Considering the DoEd only deals with ensuring every child is served by state public education (e.g. disabled access, special ed, and anti-segregation) and managing student loans for college - there's not much to be sent back to the states. Especially when the entire reason the department exists is because states weren't doing those things.
Another important point: the executive branch can't just zero out budget and fire all employees of a Congressionally created org, as they have a legal duty to ensure the core functions as defined by Congress need to be executed. They may be able to cut some personnel and programs, but not the entire thing.
The Department of Education exists because Jimmy Carter bought teacher’s union votes by promising it. Segregation was illegal before Carter was elected. Accessibility to the disabled is a law. Violations of these laws are, or should be, handled by the DOJ, not another bureaucracy. The federal government has no business being involved in student loans.
Special Ed is a separate problem.
I remember a 15-year-old-guy named Ernest in my third -grade class. Ernest was well-behaved and seldom spoke to anyone. He mainly sat by the window and watched the cars passing by. We were told that Georgia law required children to attend school until age sixteen. Ernest quit coming to school on his sixteenth birthday. That was Georgia Special Ed in 1947.
My niece is a tiny woman in her mid-60s and is a Special Ed teacher in Mississippi. She has been assaulted by students numerous times – the last resulted in hip replacement surgery. I’m not sure her efforts and perseverance are really doing much good. That’s Special Ed in Mississippi in the 2000s.
Special Ed is more of a medical and mental health problem than an educational matter. I understand the desire to have special needs students assimilate into the normal population and that schools are the starting point, but it can’t be allowed to be detrimental to the student body as a whole.
Regarding Special Ed: that is more an issue of funding the necessary personnel and resources for those children. Some will be able to be part of the general student body, others not - that has always been the case. Regardless, they are owed an education and the monetary incentive for states to not provide said education makes for a need for federal oversight and enforcement.
Speaking of enforcement, let's game this out:
A state fails to ensure that their students are able to attend due to either disability access or there is segregation occurring. DOJ files charges, court cases occur...and then what? Who actually ensures that the state fixes the issue? If they fail to do so, then what? Another court case, and perhaps yet more ignoring of the courts?
There needs be enforcement, and for these areas it's the DoEd. If you want to put those elsewhere and give it teeth, by all means make those arguments - and get Congress to pass that.
But acting like states will just do the right thing without enforcement is laughable.
Considering the DoEd only deals with ensuring every child is served by state public education (e.g. disabled access, special ed, and anti-segregation) and managing student loans for college - there's not much to be sent back to the states. Especially when the entire reason the department exists is because states weren't doing those things.
Another important point: the executive branch can't just zero out budget and fire all employees of a Congressionally created org, as they have a legal duty to ensure the core functions as defined by Congress need to be executed. They may be able to cut some personnel and programs, but not the entire thing.
The Department of Education exists because Jimmy Carter bought teacher’s union votes by promising it. Segregation was illegal before Carter was elected. Accessibility to the disabled is a law. Violations of these laws are, or should be, handled by the DOJ, not another bureaucracy. The federal government has no business being involved in student loans.
Special Ed is a separate problem.
I remember a 15-year-old-guy named Ernest in my third -grade class. Ernest was well-behaved and seldom spoke to anyone. He mainly sat by the window and watched the cars passing by. We were told that Georgia law required children to attend school until age sixteen. Ernest quit coming to school on his sixteenth birthday. That was Georgia Special Ed in 1947.
My niece is a tiny woman in her mid-60s and is a Special Ed teacher in Mississippi. She has been assaulted by students numerous times – the last resulted in hip replacement surgery. I’m not sure her efforts and perseverance are really doing much good. That’s Special Ed in Mississippi in the 2000s.
Special Ed is more of a medical and mental health problem than an educational matter. I understand the desire to have special needs students assimilate into the normal population and that schools are the starting point, but it can’t be allowed to be detrimental to the student body as a whole.
Well said, Curtis.
Regarding Special Ed: that is more an issue of funding the necessary personnel and resources for those children. Some will be able to be part of the general student body, others not - that has always been the case. Regardless, they are owed an education and the monetary incentive for states to not provide said education makes for a need for federal oversight and enforcement.
Speaking of enforcement, let's game this out:
A state fails to ensure that their students are able to attend due to either disability access or there is segregation occurring. DOJ files charges, court cases occur...and then what? Who actually ensures that the state fixes the issue? If they fail to do so, then what? Another court case, and perhaps yet more ignoring of the courts?
There needs be enforcement, and for these areas it's the DoEd. If you want to put those elsewhere and give it teeth, by all means make those arguments - and get Congress to pass that.
But acting like states will just do the right thing without enforcement is laughable.