Why Do/Don't We Need The Department of Education?

[g5000]

It was mentioned in passing in another topic that we do not need the Department of Education.

I would like to hear detailed arguments exactly why we do or do not need it.

Convince me.

Thanks.

 

[rightwinger]

Most of our educational funding is generated at the local and state level. That is where most educational decisions are made. The Dept of Education provides about ten percent of our educational funding

There is a wide disparity in funding and educational quality between states. Some states do not emphasize education and their children suffer for it. Theses states, which we like to call Red States are the ones who most want to get rid of the Dept of Education. This is primarily because the Dept of Education sets standards that they will actually have to expend money to meet.

 

[Missourian]

We do not need a Department of Education.

1) It is redundant...States and Counties all have there own D.o.Ed.

2) It is unconstitutional...nowhere does the Constitution give the Feds the authority to nationalize Education.

3) It doesn't improve results...schools, education and the education system are in far worse shape today then they were prior to the departments formation.

 

[Missourian]

Most of our educational funding is generated at the local and state level. That is where most educational decisions are made. The Dept of Education provides about ten percent of our educational funding

There is a wide disparity in funding and educational quality between states. Some states do not emphasize education and their children suffer for it. Theses states, which we like to call Red States are the ones who most want to get rid of the Dept of Education. This is primarily because the Dept of Education sets standards that they will actually have to expend money to meet.

All those Red States education systems, like Los Angeles, Chicago, New York City, Boston, Detroit...


I'll put a rural school up against an inner city school any day...and win.

 

[candycorn]

Most of our educational funding is generated at the local and state level. That is where most educational decisions are made. The Dept of Education provides about ten percent of our educational funding

There is a wide disparity in funding and educational quality between states. Some states do not emphasize education and their children suffer for it. Theses states, which we like to call Red States are the ones who most want to get rid of the Dept of Education. This is primarily because the Dept of Education sets standards that they will actually have to expend money to meet.

Additionally, if the standards are set low enough and people like Grandpa can graduate high school, the governor of that state can point ot a higher graduation rate than their predacessor.

Without national standards, there is no way to measure the progress. "Waiting for Superman" does an excellent job or painting the connundrum of the DOE v. States v. School Boards v. Teachers Unions

Waiting For Superman | Shock & Awe Public Service Announcement US (2010) - YouTube

After watching the video trailer...you have to really wonder why Newt wants to spawn more janitors and fewer college educated students. Nothing wrong with janitorial work; but Americans should want more for their kids.

 

[candycorn]

We do not need a Department of Education.

1) It is redundant...States and Counties all have there own D.o.Ed.

2) It is unconstitutional...nowhere does the Constitution give the Feds the authority to nationalize Education.

3) It doesn't improve results...schools, education and the education system are in far worse shape today then they were prior to the departments formation.

Would you agree that when the department was formed, the world was a different place? We had less competition from foreign countries, less technical education was needed for graduates, and less funding was needed to teach the less technical skills to students?

 

[The Rabbi]

We went for over a hundred years without a DOE. Since then education has not improved any and the department has simply grown and grown, without producing anything substantial.
Think of all the F-16s and Abrams tanks we can buy with what would have been spent on useless bureaucrats.

 

[rightwinger]

Most of our educational funding is generated at the local and state level. That is where most educational decisions are made. The Dept of Education provides about ten percent of our educational funding

There is a wide disparity in funding and educational quality between states. Some states do not emphasize education and their children suffer for it. Theses states, which we like to call Red States are the ones who most want to get rid of the Dept of Education. This is primarily because the Dept of Education sets standards that they will actually have to expend money to meet.

All those Red States education systems, like Los Angeles, Chicago, New York City, Boston, Detroit...


I'll put a rural school up against an inner city school any day...and win.

Those cities also have some exceptional school systems. They tend to suffer because of the diverse populations they have to educate.

When you look at which states do the worst job of educating their students, it os primarily RED states. They also have the lowest per student expenditures. If it were not for the Dept of Education, these states could spend even less on their schools

 

[candycorn]

We went for over a hundred years without a DOE. Since then education has not improved any and the department has simply grown and grown, without producing anything substantial.
Think of all the F-16s and Abrams tanks we can buy with what would have been spent on useless bureaucrats.

Yeah...like we need more F16's and Abrams tanks???

Perry.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Would you agree that when the department was formed, the world was a different place? We had less competition from foreign countries, less technical education was needed for graduates, and less funding was needed to teach the less technical skills to students?

And despite increases in all of those elements, education results across this country are poorer today than they were then. That was his point. The Dept of Ed hasn't improved anything.

 

[Decepticon]

The defense department budget has grown very steadily, and yet we were still attacked on 9-11.
Why are CONZ not calling for the elimination of the department of defense if it does not do the JOB it claims to do?

 

[candycorn]

Would you agree that when the department was formed, the world was a different place? We had less competition from foreign countries, less technical education was needed for graduates, and less funding was needed to teach the less technical skills to students?

And despite increases in all of those elements, education results across this country are poorer today than they were then. That was his point. The Dept of Ed hasn't improved anything.

Sounds, (if anything) like it needs to be retooled and standards need to be raised.

Or do you think that the 8,000+ school districts across the nation will do that on their own....make uniform standards that exceed the current DOE standards?

I mean, you ARE for higher standards are you not?

 

[PoliticalChic]

It was mentioned in passing in another topic that we do not need the Department of Education.

I would like to hear detailed arguments exactly why we do or do not need it.

Convince me.

Thanks.

As it is not a function of the federal government, as per the US Constitution, how about why we have one?

Department of Education is, of course, unconstitutional. The Constitution clearly states that powers not granted to the federal government belong to the states.

So where is the impetus for its creation? Unions. The National Education Association (NEA)

“In 1972, the massive union formed a political action committee…released ‘Needed: A Cabinet Department of Education’ in 1975, but its most significant step was to endorse a presidential candidate- Jimmy Carter- for the first time in the history of the organization.” D.T. Stallngs, “A Brief History of the Department of Education: 1979-2002,” p. 3.

When formed, its budget was $13.1 billion (in 2007 dollars) and it employed 450 people. IN 2010, the estimated budget is $107 billion, and there are 4,800 employees. http://crunchycon.nationalreview.co...-department-education-not-radical/mona-charen

“In November 1995, when the federal government shut down over a budget crisis, 89.4 percent of the department’s employees were deemed ‘nonessential’ and sent home.” Beck and Balfe, “Broke,” p.304

 

[candycorn]

The defense department budget has grown very steadily, and yet we were still attacked on 9-11.
Why are CONZ not calling for the elimination of the department of defense if it does not do the JOB it claims to do?

Hey, we didn't lose a war until Vietnam. We arguably lost Iraq. I guess that means that since we're no longer #1 after 200+ years of having a War Department, time to shutter it and let the states fund their own armies. I'll take Texas v. Louisiana and give you the points....LOL

 

[The Rabbi]

The defense department budget has grown very steadily, and yet we were still attacked on 9-11.
Why are CONZ not calling for the elimination of the department of defense if it does not do the JOB it claims to do?

Why should we not eliminate every educational institution you attended because based on your posts they obviously didn't do what they claimed?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

And despite increases in all of those elements, education results across this country are poorer today than they were then. That was his point. The Dept of Ed hasn't improved anything.

Sounds, (if anything) like it needs to be retooled and standards need to be raised.

Or do you think that the 8,000+ school districts across the nation will do that on their own....make uniform standards that exceed the current DOE standards?

I mean, you ARE for higher standards are you not?

I'm for state and local school districts deciding their own standards. School boards are elected officials, unlike the Dept of Ed, put there by the local residents to mold their local public education system and as such, are accountable to them.

 

[candycorn]

It was mentioned in passing in another topic that we do not need the Department of Education.

I would like to hear detailed arguments exactly why we do or do not need it.

Convince me.

Thanks.

As it is not a function of the federal government, as per the US Constitution, how about why we have one?

Department of Education is, of course, unconstitutional. The Constitution clearly states that powers not granted to the federal government belong to the states.

So where is the impetus for its creation? Unions. The National Education Association (NEA)

“In 1972, the massive union formed a political action committee…released ‘Needed: A Cabinet Department of Education’ in 1975, but its most significant step was to endorse a presidential candidate- Jimmy Carter- for the first time in the history of the organization.” D.T. Stallngs, “A Brief History of the Department of Education: 1979-2002,” p. 3.

When formed, its budget was $13.1 billion (in 2007 dollars) and it employed 450 people. IN 2010, the estimated budget is $107 billion, and there are 4,800 employees. http://crunchycon.nationalreview.co...-department-education-not-radical/mona-charen

“In November 1995, when the federal government shut down over a budget crisis, 89.4 percent of the department’s employees were deemed ‘nonessential’ and sent home.” Beck and Balfe, “Broke,” p.304

Neither was NASA. Should we stop going into Space?
It's arguable that the Air Force wasn't in the Constitution either. Care to give it up?
No FDA...so we can go back to the medicine shows and people selling tonic water as a cure-alls. The life expectancy will go down which may solve the problem of medicare but thats
really a craven way to solve the issue.

 

[Decepticon]

The defense department budget has grown very steadily, and yet we were still attacked on 9-11.
Why are CONZ not calling for the elimination of the department of defense if it does not do the JOB it claims to do?

Hey, we didn't lose a war until Vietnam. We arguably lost Iraq. I guess that means that since we're no longer #1 after 200+ years of having a War Department, time to shutter it and let the states fund their own armies. I'll take Texas v. Louisiana and give you the points....LOL

The Texas Army vs the Lousiana Army ?
It is funny because both Texans and Lousianians end up dead.

 

[amrchaos]

Their mission
What We Do


The mission of the Department of Education is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access. It engages in four major types of activities:

Establishes policies related to federal education funding, administers distribution of funds and monitors their use.
Collects data and oversees research on America's schools.
Identifies major issues in education and focuses national attention on them.
Enforces federal laws prohibiting discrimination in programs that receive federal funds.
See An Overview of the U.S. Department of Education for more detailed information.

The Guide to U.S. Department of Education Programs provides an overview each program administered by the Department.

 

[candycorn]

And despite increases in all of those elements, education results across this country are poorer today than they were then. That was his point. The Dept of Ed hasn't improved anything.

Sounds, (if anything) like it needs to be retooled and standards need to be raised.

Or do you think that the 8,000+ school districts across the nation will do that on their own....make uniform standards that exceed the current DOE standards?

I mean, you ARE for higher standards are you not?

I'm for state and local school districts deciding their own standards. School boards are elected officials, unlike the Dept of Ed, put there by the local residents to mold their local public education system and as such, are accountable to them.

Are you for higher standards or not? I mean, if one district wants their kids to forego any Algebra since "we never use it", would you be okay with that?