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.
Yeah, let's remove one of the foundational guardrails that is preventing states from teaching straight up religious fundamentalism in the classroom.
If you don't think that is the point behind this, then I have a bridge to sell you chief....
And I have some prime real estate in Suffolk Virginia.
I'm not looking backwards, I'm looking forwards. The state of education has declined SPECIFICALLY because of this kind of Republican led obstructionism.
You think removing (the already seriously lacking) guardrails is going to make the problem go away? You're wrong, and that is simply one of the stupidest fucking takes I have heard from anybody that is capable of using a keyboard.
We are getting outclassed by countries who have been able to leave the kind of circle jerking that passes for politics in this country behind in the post WWII period of economic acceleration while we were naval gazing and Reaganizing.
No offense, but if you think removing ANY impediments that are preventing full chistisian nationalist minority rule in this country is a good idea then please do the rest of us a favor and don't vote...fuck.
Gotta remember: when regressives say that it worked well in the past, they mean it worked well for a very specific class of people. Mainly, upper and middle class white men. That is on purpose. They obviously know school was not good for the POC, minorities , the poor, and probably women 200 years ago.
Unless they are idiots.
Even so, its still very dumb when you are, or are moving towards, being a service economy. Gutting education is destinying your country to stop being a superpower in the future.
No, it didn't. For most of that time most kids did not actually get an education.
The reason education became as big and important is because it indeed didn't work. And a well-educated populace is, like, one of the absolute most important things for a country to have, besides maybe good health. It's one of the primary metrics of a country's development index for a reason.
To be wanting to effectively abolish good education...
Don't worry, the shithole states are doing their best to bring us back to the days when a nine year old who couldn't afford school could get themselves a job at the local meat packing plant. Sadly, I think most of the textile mills have gone out of business, so those won't be an option any more.
God forbid somebody try to make a better life for themselves and their family.
But just so we're clear, you are taking the pro child labor stance here and would rather have children doing that work? Good to know.
Proof that it's real illegal labor and that it's the state's fault rather than the company exploiting people who are suffering and attempting to make a better life for themselves?
Also, do you think that giving the states full control won't mean certain ones have the freedom to enforce as much religious doctrine as they want? I personally have already experienced religious teachings in class. They are bringing back school prayer, posters with religious phrases, and clergy in schools instead of counselors. What assurances would I have for school to not turn into a church with a bit of math and reading on the side?
Funded by the states with minimum standards set at the federal level (though NCLB wasn't great). But if you honestly think the states currently rolling back child labor laws wouldn't have a field day if DOE were eliminated, I'm not sure there's a real discussion to be had.
No privilege in that comment, no sir.
I guess as long as it's only the children of true believers and poor folks it's all fine and dandy.
Did it? Because literacy rates are bad now but even worse then. Let alone literally every other subject.
So because we did it before, it must be perfect?
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.
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?
So we should give them full reign? That will make things better?
That's because Texas buys loads of school books and the publishing companies don't want to make multiple editions. Getting rid of a federal agency won't do anything to change that
The federal agency is at least making sure Texas doesn't try teaching the Bible as history.