What Trump Really Means When He Talks About “Government Schools”

The origins of the Overton window and the coming war on public education.

Imgorthand/iStock

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


About halfway through Glenn Beck’s 2010 “paranoid thriller” The Overton Window, his protagonist discovers a slide deck detailing a secret leftist plot to gradually subvert the American Way and take over the United States. The conspirators (who include the protagonist’s dad) are employing an insidious, if somewhat wonky, tactic. As Beck’s hero explains, “It’s called the Overton Window. My father stole the concept from a think tank in the Midwest; it’s a way of describing what the public is currently ready to accept on any issue, so you can decide how best to move them toward what you want.”

That’s a pretty good distillation of the Overton Window, a concept that’s suddenly gotten a lot of attention as Donald Trump and his allies have pushed the boundaries of acceptable political discourse. “On key issues, [Trump] didn’t just move the Overton Window, he smashed it, scattered the shards, and rolled over them with a steamroller,” National Review’s David French noted with a mix of dismay and admiration in late 2015. Trump’s disregard for mainstream conservatism has also emboldened his boosters on the extreme right. The day before he announced his run for Louisiana’s Senate seat, ex-Ku Klux Klan leader and Trump fan David Duke tweeted about squeezing through the Overton Window into a federal office. “If you want to radically shift the Overton Window, you need that far-right flank,” Richard Spencer, the white nationalist credited with coining the term “alt-right,” told Mother Jones.

As Trump continues to push policies and embrace figures that would have been anathema not so long ago, we’re about to see the Overton Window shift to accommodate the defenestration of progressivism. One area to pay close attention to is education, where Trump has a direct link to the origins of the Overton Window concept—and where the Trump administration will likely promote policies that would blow up public education as we know it.

Any policy currently  considered too extreme may eventually be normalized through gradual shifts in public opinion.

Trump’s connection to the Overton Window starts with Betsy DeVos, his pick for secretary of education. She’s married to Dick DeVos, heir to the multilevel marketing giant Amway and a leading bankroller of Republican and conservative causes and candidates in their home state of Michigan. The DeVoses have also been major funders of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a conservative think thank that has long pushed for deregulation, privatization, and weakening labor unions. (Dick DeVos has also served on the center’s board of directors.) The Mackinac Center is also the birthplace of the Overton Window.

The concept is named after its creator, Joseph Overton, the late senior vice president of the center. In the mid-’90s, Overton developed the idea to describe how a think tank might shift public opinion to consider ideas beyond the realm of conventional wisdom. Since politicians would not entertain these risky ideas for fear of rocking the boat, it was up to political outsiders and the public to nudge politicians toward “bolder” choices. In other words, any policy that might currently be considered too extreme for discussion may eventually be normalized through a series of gradual shifts in public opinion. According to the model, politicians rarely move the window. Arguably, Trump may not have personally shifted the window so much as climbed through an opening created by his base.

Unlike the big-government baddies in Beck’s novel, the Mackinac Center doesn’t conceal its efforts to shift the Overton Window toward “free market” solutions. (It even has an Overton Window Facebook page.) In its description of the concept, Mackinac places policies along a liberal-conservative continuum, with the left represented by “Most government intervention/Least freedom” and the right by “Least government intervention/Most freedom.” For example, on gun policy, the scale encompasses everything from no private ownership of weapons (least freedom) to no restrictions of any kind on weapon ownership (most freedom). When it’s applied to education policy, the scale ranges from “Compulsory indoctrination in government schools” to “No government schools”:

Mackinac Center for Public Policy

While any discussion of eliminating public schooling may currently seem outrageous, that could change as more states embrace the “reforms” outlined by the Mackinac Center. “Why is it that we educate children by having the government assign them to schools?” asked the center’s president, Joe Lehman, in an appearance on Beck’s show before describing how Mackinac has successfully challenged education policy in Michigan. “We’ve shifted that window up.” A Mackinac article on Overton’s legacy notes just how far he and his colleagues were able to move the state’s education policies: “Home schooling is here to stay, charter schools are well established, and school choice continues to gain ground. In fact, in some parts of Michigan it is now even possible to run for office on a platform that includes the Universal Tuition Tax Credit—another Overton innovation—a situation that was unthinkable just 10 years ago.” On the Overton scale, tax credits for education are just three steps away from the final goal: “No government schools.”

Which brings us back to Betsy DeVos. As my colleague Kristina Rizga explains, DeVos has spent decades trying to gut Michigan’s education system in the name of school choice. While she has not publicly called for an end to public education, DeVos has written about the need to “retire” and “replace” Detroit’s public school system. And she has pushed for aggressively expanding charter schools (with minimal oversight) and expanding the use of school vouchers to fund private and parochial schools—key steps on the Mackinac Center’s continuum.

Another sign the Overton Window is lurching rightward is the adoption of the language promoted by the DeVoses and Joseph Overton himself. In a 2002 speech at the Heritage Foundation, Dick DeVos advocated a shift in how conservatives talk about America’s schools. “‘Public schools’ is such a misnomer today that I really hate to use it,” he said. “I’ve begun to use the word ‘government schools’ or ‘government-run schools’ to describe what we used to call public schools because it’s a better descriptor of what they are.” At the time, you might have been hard pressed to find a prominent Republican politician willing to use such a loaded term. Fourteen years later, the president-elect is talking about our “failing government schools.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate