H.R.899 – To terminate the Department of Education(congress.gov)
congress.gov
H.R.899 – To terminate the Department of Education
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/899
39 comments
Sounds great to me. Let education in the US become an inconsistent hodge-podge, and mostly much worse overall with religion being taught in science class like in Turkey. I'm sure America's competitors will love that America is shooting itself in the foot and guaranteeing its long-term demise as superpower. But if that's what the voters want, let them have it.
American primary education already is an inconsistent hodgepodge, since it is under almost exclusively local control with local funding (via property taxes, in most places). This essentially ensures that children of the wealthy get better public education than poor children, one of many, many "rich-get-richer" feedback loops in the American social and economic system.
Local districts don't have much say in curriculum after the "No Child Left Behind" act.
The push for more public funding to charter schools really only benefits districts with lower population and higher property taxes as the charter schools generally have a much higher teacher to student ratio.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_child_left_behind
The push for more public funding to charter schools really only benefits districts with lower population and higher property taxes as the charter schools generally have a much higher teacher to student ratio.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_child_left_behind
> Local districts don't have much say in curriculum after the "No Child Left Behind" act.
Yes, they do (unless states took it away from local districts, but that's not a direct consequence of NCLB or the subsequent federal law, even if it is in some way motivated by it.)
NCLB created, and subsequent federal law has modified, requirements for testing and accountability based on that testing, but left to the states most of the actual standards and content of the testing (and did virtually nothing to direct curriculum.)
Yes, they do (unless states took it away from local districts, but that's not a direct consequence of NCLB or the subsequent federal law, even if it is in some way motivated by it.)
NCLB created, and subsequent federal law has modified, requirements for testing and accountability based on that testing, but left to the states most of the actual standards and content of the testing (and did virtually nothing to direct curriculum.)
In theory yes, but in practice the teachers are incentived above all else to cater everyday they can to push the standardized testing material into all of the students leaving very very little room for creative teaching.
I don't know about local districts, but individual states still control the curriculum under NCLB. As far as I can determine, NCLB only imposed requirements on testing, and left the standards of proficiency to test up to the states. And of course, the only tool the Department of Education has to enforce anything is funding. They have no power over schools that take little or no federal funds.
Local funding in Texas gets re-distributed from richer to poorer areas. Given the terrible conditions down in S.Texas it's probably a good policy.
I agree it's a good policy. But Texas still ranks near the bottom in state funding for schools. Texas is a welfare state, education-wise, getting half its money from the federal government.
Although American colleges are overall the best in the world (and the reason I came here in the first place), my impression of the K12 education system is that it's pretty abysmal.
I went to school in a tiny Eastern European country and came out knowing 2 foreign languages, Calc 1 level math, a decent amount of European and World history, literature, geography, chem, physics...I was pretty well-rounded.
I was pretty shocked to get accepted at an Engineering college here and to see my American peers fail out the first year because they couldn't pass Trig/Algebra, not to mention the abysmal level of spelling, not knowing any literature....and then there were others who were just brilliant.
The same country had managed to produce both kids who could kick my ass on one hand and barely-functioning illiterates on the other. And both would have been "straight A" students in their respective schools.
So there's something really wrong with education in this country. Not saying that DeVos would fix it, I doubt that, but it's already pretty fucking terrible for too many kids.
I went to school in a tiny Eastern European country and came out knowing 2 foreign languages, Calc 1 level math, a decent amount of European and World history, literature, geography, chem, physics...I was pretty well-rounded.
I was pretty shocked to get accepted at an Engineering college here and to see my American peers fail out the first year because they couldn't pass Trig/Algebra, not to mention the abysmal level of spelling, not knowing any literature....and then there were others who were just brilliant.
The same country had managed to produce both kids who could kick my ass on one hand and barely-functioning illiterates on the other. And both would have been "straight A" students in their respective schools.
So there's something really wrong with education in this country. Not saying that DeVos would fix it, I doubt that, but it's already pretty fucking terrible for too many kids.
Seems to me like an inequality-driven issue. In other words, it's caused by the prevailing political paradigm in the country.
The various departments, along with the whole government, just embody the prevailing paradigm. But it's pretty common in this country to shoot the messenger. (X) Whereas the real problem is with some of the political and social beliefs shared by vast numbers of citizens.
---
(X) - "guv'mint is baad! down with it!" No, government is what you all make it. It's a reflection of the contents of your shared mentality. If you think it's bad and you want to fix it, start with a look in the mirror.
The various departments, along with the whole government, just embody the prevailing paradigm. But it's pretty common in this country to shoot the messenger. (X) Whereas the real problem is with some of the political and social beliefs shared by vast numbers of citizens.
---
(X) - "guv'mint is baad! down with it!" No, government is what you all make it. It's a reflection of the contents of your shared mentality. If you think it's bad and you want to fix it, start with a look in the mirror.
Reducing what should be a meaningful discussion about how to structure an education system that produces good outcomes overall, is resilient to regional inequality and family circumstances, gives students room to grow, gives adequate help when needed, and can be responsive to the needs of local communities to "my opponents are stupid" is exactly how we got into this mess of a political divide in the first place.
Would you say the Dept of Ed is effective in its current role, whatever that is? I can't think of any impact it had in my education.
The DoE collects a huge amount of nationwide data. If any policy, rule, or idea that was based on evidence and is related to education affected you, there's a good chance it's thanks to the DoE.
Education in the US is pretty decentralized but there's plenty of work the federal DoE does that's very important, here's a good place to start looking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_for_Civil_Rights
The DoE enforces many of these laws which prevent abuse, bullying (teacher tolerance of it), discrimination, etc in education, which is pretty important. It's almost certainly the case that the DoE has seriously impacted the education of you or someone you care about through lawsuits, intervention, investigation which all change policy at the local level in a big way.
There's plenty of more things that it does. Take some time to look at what the DoE does and answer the question for yourself, it isn't hard.
In particular there are a lot of states that would love to let private religious schools torture gay children to try to turn them straight. The DoE is the only reason they can't do that.
Education in the US is pretty decentralized but there's plenty of work the federal DoE does that's very important, here's a good place to start looking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_for_Civil_Rights
The DoE enforces many of these laws which prevent abuse, bullying (teacher tolerance of it), discrimination, etc in education, which is pretty important. It's almost certainly the case that the DoE has seriously impacted the education of you or someone you care about through lawsuits, intervention, investigation which all change policy at the local level in a big way.
There's plenty of more things that it does. Take some time to look at what the DoE does and answer the question for yourself, it isn't hard.
In particular there are a lot of states that would love to let private religious schools torture gay children to try to turn them straight. The DoE is the only reason they can't do that.
From that perspective its pretty obvious why some Republicans (Tea Party/Trumpists) want to shut it down then, they don't think government should be an equalising force on society at all. Given that philosophy, it seems almost inevitable they will shut it down. Can anyone think of reasons they wouldn't?
It basically acts as a federal lever of legislative control over the individual states' Depts of Ed.
According to its wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Ed...), the highlights include:
- regulating how states are accountable for standardized tests (No Child Left Behind, later Every Student Succeeds)
- regulating federal student loans
- civil rights (LGBT, race, etc.)
- federal assistance for low-income students and underperforming schools
They don't dictate curriculum or anything. So basically it falls under the old argument of Federal vs State control over education. Conservatives have been trying to get rid of the Dept of Ed ever since it was made a cabinet-level position in 1979. They might now have their chance.
- regulating how states are accountable for standardized tests (No Child Left Behind, later Every Student Succeeds)
- regulating federal student loans
- civil rights (LGBT, race, etc.)
- federal assistance for low-income students and underperforming schools
They don't dictate curriculum or anything. So basically it falls under the old argument of Federal vs State control over education. Conservatives have been trying to get rid of the Dept of Ed ever since it was made a cabinet-level position in 1979. They might now have their chance.
AFAIK, it mostly distributes federal educational assistance to needy school districts. If you were born relatively wealthy, then no, it probably didn't have a big impact on your primary education.
It tries to address desegregation and discrimination based on sex (Title IX). I don't want to put words in Bannon's mouth or make a value judgment, but I think they would prefer those things to be scrapped.
You say "inconsistent" like it must be a bad thing.
I'll take inconsistent educational quality over consistently bad any day.
I'll take inconsistent educational quality over consistently bad any day.
> But if that's what the voters want, let them have it.
When the current administration lost the popular vote by millions, it's hardly what "voters" want. The electoral college was a hedge against populism. Yet it's been twisted to work FOR populist platforms by gerrymandering districts such that only a Republican has a fair shake, and the state then awards them their votes.
Notions that the people of any country have the government they deserve is nonsense. First past the post voting, special interest lobbying, and just plain ignorant politicians marginalize a lot of voices.
When the current administration lost the popular vote by millions, it's hardly what "voters" want. The electoral college was a hedge against populism. Yet it's been twisted to work FOR populist platforms by gerrymandering districts such that only a Republican has a fair shake, and the state then awards them their votes.
Notions that the people of any country have the government they deserve is nonsense. First past the post voting, special interest lobbying, and just plain ignorant politicians marginalize a lot of voices.
>Notions that the people of any country have the government they deserve is nonsense.
Wrong. If you don't like your government, it's your responsibility to change it. If you disagree, what's your alternative? Pray for alien intervention?
Wrong. If you don't like your government, it's your responsibility to change it. If you disagree, what's your alternative? Pray for alien intervention?
It's worth pointing out that bills get introduced all the time, and essentially mean nothing until they are scheduled for actual consideration by a committee.
Introducing a bill is an easy way for any member of Congress to "take a stand" on some issue, and it happens thousands of times per Congress.
Introducing a bill is an easy way for any member of Congress to "take a stand" on some issue, and it happens thousands of times per Congress.
If anything, just curious that it's right after DeVos got confirmed. Heh..
It's a direct response to DeVos's confirmation:
> "Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. should not be in charge of our children’s intellectual and moral development."
https://massie.house.gov/newsroom/press-releases/rep-massie-...
> "Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. should not be in charge of our children’s intellectual and moral development."
https://massie.house.gov/newsroom/press-releases/rep-massie-...
We won't mention that our elected bureaucrats have an 18% approval rating.
I was able to go to engineering school thanks to FAFSA. FAFSA seems to be run by the Dept of Edu. I want my taxes to go to such programs personally. My family has certainly become wealthier and been able to pay more in taxes because of FAFSA. Big govs investment in me has paid back 10 fold by now.
The next looming debt crisis is one founded on education loans. Does this sort of government gutting really help with that? Is congress planning on giving a check to every college student enrolled instead with the money saved? Are they planning on forgiving a large portion of mortgage sized education loans? If not I fully expect another financial crisis to arise in the next 10 years primarily caused by student loans.
The next looming debt crisis is one founded on education loans. Does this sort of government gutting really help with that? Is congress planning on giving a check to every college student enrolled instead with the money saved? Are they planning on forgiving a large portion of mortgage sized education loans? If not I fully expect another financial crisis to arise in the next 10 years primarily caused by student loans.
Yes, without FASFA, I would have gone to a substantially inferior college than the Top 15 school I went to (which was nearly free with my aid package). I would not have had that rare opportunity to succeed (and believe me, I made the most of it). Cutting this department just means even more of the "rich get richer."
Economics 101: supply and demand. Grant money makes prices higher not lower.
Take a look ITT. They took billions per year of poorly spent government grants, and left taxpayers on the hook for hundreds of millions. That school would not have existed were it not for federal grants.
Separating the payer from the decision maker yields very uneconomical decisions, in education, healthcare, whatever.
There are two options (1) restore sanity by regulating the hell out of education pricing or (2) restore sanity with market pressure.
I lean towards #2, but either way, grants aren't effective at lowering costs.
Take a look ITT. They took billions per year of poorly spent government grants, and left taxpayers on the hook for hundreds of millions. That school would not have existed were it not for federal grants.
Separating the payer from the decision maker yields very uneconomical decisions, in education, healthcare, whatever.
There are two options (1) restore sanity by regulating the hell out of education pricing or (2) restore sanity with market pressure.
I lean towards #2, but either way, grants aren't effective at lowering costs.
Ah, but the facts contradict ye. Look at private school tuitions. Look at the cost of daycare. They're not publicly subsidized, and they've risen just as fast as private college tuition.
You're also overlooking the rising value, and rising recognized value, of a college degree. Since 1979, only college-educated workers have seen median wages rise. A high school diploma earned a -27% real return over the same period. Is it any surprise young people are encouraged and willing to pay anything, anything for a shot at economic opportunity? (Further information at epi.org.)
The rise in public university tuition is largely explained by reduced subsidies. Year after year, states "hold the line" on higher education spending, leaving ever more of the cost to students (and students' families, of course). To the point that California famously once spent more on college than prisons, and now spends more on prisons than college.
You're also overlooking the rising value, and rising recognized value, of a college degree. Since 1979, only college-educated workers have seen median wages rise. A high school diploma earned a -27% real return over the same period. Is it any surprise young people are encouraged and willing to pay anything, anything for a shot at economic opportunity? (Further information at epi.org.)
The rise in public university tuition is largely explained by reduced subsidies. Year after year, states "hold the line" on higher education spending, leaving ever more of the cost to students (and students' families, of course). To the point that California famously once spent more on college than prisons, and now spends more on prisons than college.
Private school tuition can be subsidized by federal student grants and loans as well.
Grants and loans have been around for a long time. I'm not saying they're the cause of rising tuition. I'm saying increasing them wouldn't help.
I agree that the value of a college degree has a lot to do with increased tuition costs. If the average person will earn more than a $1 million more over his lifetime for getting a college degree, even expensive college is still "a good deal".
Grants and loans have been around for a long time. I'm not saying they're the cause of rising tuition. I'm saying increasing them wouldn't help.
I agree that the value of a college degree has a lot to do with increased tuition costs. If the average person will earn more than a $1 million more over his lifetime for getting a college degree, even expensive college is still "a good deal".
If you want to know what the department does, just look at its budget: https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget17/17action....
Eliminating the department doesn't necessarily mean eliminating all of its current functions. It just means that it will not exist in the same tier of government, with a cabinet member at its head.
Eliminating the department doesn't necessarily mean eliminating all of its current functions. It just means that it will not exist in the same tier of government, with a cabinet member at its head.
I don't see any proposals for other departments picking up the slack though...
This administration will likely render the federal Dept. of Ed useless anyway, even if it sticks around. Getting rid of it is a way to make the removal of its policies, and the increased state control that follows, more permanent.
> removal of a department of government
> increased state control
I don't follow.
> increased state control
I don't follow.
I think the GP means 'controls by individual states'
That is correct - in the US, typically the term "state" is used to refer to the 50 states, rather than the abstract term which is meant to refer to any governing body.
Some folks might find it interesting that Thomas Massie is an MIT alum, former entrepreneur, and junkyard wars competitor.
http://news.mit.edu/2002/two-teams-mit-battle-it-out-tvs-jun...
http://news.mit.edu/2002/two-teams-mit-battle-it-out-tvs-jun...
John Taylor Gato and you'll be free.
Sounds great if they terminate outstanding student loans as well!