What if we give states total control over education? That's the America I want. | Opinion
There are valid concerns over what President Donald Trump is doing with the Department of Education. But he's right to want it gone.
- President Trump's plan to eliminate the Department of Education has sparked debate, with critics arguing it would negatively impact local education.
- Supporters of the plan contend that the federal government's role in education is limited and nonessential, with most funding and control residing at the state and local levels.
- While the Department of Education provides some funding for low-income districts and special education, it constitutes a small percentage of overall public school funding.
- Ultimately, dissolving the Department of Education requires Congressional action, despite President Trump's efforts to reduce its staff and transfer programs.
President Donald Trump’s plan to shutter the U.S. Department of Education has rallied Democrats and activists who are misleading parents about what closing the federal department would mean for local education.
My response to those concerns, in the wake of the July 14 Supreme Court decision allowing Trump to fire more than a thousand employees of the Education Department, is that the federal government’s role in education is not an essential one. It does not employ teachers, run schools or set curricula. It performs some positive functions, but none that warrant a department of the size of the Education Department.
The department should be closed, and essential functions should be woven into other existing government departments.
Defunding the Education Department doesn't mean defunding education
Many are concerned about the impact that shuttering the Department of Education would have. This is based on valid concerns, but it stems from a misunderstanding of the federal government's role in education.
I'm not going to argue that the Trump administration is the best vessel for these changes, nor will I fault anyone for thinking that Trump is approaching these issues in a brash manner. However, the endgame of making sure the federal government is not involved in education is a proper one, even if it is disruptive. Plus, moving any control of education away from the federal government means removing Trump from that process.
The department has some funding provisions within it, specifically for low-income districts and special education programs. These programs amount to, by the department's own estimates, just 8% of public school funding nationwide.
These types of funding do have merit and should be transferred to other departments or, better yet, simply allocated to the states for disbursement.
However, this funding for schools represents just a small portion of what the Department of Education does, and marks a very small amount of its spending. Before Trump’s budget cuts, the department employed more than 4,000 people and spent nearly $3 billion annually on salaries and administrative expenses. That is government bloat that needs to be eradicated.
The federal government doesn't have a role in education
The reason that dissolving the Department of Education marks such an important sticking point for conservatives is not just because of the cost. Rather, it stems from the fact that the federal government does not have a constitutional or practical role in education.
The federal government has a role in protecting civil rights, but the current form of the Department of Education goes far beyond that, and those duties are better suited to be carried out by other agencies. Whether you trust Trump to enforce these things or not, the tools are available to any administration through other departments.
The federal government should not be involved in education from the outset. That is a responsibility for the states to tailor their educational funding to the specific needs and wants of their citizens. Education is better handled by those closest to the children they are educating, rather than by bureaucrats all the way in Washington.
A state-based approach also provides the opportunity for different states to try various methods, resulting in differing systems that can compete against those produced by other states. So, initiatives such as universal school choice can be further explored.
The department still needs to be dissolved through Congress
The reality is that even if Trump slashes the department’s resources and directs other agencies to take on certain responsibilities, the bloat of the federal government’s involvement in education won’t go away without Congress stepping in.
The Department of Education was established by congressional statute, which means that the only way to dissolve it is through the same body. The president cannot nullify a congressional statute with his own pen, but he can take action to weaken it.
Trump has opted to instead fire roughly half of the department's staff and directed several programs to be absorbed by other departments or by the states.
Still, no matter how much he neuters the department, it will continue to exist as long as the statute establishing its creation stands. The department would essentially be in hibernation.
Congress should pull the plug on the department once Trump weakens it to the point that it can no longer achieve its purported functions. Otherwise, it is a zombie agency waiting to be reinstated by an ambitious Democratic administration.
Dace Potas is an opinion columnist for Paste BN and a graduate of DePaul University with a degree in political science.