Fauci’s critics, like Sen. Rand Paul, have seized on diary entries detailing his conversations with New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio just prior to that city’s 2020 shutdown. But that criticism errs by collapsing two different things. Fauci plainly supported the initial school closures, as did most Republican and Democratic officials. The more relevant question is whether he advised keeping schools closed on a broad scale the following year.

Fauci has long maintained that he did not. 

In August 2020, as districts wrestled with whether to reopen, he National Geographic, “there are areas and regions of the country … where the level of infection is low enough that you really should try very hard to get the children back to school.” Four years later, Fauci the same account. “I kept on saying, ‘Close the bars, open the schools,’ ” he told CBS News: “Initially to close it down was correct. Keeping [schools closed] for a year was not a good idea.” 

Unfortunately, if that was Fauci’s intended message, it largely failed to reach the public.

Several surveys I conducted for a book on the politics of pandemic school closures show that Americans understood Fauci’s position very differently. My evidence comes from three sources. The is a November 2022 YouGov panel of 1,000 U.S. adults, with samples weighted to represent the national adult population. The is a December 2023 of 5,000 elected school board members, with responses weighted to reflect the demographic characteristics of school districts nationwide. The was a 2025 YouGov survey with the same parameters as the one I conducted in 2022. 

Together, this assortment of data reveals how Americans and local school officials understood the case for prolonged school closures, and which public authorities they believed stood behind them. Three findings from these surveys are especially relevant to the renewed debate over Fauci’s role. 

First: Whether, fairly or not, Fauci became the public face of keeping schools closed.

In the 2022 and 2023 surveys, I asked respondents whether they thought various political leaders and organizations believed that keeping schools closed throughout the 2020-21 school year was strongly justified, somewhat justified, somewhat unjustified or strongly unjustified. The list included Fauci, Presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump, the Democratic and Republican parties, and teachers unions.

Overall, 57% of the 2022 respondents said they believed Fauci thought keeping schools closed during that time was strongly justified, a higher number than for any other leader or group. School board members were even more likely to reach that conclusion: Over 7 in 10 believed Fauci viewed prolonged closures as strongly justified.

What’s more, the idea that Fauci supported prolonged school closures cannot simply be dismissed as a partisan talking point: 63% of Democratic and 57% of Republican respondents held that view.

Second: Compared with those who thought Fauci opposed prolonged school closures, respondents who said they believed Fauci viewed lengthy shutdowns as necessary were far more likely to conclude — even after vaccines had become available — that it was too risky for both students and educators to return to their classrooms. 

Specifically, in the 2022 survey, I asked respondents how risky it was for either a 10-year-old child or a 50-year-old teacher to return to elementary school. Those who believed Fauci supported school closures were about twice as likely as those who thought he opposed them to say school remained too risky for students and about 40% more likely to say the vaccinated teacher still faced substantial risk. To be clear, this does not prove that Fauci caused those perceptions. Americans who already feared reopening may instead have assumed he agreed with them about various risks. But it does show how closely Fauci’s public image had become tied to continued fears about returning to school.

Taken together, these findings suggest that Fauci had become more than a public health official. For many Americans, his perceived position on school closures served as a cue for judging the risks of reopening, even after vaccines had become widely available.

Third: I wanted to know what mattered more when Americans were asked to look back and reflect on the wisdom of prolonged school closures: evidence about what happened to children or the positions of public figures like Fauci.

To get at this, I ran an experiment in the 2025 survey. First, all participants were reminded that many public schools had remained closed even after vaccines became available, while bars and restaurants had reopened. Then, the respondents were then randomly divided into four groups. One group received no additional information. The other three were told that research showed school closures caused lasting academic harm; that Trump had opposed keeping schools closed; or that Fauci had publicly rejected lengthy shutdowns. I then asked everyone whether keeping schools closed for more than a year had been the right or wrong decision.

Regardless of the information they received, about two-thirds of Republican respondents said they believed it was the wrong decision. Among Democrats, however, the information mattered. Just one-third of those who received only the basic facts said prolonged closures had been wrong. Reminding them of the evidence on learning loss barely changed that judgment. But when they learned that Fauci himself had rejected year-long closures, nearly half concluded the policy had been wrong.

Faced with a choice between evidence about the consequences for children and cues from trusted leaders, many Americans appeared to place greater weight on the messenger than the evidence. Fauci, not research on learning loss or Trump’s position, proved to be the persuasive cue. call this follow-the-leader politics. People often rely on trusted elites to interpret complex issues rather than evaluating the underlying evidence themselves.

In sum, Fauci may be correct about what he intended to communicate. But my surveys suggest that most Americans, including the school board members responsible for reopening classes, heard something very different. Fauci’s public standing became closely associated with support for keeping schools closed, shaping how many Americans understood the risks of reopening and, ultimately, judged one of the most consequential policy decisions of the pandemic.

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 91ɬ�� 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.”

91ɬ��’s senior reporter Jo Napolitano contributed to this report.