Now that the Democrats will stay in control of the Senate next year, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a far-left independent, has officially announced his intention to chair the education committee. According to a statement from his office, he’ll likely focus more on higher education and health care issues than K-12.

Meanwhile, conservative Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky — in line to be the top Republican on the committee — that he will instead take the role of ranking member on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. That leaves Louisiana Sen. Dr. Bill Cassidy as the next Republican in line for the job. Cassidy, an advocate for , is also considering a

The progessive believes in free college for all and wants to triple funding for poor schools.

The conservative once campaigned to abolish the U.S. Department of Education.

One is the son of a former Libertarian Party candidate for president and sounds a consistent drumbeat on schools: The federal government should stay out.

The other, ranked by one scorecard, is a self-described democratic socialist known for pushing just one education cut — to charter schools.

But in the latest example of the nation’s topsy-turvy politics, Vermont Independent Bernie Sanders and Kentucky Republican Rand Paul will soon be first in line to run the Senate education committee.

“They’re a heck of an odd couple,” said Rick Hess, a senior fellow and director of education policy studies at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.

“Alpha and omega,” quipped Jack Jennings, a retired education policy expert and former Democratic staffer for the House.

Depending on the outcome of this week’s election, the two firebrands are the top contenders to be chair and ranking member of the Senate HELP Committee, which also oversees health, labor and pension issues. While it may seem increasingly inaptly named in an era of gridlock and rabid partisanship, the committee wields considerable power, overseeing a $235 billion education budget and issues from special education to preventing sexual harassment and discrimination in schools.

With Republicans already proposing to restrict lessons on gender identity and sexual orientation and the Biden administration engulfed in a to wipe out billions of dollars in student loan debt, there’s plenty of potential for the two to clash. Neither senator’s office responded to requests for comment.

The succession battle is triggered by the expected transition of longtime chair Patty Murray of Washington to a leadership position on the appropriations committee — that is, if she wins  against a suddenly formidable challenger—  and the retirement of ranking member Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina.

From COVID closures to parent protests at school board meetings, the committee has seen its share of hot-button topics over the past two years. While hearings have been clearly partisan, Murray and Burr have kept the tone fairly civil.

Bethany Little, principal at EducationCounsel, a consulting firm, sees it as the end of an era in which members wanted “to get things done.” That’s how it was, she said, when she worked for the committee under former Democratic chairs Edward Kennedy and Tom Harkin. 

“There is a shift in the posture of the people taking charge and their interest in making a deal and being able to find middle ground,” she said.

The ascendency of Sanders/Paul — or Paul/Sanders — is by no means assured. Earlier this year, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said he expects Paul to run the committee if the GOP flips the Senate. But first, Paul has to defend his seat in Congress, which he’s expected to do in solidly Republican Kentucky. Sanders, for his part, would have to give up chairmanship of the budget committee. 

Some say that’s a switch he’d be likely to make. 

The senator “got his green money,” Hess said, referring to climate-related provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act. But for free preschool and community college, part of the original version of that bill, fell by the wayside. 

Sanders recently said he’d like to revive efforts to pass what he has described as “transformational” programs for families, such as the larger child tax credit that was part of the American Rescue Plan. But he never wanted to stop at two years of free community college. He wants to be free and for the federal government to cancel all student debt.

As an advocate for , the chairmanship would also allow him to lead the panel that oversees the government’s various health-related agencies.

Health care issues might also be a reason why Paul, an eye surgeon, would savor the chance to chair the committee. Paul is known for his regular with medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci over COVID policies and vaccines. Paul wants to investigate allegations that tie Fauci to the virus’s creation by funding research in China. While Fauci categorically denies the allegations, an Oct. 20 Paul fundraising email declares, “If you help me win, I promise to subpoena every last document of Dr. Fauci’s unprecedented coverup.”

“He’s so off the rails on just about everything,” said Charles Barone, a former Democratic staffer in the Senate and now vice president of K-12 policy with Democrats for Education Reform, a think tank. “His level of combativeness and his general aversion to anything bipartisan is problematic.”

Paul was the among the handful of Republicans to the Every Student Succeeds Act in 2015. Aside from wanting to put Education Secretary Miguel Cardona out of a job, he also proposes sending federal directly to parents.

Jennings said moderate Republicans on the committee — Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Mitt Romney of Utah — could mitigate some of Paul’s  rhetoric.

But as for the Vermont senator, he said, “I don’t think there’s any restraint on Sanders. He speaks his mind.”

As Election Day nears, predictions on whether Democrats will hold onto the Senate change almost by the hour. According to election forecaster FiveThirtyEight, they are now in a with Republicans, who in the polls.

Regardless of who leads the committee, as long as one party holds a slim majority, there’s little chance members would advance bipartisan bills, said Michelle Dimino, deputy director of education for Third Way, a center-left think tank. 

“It’s more likely to stay in the realm of hearings and investigations,” she said. 

Hess said he could see Republicans questioning how districts are spending COVID relief money, and Jennings added that they would likely try to stop the Biden administration’s move to cancel student debt.

“There’s enough for them to muck around in,” Jennings said.

Possible common ground

Despite their differences, the two iconoclasts have one thing in common: They are both known for bucking their own parties — a trait that could make them occasional allies. One issue where the pair could find common ground is testing and accountability. the federal requirements to assess students annually as “Washington’s intrusion into the classroom,” and Sanders is an of standardized testing.

They might also find agreement on protecting student privacy. Paul has sought to roll back government surveillance programs, and Sanders is “wary about big tech collecting data” on students, said Lindsay Fryer, senior vice president of Penn Hill Group, an education lobbying firm.

Paul is also up for the top Republican seat on the homeland security committee and has said he doesn’t plan to make until after the election. That committee the , which would still give Paul a chance to put his stamp on expanding school choice.

Republicans want to see the program, which serves about 1,800 students, have “stable financial footing,” said Lindsey Burke, director of the Center for Education Policy at the conservative Heritage Foundation. Right now, she said, it exists “at the whim of Congress.”

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten is among those who probably hopes he’ll choose homeland security. She told ����Ӱ�� that the prospect of him leading the education committee “absolutely” keeps her up at night as she travels the country for Democratic candidates.

Given how far apart the parties are on education, leaders might have no problem with Paul and Sanders promoting their out-of-the-mainstream ideas.

But the opposite could also be true. 

Hess said Republicans could regret giving more attention to the idea of eliminating the education department. Likewise, he said, the “Democrats might be better off if Sanders doesn’t have such a visible, public platform to talk about giving money away.”

����Ӱ��’s senior reporter Jo Napolitano contributed to this report.

The proposed rule would allow “federal reviewers to ignore state and local decisions to authorize new public charter schools,” Sens. Michael Bennet of Colorado, Diane Feinstein of California and Cory Booker of New Jersey wrote in a to U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona. 

Republican Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida, Tim Scott of South Carolina, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Richard Burr of North Carolina also signed the letter. The proposed requirements, they wrote, “would make it difficult, if not impossible, for new public charter schools start-ups, and for high-performing public charter schools seeking to replicate or expand, to access [Charter Schools Program] funding.”

The $440 million competitive grant program, now almost 30 years old, supports schools’ start-up costs, from facility needs to staffing. Department officials say the revisions, which would require potential grantees to demonstrate “sufficient demand,” would encourage more racially balanced schools that don’t compete with traditional districts losing enrollment. Provisions would also require charters to be transparent about any contracts they have with for-profit organizations, which would increase accountability. But charter advocates argue the plan would make it harder for applicants to win approval, even if there’s demand from families. 

After backlash from the field and six in the Senate, the department last month extended the comment period on the rule for five days. Over 26,000 , both for and against the plan, have been submitted. 

Ranking Republicans on the House and Senate education committees have also threatened to repeal the rule if the administration doesn’t change it. They’ve asked the department to confirm by May 12 that it will submit the final rule to Congress for review.

In the recent letter, the senators said the proposal would “add significant burdens and time to an already complex application process, with little time for technical assistance, particularly for the upcoming 2022 grant cycle.”

Under the current schedule, the department is due to award grants to states by Sept. 30, which means the department has less than four months to finalize its rule, post the grant application and review submissions. New and expanding charter schools depend on the grant program because they don’t receive funding until after they begin serving students.

The senators want the department to allow charter operators to apply for the program under existing rules released in 2020.

“The time frame is definitely very tight, which is why it’s better to stick to the old rule this year,” said Nina Rees, CEO of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. The Alliance is opposed to the department’s major revisions to the rule and argues it would hurt charters at a time when the sector has seen record growth. 

The department didn’t directly respond to the bipartisan letter, but said in a statement that the proposed rule is intended to “improve the quality and accountability of charter schools.”

Bennet, Feinstein and Booker advocate for funding for the Charter Schools Program every year, Rees said, but added it’s significant that they’re “expressing their views publicly.”

“We hope the department takes them seriously,” she said. “The three are not just any Democrats. They come from … states with a rich history of chartering.”

Leading Republicans on the Senate education committee are calling on the head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to provide details about how much the agency interacted with teachers unions and whether she has been completely forthcoming about their involvement in .

North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr, ranking member of the committee, and Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, sent to CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky Thursday with a list of questions about why the guidance was delayed from late January to mid-February. The letter asks Walensky to identify all administration personnel, including political appointees who prepared and reviewed her April 22 letter to the committee, and requests a complete list of “stakeholders” the CDC contacted, including parents. The senators want to see all documents and communications between the CDC and union employees or members.

“That your agency would give teachers’ unions privileged access to the agency’s internal decision-making process on an issue as critical as school re-openings is a betrayal of that trust,” they wrote. “That you then would appear to try to avoid Congressional scrutiny by providing incomplete testimony is deeply troubling.”

The letter is the latest example of concerns about political influence over the agency in charge of the nation’s response to the pandemic. During the Trump administration, Democrats whether senior officials were pressuring the CDC, then led by Dr. Robert Redfield, to downplay the threat of the virus. Now, Republicans are questioning whether President Joe Biden’s supporters have interfered with efforts to reopen schools.

The CDC did not respond to requests for comment.

On Feb. 27, ����Ӱ�� filed a request with the CDC seeking information similar to what the senators want — all documents and communication, such as emails and transcripts of meetings, involving the CDC and any interest groups or individuals consulted in preparing the guidance. The CDC has so far provided internal CDC emails, but not the full list of groups and individuals.

Walensky testified before the committee May 11, saying that the agency sought input from over 50 “consumers.” During that hearing, she said the CDC’s communication with the unions focused on what schools should do if they have immunocompromised teachers.

But obtained through the Freedom of Information Act by Americans for Public Trust and Open Fairfax County Schools, a parents’ group in Virginia, show there was extensive email communication between CDC officials and the unions, especially the American Federation of Teachers.

“Your testimony seems – at a minimum incomplete – if not inaccurate,” the letter said. “The email correspondence makes clear that the involvement of the teachers’ unions went well beyond accommodations for high-risk teachers.”

AFT, for example, pushed for language saying the agency could change its guidance if a new variant of COVID-19 was detected.

In a Feb. 11 email to Walensky, as well as White House officials, Kelly Trautner, AFT’s senior director of health issues, suggested: “In the event high community transmission results from a new variant of SARS-CoV-2, a new update of these guidelines may be necessary.” She wrote that the union was concerned that even with safety protocols in place, some schools in “high-density, crumbling infrastructure areas” would not be able to safely reopen.

The final guidance reads: “As more information becomes available, prevention strategies and school guidance may need to be adjusted to new evidence on risk of transmission and effectiveness of prevention in variants that are circulating in the community.”

The Fairfax group said the senators raise important questions and that the public needs to understand why the guidance didn’t always coincide with the studies and recommendations it received from experts, such as the agency recommending 6 feet of social distancing even when research showed 3 feet was still effective in minimizing transmission. The CDC later reduced its recommendation 3 feet, which the AFT initially opposed.

“The draconian guidelines, many of which the CDC has subsequently pulled back from, resulted in slower reopenings in parts of the country that treat such guidance as mandatory, a result that was in alignment with the positions being advanced by the AFT and NEA but which caused real harm to the nation’s school children,” the Fairfax group said.

Following the initial release of the emails May 1, AFT spokesman Oriana Korin issued a statement saying the union was in touch with the CDC on behalf of its members, just as it was during the Trump administration.

“And while we have at times been concerned about their conclusions — as we were initially with the change in classroom physical distancing rules — we respect deeply that the CDC career staff has always taken its responsibility seriously,” she said. “And we appreciate that under Dr. Walensky’s leadership, the CDC welcomes stakeholder feedback, as opposed to ignoring it.”