Multiple Republican presidential candidates made it clear at this week’s debate that the Department of Education is in danger if they are elected. “Let’s shut down the head of the snake, the Depart…
Multiple Republican presidential candidates made it clear at this week’s debate that the Department of Education is in danger if they are elected.
“Let’s shut down the head of the snake, the Department of Education,” Vivek Ramaswamy said. “Take that $80 billion, put it in the hands of parents across this country.”
Conservatives see the department, which has more than 4,400 employees and in its current form dates back to 1979 after first being established in 1867, as a prime example of Washington’s meddling in Americans’ lives. The time has come to “shut down the Federal Department of Education,” former Vice President Mike Pence said Wednesday.
But what would it mean to actually shutter the massive agency?
How could the department be eliminated?
Killing the Department of Education (DOE) would be easier said than done.
Conservatives have said since the creation of the department they want to get rid of it. From President Ronald Reagan and his Education secretary to President Trump and his own, Republicans have decried the department’s existence but failed to abolish it.
That is because the decision to do so is not only up to the president and would have to go through Congress.
“There would have to be some legislation to specifically outline this, but I do think it would need to have the support of the executive branch and, obviously, this is a Cabinet-level agency, so I think having the president — would have to take a leadership role and help to make sure that the proposal is carefully crafted,” said Jonathan Butcher, the Will Skillman senior research fellow in education policy at The Heritage Foundation, which supports nixing the DOE.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) proposed such legislation in 2021 and reintroduced it earlier this year.
“Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., should not be in charge of our children’s intellectual and moral development,” Massie said two years ago. “States and local communities are best positioned to shape curricula that meet the needs of their students. Schools should be accountable. Parents have the right to choose the most appropriate educational opportunity for their children, including home school, public school or private school.”
DOE did not respond to The Hill’s request for comment.
DOE’s duties would be absorbed by other federal agencies
DOE has an enormous number of responsibilities, including handling student loans, investigating complaints against schools and tracking education progress across the country.
None of the 2024 candidates during Wednesday’s debate detailed how they would handle eliminating it, but conservatives have longed to see many of its tasks either completely eliminated or absorbed into other departments.
“For example, the Office of Civil Rights at the Department of Education. I think that any duplicate responsibilities that it shares with the Department of Justice should be eliminated, and then the rest of that office should go to the Department of Justice,” Butcher said.
That plan is clearly working flawlessly in many parts of this country. There are more people alive today that believe in mythological deities, or that the earth is flat than at any other point in human history.
By population percentage we we seem going in the right direction, but the same old bullshit continues to be effective at pulling the wool over the eyes of the average rubes who are coopted by religion or social dogma before education can get to them.
Also means all the antidiscrimination rules no longer apply. The situation is right now a private religious school can pretty much hire and fire whomever they want for whatever reason. And this also kills tenure, which I am not sure is a system worth saving but at the same time I don't trust the GOP to replace it with something better.
I assume they want the states to have full autonomy over their education for starters. RIP kids in the south, they'll never even be taught how badly they've been screwed.
They want school choice, where parents take their school funding vouchers to charter schools, so they can segregate their children from the "less-fortunate" and "woke" (read people of color) and teach them all about the whitewashed history of the world and nothing about climate, healthcare, or gender and sexuality.
Worth it to continue reading until you get to the part where the founding fathers would have wanted you to be a good Christian and not choose whatever life is best for your family, but then in the next paragraph also state that only the family can choose what is right for themselves.
Couldn't make it much further because I don't want to be angry on a beautiful Monday, but knowing they couldnt keep their ideology straight for 2 paragraphs is all I need.
In a report from The Heritage Foundation back in 2020, the group estimated billions would be saved …
in a better world, it wouldn’t matter what the heritage foundation thinks. they’re a conservative propaganda machine that pushes climate change denial, transphobia, and voter fraud claims. it’s dishonest reporting to cite them without mentioning their track record and credibility.
Someone should tell the Heritage Foundation that we could save hundreds of billions of tax dollars per year if we just completely eliminated the Defense department. I mean, who cares about consequences when you have all those S A V I N G S, am I right?
Nope, the Republicans want to increase the military budget by a huge margin and eliminate the department of homeland security, department of education, the FDA, the EPA, the NIH, CDC, and more.
Just another thing the Republicans want to eliminate without any forethought or planning for what comes after. And just like their 'repeal' of ACA, they will cry for years that this needs to happen, and they've got a plan to handle it. Only to have it all blown up in their faces once they actually have the opportunity to make it happen.
The Republican party is a dog chasing a car. If it ever catches the car, they'll fuckin get run over.
I still don't understand how this would close any schools or universities. The public school and state university system has been here since the 1600s. Other than e.g. military academies, what schools do the feds run? Not many. They slosh a lot of money around, but it isn't clear to me that it's been a net positive in the 40 years it's been active, judging by effects on tuition, student debt, etc.
There's a lot of dumb rhetoric (and people) behind some of these calls to end the DoE, but the schools survived for 300+ years before it existed.
The problem is more that this would give states absolute authority when it comes to what is and isn't taught in schools (it actually goes further than that but I'm at work, look up what laws and acts the DoE is responsible for).
This is more or less fine for states with massive populations as those typically lean blue. I don't see the left suddenly switching to an anti science rhetoric
Red states? Science is replaced with religion. If you can't see why that's a problem then your reasons for disputing this are suspect.
Continuation of their Starve the Beast policies that they've been pushing for some 4 decades now.
In short, they cut funding for a department because they claim it is too expensive. There is a limit to how much can be cut before services suffer. That is true for anything - workers don't work for free, and equipment and supplies cost money. So then after they cut funding, they then declare that the department isn't meeting their goals and should be cut. They are setting up these departments to fail and then use that excuse to try to eliminate them altogether. The latest push is to kill the Department of Education, but over the years Republicans have been playing this game with the Post Office, the IRS, Amtrak, the EPA and a bunch of other "unnecessary" departments.
Be educated in what these clowns are trying to do because unlike the Left which has an attention plan of a goldfish, these conservatives play the long-game. They have been pushing these awful ideas since Reagan (and some even before that).
They want government to fail and create chaos and they actively try to push polices that will do it.
This is definitely one of those places where it’s easy to get frustrated with rural conservative voters, voting against their own best interests.
Kids in a state like mine already have a huge advantage because we value education and we fund it better. We also can afford to do so.
Conservative states already have less opportunity for their kids, by interfering and limiting their education. Those kids are already disadvantaged because many areas can’t afford adequate funding. I understand authoritarian politicians wanting power and control, but how can parent vote for limiting their kids’ future like that. Department of Education helps fund those schools, while also requiring equal opportunity and requires it be an actual education. Again, I understand politicians spreading divisiveness and outrage to control the populace, but how do parents firstly fall for the BS, and secondly vote against accepting “free” funding to improve their kids’ education?
DoE is one of those “transfer of wealth” programs where blue states pay more, and red states take more. If I don’t mind paying extra to help those disadvantaged, why do they not want to accept more money to invest in their kids’ future. Someone needs to talk to them about “family values”
It's simple. Rural parents and older people have been convinced over time via propaganda that "the school system" is why younger people don't generally share their values and ideology. This can be used in all kinds of ways to create emotional responses later.
For example, many conservatives in the western states are convinced young arsonists are burning down forests and fields because they are homeless and feel entitled to housing. Of course, there is no proof of this, and they don't think it can be climate change because they don't think climate change is real.
As a result of all this, they are very willing to take their kids out of school and switch to some homeschooling program so they don't raise homeless arsonists.
If I don’t mind paying extra to help those disadvantaged, why do they not want to accept more money to invest in their kids’ future. Someone needs to talk to them about “family values”
Because they want to teach hate to keep the poor poor and the rich rich. A DoE will never allow that, the existence of a DoE is "woke".
Take $80 billion, divide by the number of households in US with children ~ 30 million. That’s about $2700. Anyone who’s a parent knows that doesn’t go far at all in terms of education expenses. Good luck privatizing education and funding it out pocket for $3k/yr. Complete idiots.
That's kinda the point. They actively want the poors to have to send their kids to the 'budget' schools. The ones that charge exactly $2700 / yr / student. Broken computers, empty libraries, overworked and severely underpaid teachers, no extra curriculars.
Meanwhile, the oligarchs rich people can send their kids to the schools that cost more, teaches their kids how to be shitty to the proletariat, and has a pipeline directly into colleges.
The whole point of this venture is to siphon even yet more money from the poor into the hands of the rich, meanwhile depriving those same poor of a worthwhile education and giving the rich an even greater advantage.
Depends on the state, but finding isn't really the issue here. It's a move to a voucher system.
The idea that they are pushing is to privatize the entire education system. Privatization has been a wet dream for Republicans for many years now, and not just in education. It would further corporatize the country and allow for more money that was once 'the people's' to be siphoned into private pockets.
So the state gives money to families with children. Those families send their kids to a private school and give that money (plus probably a lot more) to that private school. Public money flowing into private hands. Add to that deregulation of the industry - no standard tests or textbooks. Education will be chaos.
You can't indoctrinate kids nearly as easily in public schools, and there's no way to turn a profit on them. By contrast, a solid public education makes kids more likely to grow up and vote Democrat. The GOP especially today knows that it can't win legitimately; rage baiting and cheating are their only remaining strategies.
the Federal contribution to elementary and secondary education is about 8 percent
the Federal role in education as a kind of "emergency response system," a means of filling gaps in State and local support for education when critical national needs arise
comprehensive set of programs, including the Title I program of Federal aid to disadvantaged children to address the problems of poor urban and rural areas
While you may think 8% of school funding isn’t much to lose, look at what it would impact
They want the largest amount of control at the highest level. If the federal level doesn't work, they'll dismantle it as far as possible and instead reign at the state level.
That's also why they are against "big government" - it's always the government above their highest one that's problematic. Never the one they are at.
They don't really want that federal control. They want to pretend they didn't lose the Civil War and have the federal government be responsible for international relations and military defense only.
This will allow them to pass whatever laws they want in their state, with effects I'd bet you can predict pretty easily, and depressingly.
I hate to break it to you, but that's exactly what they want.
"Grover Norquist, who founded Americans for Tax Reform in 1985 at the urging of President Reagan, declared in 2001: “I don’t want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.”"
Of course they do, they are advocating to strengthen it more then anybody. They just want to strengthen it in all the worst possible ways by making their fascism on the federal level.
Conservatives have established a series of charter schools designed to eliminate liberal thinking and to embrace Conservative Religious values (hate, discrimination, and conformity).
“Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., should not be in charge of our children’s intellectual and moral development,”
I think politicians instead of professionals being in charge of intellectual and moral development of children would be the worse choice. Like letting the fox guarding the hen house.
You don't need anyone in charge of education if there's no education! Republicans seem to want to eliminate all education except for private "Christian" indoctrination centers.
Imagine your kids’ education at the mercy of an authoritarian governor, acting to promote spite, hatred, scapegoats, outrage. Imagine a small group of racists, religious zealots, repressives steer your child away from actual education and towards whatever dreck they’re promoting.
These people are so fucking infuriating with their intentional ignorance...
WE VOTE FOR YOU TO CHOOSE THEM YOU NAZI FUCKS!
They know how representatives are supposed to work in government, they know that we (should be) electing people that we trust to make the right decisions with legislation and staffing. They'll defend Boofer McBooferton on the SCOTUS without blinking an eye. We didn't vote for him. We voted for the president that was handed a list by the federalist societychose him. Our vote for the (insert politician) was a vote for their choices...
I swear we need to force people to sit down and watch old PBS civics cartoons...
It is a cool song that still brings chills today. Perhaps you should listen to the point that song is trying to get across before disparaging a tribute.
Then again, i imagine it’s like “Born in the USA” or “The Punisher” that somehow becomes an anthem for the exact opposite of intended meaning
Meanwhile, every single open dictatorship establishes an education system to garner public favor and attempt to control what the populate learns and thinks.
Do you know what parents did before the DoE? Put their kids in the exact same school system they do now. The DoE started in 1980. The idea that Washington should suddenly have that much influence over a state/county-run public school system that existed since the 1600s was controversial.
Make the case for the DoE by all means, but reading this thread is blowing my mind. The DoE is barely older than I am and judging by tuition inflation and student debt it has left a few things to be desired in its short life.
The DoE was preceded by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The organizational structure has changed substantially over the centuries, sometimes being a standalone department and sometimes being an office in a larger department. But that is essentially window dressing.
Ultimately, the DoE goes back to 1867. It's been around for a while.
Ramaswamy isn't suggesting shuffling it into another department. He's suggesting getting rid of those functions entirely. Getting rid of the $80 million it spends on student loans, grants, anti discrimination enforcement and national education statistics, and "putting it in the hands of parents".
For reference, $80b/year is about an order of magnitude less than what the US spends on the military. Suddenly a lot of the ways America ... is... kind of makes sense.
Actually, it's pretty close to a single order of magnitude; $80b on education vs. $877b military. Not that it detracts from the point, though, nearly a trillion dollars is a metric shit-ton of money.
Republican don't want to re-organize how the federal government handles the responsibilities of the DOE—they want those responsibilities eliminated, and the more it harms schools, the better.
No they don't. If you want to control something your first step is not to break the mechanism of control. They want to say they want to.
Say you wanted to eliminate fossil fuels, if given federal power would you let 50 states or 5 different federal agencies just decide how to do it or would you use the existing control to make a unified standard across the country?
How many of those provinces are pushing creationism, pushing religion in general, forcing "don't say gay" laws, increasing police presence, and forcing the school to out any trans kids?
Well education is still all stated funded so it would look like it did back before it existed in 1979, and not much different than today, probably better. There's many national departments that are unneeded and could easily be eliminated.
Depends on the state you live in. If you live in a blue state, you might see some improvement. If you're in a red state, you can expect even worse educational outcomes than they are already seeing. Remember, the Texas GOP platform in 2012 included this gem.
We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.
They oppose teaching critical thinking skills or anything that might challenge a students beliefs. Do you really want people like them deciding what will be taught in schools and how?
They already do. All text books sold to schools In the US have to be approved by some review board in Texas currently. I don't think it's a department of education thing, but it would certainly reduce thier power.