER FATHER AND THE PRESIDENT OF CHINA.

AND WHILE PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS SIGNING EXECUTIVE ORDERS PROMOTING "BUY AND HIRE AMERICAN" THIS WEEK, TRUMP FAMILY BUSINESSES, INCLUDING IVANKA'S, CONTINUE TO IMPORT PRODUCTS MADE OVERSEAS.

IVANKA TRUMP IS NO LONGER INVOLVED IN DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS OF HER COMPANY BUT SHE STILL OWNS IT AS PART OF A TRUST.

SO IS IT LEGAL?

OR ETHICAL FOR THE DAUGHTER OF A PRESIDENT TO BE MAKING PERSONAL GAIN BECAUSE YOU MAKE MORE MONEY WHEN YOU CONTROL PATENTS OVER YOUR BRANDS WHILE SHE IS IN THE WHITE HOUSE AT A STATE DINNER WITH ANOTHER HEAD OF STATE?

>> WELL, I MEAN, WHAT IS NOT ETHICAL IS THE IDEA THAT THIS FAMILY CONTINUES TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT IT IT PROFITS OFF OF DONALD TRUMP BEING PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

AND I THINK IT'S VERY PROBLEMATIC.

I THINK YOU KNOW THERE HAS TO BE A BRIGHTER LINE BETWEEN THE WHITE HOUSE AND THEIR BUSINESS AND HAVING A TRUST DOES NOT DO IT BECAUSE IT AIN'T WIND.

AND I THINK THIS IS GOING TO COME TO ROOST.

AND IF WE COULD SEE DONALD TRUMP.

>> HOW?

>> IF WE COULD SEE DONALD TRUMP'S TAX RETURNS THAT WOULD TELL US A LOT ABOUT WHAT THEIR INTERESTS ARE AND RELATIVE INTERESTS AROUND THE WORLD WHEN IT MANY IMPACTS PUBLIC POLICY.

I THINK THERE IS A LONG WAY TO GO.

>> THERE WAS A PROTEST ON TAX DAY AND IT DID NOT DO ANYTHING.

>> WE NEED HIS TAX RETURNS.

>> I MEAN THIS LOOKS A LITTLE... >> AND I DO NOT THINK IT HAPPENED THAT QUICKLY.

>> SAME DAY.

SAME DAY.

>> I IMAGINE THIS WAS IN THE PROCESS.

IT STILL MIGHT BE UNTOWARD I HAVE NO IDEA WE CAN ASSUME IT WAS IN SOME WAY.

IT GOES TO THE LARGER POINT THAT AS GOVERNMENT GROWS IT MAKES IT HARDER AND HARDER TO ATTRACT THOSE WHO ARE NOT CAREER POLITICIANS INTO THE WHITE HOUSE AND THAT IS PROBLEMATIC WHETHER YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT ARE 0 A REPUBLICAN WE WANT PEOPLE WHO HAVE REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE.

IN THEORY IT SHOULD BE A GOOD THING THAT WE HAVE PEOPLE IN THE WHITE HOUSE WHO HAVE ALL OF THIS BUSINESS EXPERIENCE BUT WE ARE CONCERNED PERHAPS RIGHTLY THAT THEY ARE ENTANGLED BECAUSE GOVERNMENT IS SO POWERFUL SO THERE IS A LEGITIMATE CONCERN HOW DO WE ROLLBACK GOVERNMENT ENOUGH TO ATTRACT BETTER PEOPLE ON THE RIGHT OR THE LEFT.

>> SO I THINK THAT IVANKA TRUMP LEARNED AT HER FATHER'S KNEE AND THIS IS A CLIP TOCK SI FOR THE TRUMP FAMILY WHETHER IT'S DINNERS AT THE HOTEL OR THE GOLF COURSES OR THIS OR IVANKA IS WEARING HER CLOTHES FROM HER BRAND WHEN SHE IS ON TV.

BUT I HAVE A CONFLICT ABOUT ATTACKING IVANKA TRUMP SO I DO NOT DO IT.

I THINK THIS IS HER FATHER'S RESPONSIBILITY.

BECAUSE I ACTUALLY HOPE AND PRAY THAT HER BEING IN THE WHITE HOUSE DOES EMILE RATE POLICIES THAT I FEEL LIKE ARE THE WORST INSTINCTS OF THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S STAFF.

SO THERE IS THIS KIND OF HOPE AND PRAYER THAT SHE WILL BE THE ADVOCATE FOR WOMEN THAT SHE SAID SHE WOULD BE.

THERE ARE A FEW TESTS WHETHER IT'S CHILDCARE OR WHETHER IT'S PLANNED PARENTHOOD.

SHE FAILED THE ONE ON LGBT KIDS.

BUT SO I DO THINK THIS KIND OF CONSTANT SCRUTINY ON HER HAS A CONFLICT FOR PEOPLE LIKE ME.

>> THAT IS AN INTERESTING POINT THAT YOU BRING UP.

BECAUSE EVERY REPUBLICAN WOMEN I KNOW AND I'M FRIENDS WITH MANY THEY SAY THE SAME THING WE HAVE TO KEEP HER THERE.

THERE'S BEEN NO EVIDENCE OF HER HAVING ANY INFLUENCE ON ANY POLICY FROM PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENTS TO THE ENVIRONMENT TO WOMEN'S RIGHTS -- >> THEY SAID SHE WAS SAD ABOUT THE SYRIAN CHILDREN AND ENCOURAGED THE PRESIDENT TO ACT.

SO THAT -- BUT NOT A PROGRESSIVE ISSUE AND NOT EXACTLY SETTLING THAT -- SOMETHING THAT OUR HOPES ARE.

>> HOW LONG IS THIS HOPE GOING TO GO ON?

>> WHO KNOWS.

>> SHE COULD HAVE THAT SAME INFLUENCE WITH A CLEAN BUSINESS.

NOT BEING YOU KNOW, AT THE PUBLIC DOLL EVEN IF SHE IS NOT GETTING PAID IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

>> IF SHE WERE A WHITE HOUSE STAFFER IT WOULD BE WORSE BECAUSE THEN SHE WOULD BE FREE TO PURSUE HER BUSINESS INTERESTS.

SHE CANCELED HER BOOK TOUR BECAUSE SHE DID NOT WANT IT TO BE SEEN THAT SHE WAS PROMOTING HER BUSINESS.

I THINK -- BUT THEY ARE NOT DOING THE ULTIMATE THING THEY ARE NOT GETTING RID OF HER ASSETS.

THEY ARE MAKING SURE THAT THEIR ASSETS STILL GROW AND THAT IS AN ETHICAL TEST?

>> WHERE IS THE PUBLIC OUTRAGE?

>> I THINK IT'S HARD -- I THINK IT'S HARD FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND.

>> PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THIS ABOUT HIM.

>> CAN YOU IMAGINE CLINTON DOING THIS OR OBAMA?

OR PRESIDENT BUSH?

>> I COME FROM A DIFFERENT ANGLE YES AT A MINIMUM IT'S DUBIOUS TO SAY THE LEAST THERE ARE CONFLICTS AND IVANKA CONVENIENTLY GOT A TRADEMARK THE SAME DAY.

>> THIS IS THE GUY THAT WAS GOING TO DRAIN THE SWAMP.

>> I DON'T WANT TO DEFEND THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION BUT I WILL SAY THAT I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT EVERYTHING IS LIKE HOUSE OF CARDS AND THERE IS HEY MOTIVE HERE TO MAXIMIZE THE PROFITTY OF THE TRUMP ORGANIZATION.

YOU HEARD DONALD TRUMP JR. SAYING WE ARE GOING TO PUT IT IN A BLIND TRUST BUT HE DID NOT KNOW WHAT A BLIND TRUST WAS.

IVANKA, I DO NOT THINK SHE IS TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO USE HER DAUGHTER AS A PROP TO MAKE MONEY FOR THE TRUMP ORGANIZATION SHE IS A MOTHER WHO HAD HER DAUGHTER IN THE ROOM WITH THE CHINESE PRESIDENT.

AND I TAKE A STEP BACK AND TRY TO GIVE THEM A TAD OF THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT TO NAVIGATE THE CONFLICTS BUT THE LINES HAVE BEEN BLURRED AND THERE NEED TO BE CLARIFICATIONS BUT WE ARE IN UNCHARTERED TERRITORY THIS IS NOT A PRESIDENT THAT RUNS A MULTI BILLION DOLLAR ORGANIZATION.

>> AND THE REASON THE AMERICANS ARE NOT OUTRAGED THEY WERE DESPERATE FOR SOMEONE WHO DID NOT COME FROM WASHINGTON.

LIKE HIM OR DON'T LIKE HIM THEY WANTED SOMEONE WHO HAD THAT BUSINESS SAVVY.

SO THERE IS AS JEN SAID ETHICAL CONCERNS HERE.

BUT I THINK THAT BETTER THAN FOCUSING ON THAT IS TO FOCUS HOW DO WE GET BEYOND THAT FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT TO ATTRACT GOOD PEOPLE?

>> HE IS A HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATOR IN TURKEY.

>> WE ARE OUT OF TIME.

BEHIND THE HEADLINES: FROM THE WHITE HOUSE, TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ED.

EDUCATION SECRETARY BETSY DEVOS SIGNED AN ORDER REVERSING OBAMA ADMINISTRATION REFORMS THAT STRENGTHENED PROTECTIONS FOR BORROWERS OF STUDENT LOANS.

THE GOAL OF THE REFORMS DEVOS REVERSED WAS TO SUPPORT STUDENT BORROWERS SO FEWER OF THEM DEFAULTED.

DEVOS DEFENDS HER ACTIONS SAYING THEY'RE INTENDED TO LIMIT 'THE COST TO TAXPAYERS" AND "INCREASE CUSTOMER SERVICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY."

THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ADMINISTERING ONE-POINT-THREE TRILLION DOLLARS IN FEDERAL STUDENT LOANS.

MEANWHILE DEVOS IS INCITING OUTRAGE THE WOMEN SHE NAMED TO BE DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR CIVIL RIGHTS.

CANDICE JACKSON, WHO IS ALSO TEMPORARY HEAD OF THAT DEPARTMENT, ONCE COMPLAINED SHE WAS BEING DISCRIMINATED FOR BEING WHITE.

JACKSON ALSO WROTE AN OP-ED CHARGING THAT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROMOTES RACIAL DISCRIMINATION.

THE OFFICE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING STUDENTS FROM RACIAL, GENDER DISABILITY AND AGE DISCRIMINATION INVESTIGATING THOUSANDS OF CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINTS EVERY YEAR.

SO IS THIS JACKSON WOMAN GOING TO FIND THAT ALL COMPLAINTS OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST -- BY PEOPLE OF COLOR SHOULD BE THROWN OUT AND INSIGHT A GROWTH IN THE NUMBER OF WHITE PEOPLE SAYING THEY WERE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST?

>> THE FAR RIGHT HAS HAD AN AGENDA WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FOR THE LAST -- SINCE IT WAS CREATED THAT THEY WANTED TO GET THEIR HANDS ON IT AND THEY HAVE A LEADER IN BETSEY DeVOS WHO WANTS TO EXECUTE ON THEIR WISHES WHICH IS PULLING BACK ON PROTECTING KIDS CIVIL RIGHTS AND PULLING BACK ON SUPPORTING PUBLIC SCHOOLS, PULLING BACK ON THINKING ABOUT HOW TO MAXIMIZE THAT PUBLIC SCHOOL EXPERIENCE.

SO I DO WISH THAT THEY WOULD FIGURE OUT HOW TO JUST FOCUS ON GETTING KIDS READY FOR THIS ECONOMY THAT THEY ARE FACING.

BUT THEY SEEM TO WAND TO RIO OWE WANT TO REVERSE ENGINEER ALL OF THE PROGRESS THE COUNTRY HAS MADE IN DIVERSITY AND EMPOWER.

IN A WAY THAT IS DISTRACTING AND AS A TAXPAYER OFFENSIVE.

>> IS THE GOAL HERE MUST BE ASKED, TO DISMANTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS COMPLETELY?

>> NO.

>> THE MORE -- BUT THE MORE CHARTER SCHOOLS THE MORE PRIVATIZATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THE LESS THE FEWER PUBLIC SCHOOLS THERE WILL BE.

>> AND WE HAD AN EVENT ON THIS LAST WEEK WITH A NUMBER OF STRONG SCHOOL CHOICE ADVOCATES BUT THE GOAL IS NOT TO GET RID OF PUBLIC EDUCATION.

THE GOAL IS TO GIVE MORE FAMILIES THE CHOICE OF WHERE THEY CAN SEND THEIR CHILDREN WHETHER THAT IS A RELIGIOUS SCHOOL OR PRIVATE SCHOOL OR PUBLIC SCHOOL OR CHARTER SCHOOL.

SO THE PARENTS AND FAMILIES HAVE MORE CONTROL OVER THE KIND OF EDUCATION.

WE HAVE TO REMEMBER WE ARE A COUNTRY OF 300 MILLION PEOPLE.

AND THE IDEA THAT WE ARE GOING TO ALL SHARE THE SAME VALUES WHEN IT COMES TO HOW TO EDUCATE OUR CHILDREN IS WHAT DRIVE US APART WHAT CREATES THE WEDGES.

LET'S GIVE PEOPLE ESPECIALLY THE FAMILIES IN FAILING SCHOOL DISTRICTS THE CHOICE.

AND I THINK IT'S EASY TO GO AFTER BETSEY DeVOS MANY SHE SAID A COUPLE THINGS THAT THERE'S LOTS OF OUTRAGE BUT IF WE STEP BACK AND THINK ABOUT WHAT THE END GOAL IS WHICH IS TO EDUCATE CHILDREN AND GIVE THEM OPPORTUNITY WE CAN COME TO THE TABLE TOGETHER ON THIS.

>> SHE HAS A HUGE FINANCIAL -- SHE CAME FROM MICHIGAN WHERE SHE WAS -- HER FAMILY HAS BUSINESSES STARTING PRIVATE SCHOOL CHARTER SCHOOLS.

AND THIS IS ALSO -- IT'S MONEY FOR HER.

>> BUT I DON'T KNOW TOO MANY PEOPLE WHO HAVE GOTTEN EXTREMELY RICH OFF THE EDUCATION SYSTEM.

WE DON'T HAVE AN EDUCATION MARKET.

THIS IS A WEALTHY WOMAN WHO HAS BEEN GENEROUS TO THE SCHOOL CHOICE MOVEMENT NO DOUBT BUT THAT IS HARDLY THE SAME THING AS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT INSIDE THE WHITE HOUSE AND THOSE CONCERNS.

>> THE STUDENT LOAN SERVICING INDUSTRY HAS GOTTEN RICH OFF OF THE EDUCATION SYSTEM AND IT'S PROBLEMATIC TO PUT IN PLACE A SYSTEM AGAIN WHERE YOUNG PEOPLE CAN GO INTO EXTRAORDINARY DEBT BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE PROFITING OFF THE STUDENT LOAN SYSTEM AND SOMEBODY WHO IS THE DEPUTY IN CIVIL RIGHTS AND NOT THE PENTAGON SOMEONE WHO IS IN CHARGE OF THE DIVISION BECAUSE YOU DO NOT WANT TO GO THROUGH THE SENATE SCRUTINY AND THAT IS PROBLEMATIC.

BECAUSE A LOT OF THINGS CAN HAPPEN AT THE POLICY LEVEL AND THERE'S NOBODY TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT.

AND THIS HAS BEEN A SYSTEMIC.

THESE EARLY MOVES BY THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION REALLY SIGNAL THE DIRECTION THEY WANT TO GO.

>> AND I ALSO HOW MUCH CAN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM STAND OF HAVING MONEY AND STUDENTS TAKEN AWAY FROM IT BEFORE -- BY CHARTER SCHOOLS BEFORE IT COLLAPSES?

>> THAT IS WHY IT IS A FALSE CHOICE.

IT'S FALSE TO SAY WELL WE ARE JUST GOING TO SUPPORT OTHER FORMS OF EDUCATION.

I GIVE SECRETARY DeVOS CREDIT THIS WEEK SHE WENT TO A SMALL TOWN IN OHIO WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE TEACHERS UNION TO MEET WITH FAMILIES THAT ARE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM AND THAT SCHOOL DISTRICT VOTED FOR DONALD TRUMP LIKE IN THE 70%.

AND WHAT SHE LEARNED THERE, THOUGH, WAS PARENTS SAYING PLEASE DON'T DIVERT MONEY FROM OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

THEY WERE SUPPORTING THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS SAYING WE -- THIS IS NOT ABOUT CHOICE.

YOU ARE GOING TO TAKE MONEY OUT OF THE COMMUNITY AND SEND IT TO PRIVATE SCHOOLS TOO FAR AWAY AND OUR KIDS NEED THE MONEY IN THE PUBLIC EDUCATION.

SO -- IF YOU ARE GOING TO ADD NEW MONEY AND SAY WE ARE GOING TO EXPERIMENT AND ADD MONEY TO CHARTER SCHOOLS OR TO GIVE THEM TO CHURCH SCHOOLS THAT IS FINE.

BUT YOU ARE NOT.

YOU ARE TAKING IT FROM PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

>> AND WHAT A LOT ARE DOING BY THE WAY THEY ARE CUTTING MUSIC EDUCATION AND CUTTING ARTS EDUCATION.

>> DO PEOPLE KNOW IN ARLINGTON WHERE I LIVE IN VIRGINIA THEY SPEND CLOSE TO $28,000 PER STUDENT EQUIVALENT TO THE PRIVATE EDUCATION TUITION HERE IN WASHINGTON D.C.

I THINK THAT PEOPLE ARE UNAWARE OF HOW MUCH PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARE SPENDING PER PUPIL AND IF YOU DIG DEEPER AND LOOK AT THE -- THAT IS WHY THEY PAY TAXES.

>> THE MAJORITY OF OUR STUDENTS RECEIVE A PUBLIC EDUCATION AND WE CANNOT AFFORD TO TAKE MONEY AWAY FROM THOSE STUDENTS FOR THE PUBLIC EDUCATION.

>> I THINK IF YOU CANNOT EDUCATE A CHILD AT 28,000 THEN YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING WRONG.

>> IF YOU LOOK AT ARLINGTON WHICH IS NEXT TO FAIRFAX, WHICH IS ONE -- WE ARE OUT OF TIME.

THAT'S IT FOR THIS EDITION.

FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER AND VISIT OUR WEBSITE, PBS.ORG/TOTHECONTRARY.

AND WHETHER YOU AGREE OR THINK TO THE CONTRARY, SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

[♪♪]