fbpx
Articles

A conversation with Jeb Bush on education, COVID, and politics

/
June 2, 2021

Jeb Bush, the son of and brother of two American presidents, has his sights set on addressing the issue of education reform head-on through his Education Foundation, ExcelinEd, which he formed to improve education standards. His journey in the education field started with his experience in politics. “When I started running for office, I would tour the state and hear that the number one problem that people had was education training,” Bush said. This issue drove him to want to know more about the education system in the state of Florida, which hovers consistently at the bottom of the state education ratings. Bush also credits touring 250 Florida schools as a gateway to his understanding the enormity of the problem. 

Stepping into the education arena became a spiritual calling, as well. “God has given every child the ability to learn. Yes, they learn in different ways. But what we ought to say is that because this is a gift from God, we should organize ourselves around that to reach kids.” He granted a rare interview to the ERLC about his latest work. 

Why have you decided to address the issue of education? 

When I started running for political office, I would always ask questions about what the top priorities were. In the state of Florida, in 1987-88, every county, every economic development group that I spoke with would say education and training were the number one issues. So my first passion was really how we take a pretty poor education system at the time in Florida and make sure that we have a phenomenal business climate where people can rise up, businesses can invest, and people can flourish. I was convinced at the time that school choice had to be an element of that.

I created Floridians for School Choice, the group that advocated for vouchers. We brought Polly Williams, an African American, very liberal state senator from Wisconsin to promote the idea of what she did in Milwaukee. The first voucher program was in Milwaukee. As a candidate in ‘94, and certainly in ‘98, when I went to visit 250 schools, I learned so much. My views didn’t change, but I learned how to advocate these pretty provocative ideas in a way that wasn’t threatening. I put a human context around it. Then I got to be governor, and I got to implement the things that I said I wanted to do. It was a joy of a lifetime.

After I left politics, it was through the Foundation for Excellence in Education that I continued to be involved with an incredible team of 55 to 60 people. We work in 40 states, and we advocate meaningful reform, empowering parents to make choices for their kids rather than systems and bureaucracies; high expectations; real accountability; ending social promotion in third grade; early childhood literacy; and trying to change high schools so that kids graduate college and/or career ready. 

Is this a spiritual calling for you?

It’s at the heart of my spiritual beliefs. You start with the premise that God has given every child the ability to learn. They learn in different ways. Not every kid learns at the same speed or can reach the same levels of aptitude, but this is a God-given gift that every child gets. So, rather than excuse why kids can’t learn, we ought to say this is the gift from God. We also need to organize ourselves around these kids in a different way to ensure that they reach their God-given abilities. That doesn’t sound too crazy to me. Basically what else is there to be doing in life?

It’s been a great passion of mine, but it’s also been a great frustration because we haven’t moved the needle as fast as we should. The world’s moving at a faster pace than it was in 2000. It’s moving at warp speed right now. And all this disruption, culturally, economically, socially, and politically, requires young people to have a foundation from which they can thrive. And right now, too many kids don’t have that.

When you were governor of Florida, how did you see change take place? 

When I became governor, we increased our graduation rate every year. I think it’s at 85% right now. Now, I think we need to raise the bar. I think we need to constantly be pushing the system to assure more and more kids are college and/or career ready. But, we’ve had big progress because we’ve had higher expectations for our children, and we’ve empowered parents in Florida . . . . My attitude is: let’s focus on children and students. We need to empower parents to give them the information they need to make informed decisions and have high expectations for every school. They are respected whether they’re a traditional public school, a charter school, a private school, or a parochial school. With high expectations for every kid, you’re going to get a better result. 

How has COVID-19 disrupted the education system, and what advice would you give to leaders? 

In March, we were all sent home. If you’re living in poverty and couldn’t afford the $40-per-month for broadband or one of the service providers for high-speed broadband, you’re out of luck. If you didn’t have a device to be able to learn on, you’re out of luck. And so we’ve been advising governors to direct some of this discretionary money toward dealing with this digital divide issue. It is ridiculous that we have a digital divide in this country. We are the most advanced country in the world technologically. I read somewhere that 400,000 teachers didn’t have access to high-speed broadband. How could they teach if they’re at home? So, that’s one thing. 

The second thing I’d say is, as is the case with every policy in my mind, at least we should have a bias toward action — not a bias toward sitting in the fetal position saying, “This is overwhelming, and we can’t do anything about it.” A bias toward action means we should do everything possible to to open our schools and to keep them open in a safe way. So, I’m proud of the fact that Florida led the way in getting schools back open. Because we have big school districts, our governor, education commissioner, and most of the superintendents had a bias toward action. They were the first of the big school districts to act. They were the first to open, and they’ve not closed. And the fact is that we haven’t had a huge outbreak of COVID in our schools.

The learning gaps that started in the spring semester of last year . . . [are] going to hit low-income kids the hardest, and those gaps will grow. There should be a bias toward action, particularly for low-income communities, to make sure that they have access to the same quality education that more affluent families have right now in our country. 

You have an influential last name. What if somebody’s last name is not Bush? What advice would you give them about getting involved? 

We’re a bottom-up country. The best ideas come from the bottom-up, and the best advocacy comes from the bottom-up. And the best means by which you can make a difference is from the bottom-up. So first and foremost, if you’re a parent, get involved in your school. If you have school choice programs that are in your state that are under attack, protect them, defend them, and advocate for them. 

I’m a huge advocate of local involvement — community involvement — to be able to make a difference in changing policy. If you notice, politicians do listen to people when they come and say, “Don’t take this away from me.” So, my advice is to be involved in your child’s education. If you don’t have children, be involved in the school. Be a mentor in religious institutions that have been fortified because they’re receiving this kind of support.

What advice would you give to President Biden? 

I do what I’ve done with every president which is pray for their judgment, their discernment, and their health, because when presidents succeed, we all succeed. And I think that’s the first thing we ought to do — to encourage our president. Pray for him, and pray for public leaders, whether we agree with their policies or not. That’s a noble tradition in our country. It’s a sign of strength, not weakness. 

The second thing I’d say is I’d bet that the top-down approach doesn’t work . . . . There are lots of things that could happen, but if the mindset is we’re smarter than you and we don’t trust you, we’re going to get ugly results. And so my hope is that the president will trust the decisions made at the local level more than what typically happens from D.C., and try to envision what the world will look like in 2030, not what the world looked like in 1980.

Do you miss politics? 

That’s a great question. I don’t want to sound like a politician cause I’m not, but the answer is yes and no. I miss the challenges, particularly in emergencies. I miss being able to serve when people really need the help of the government. I don’t miss the politics of politics, which is dangerously poisonous right now. 

I’m totally blessed in life. I have five grandchildren, all close to perfection, as you can imagine. My wife and I are about ready to celebrate our 47th year of marriage. Wow. My reform education foundation is flourishing. My business is flourishing. My health is great. I don’t miss politics. I worry about our country a lot. And I hope our politics do change for the better — where we’re more loving, more conciliatory, and don’t think people who disagree with us are our enemies. 

Photo Attribution:

NurPhoto / Getty Contributor

Maina Mwaura

Maina Mwaura resides in Atlanta, Georgia, with his wife, Tiffany, and daughter, Zyan. He is a graduate of Liberty University and New Orleans Theological Seminary and has served on staff at several churches. You can find Maina‘s written work at mainaspeaks.com. Read More

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24