Would you favor Trump dismissing all Dept. of Education Employees, effectively shutting it down?

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

There is no Department of Education in the Constitution. It never should have been created.

Let the States run education in their own States.

Shut down the unneeded DOE.

Department of Energy?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The Teachers Union owes reparations to the 2 of 3 kids who can't function at grade level

What about states where there are no teacher's unions? Why do you always forget those states?

 

[dblack]

Congress can't create legislation that the constitution does not empower them to create via explicit (enumerated) or implied powers in the constitution.

Uh huh.
Can you provide of an example of legislation, real or hypothetical, that the general welfare clause and / or the common defense clause does not grant the implied power to create?

The general welfare clause "implies" nothing. It's a limitation on the taxation power. It prohibits taxation that isn't for the general welfare and common defense. The Founders sought to prevent taxation merely for the purpose of enriching state coffers.

The implied power required to run government comes from the "necessary and proper" clause.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

YES. all departments yes. ABOLISH all government departments including UNICEF!

UNICEF is not a government department, dumbass! The UN part in UNICEFstands for United Nations!

If you are joking, it is not funny! Too many morons would believe you.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I see it more as the ability for bare minimums to be equivalent between the States, setting a floor as such.

It has to do with commerce between the States, and the ability of people to move freely between the States, so I see this limited scope as part of the federal mandate.

That being said, the current laws on the books for this could probably be reduced by a factor of 100 to meet the requirements I listed above.

Yeah, but once you start loosely applying the commerce clause, ANYTHING can be deemed regulation of interstate commerce, thereby preempting all state authority.

The slippery slope argument can be applied to anything.

If you allow people to attend educational facilities across state lines, there needs to be Standards. Unless congress allows States to enter into agreements between themselves, it's up to the fed to regulate this.

Jimmy Carter created the Dept of Education. Those problems worked themselves out before its creation, they'll work themselves out after it is gone.

Mark

Do you know who performed the functions of the Education Department before it was created?

It was another Cabinet level position called Health, Education, and Welfare.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

YES. all departments yes. ABOLISH all government departments including UNICEF!

UNICEF is not a government department. It's part of the UN.

that's a stupid statement!

No, apparently you are stupid, that's why it appears to be stupid to you!

 

[M14 Shooter]

Congress can't create legislation that the constitution does not empower them to create via explicit (enumerated) or implied powers in the constitution.

Uh huh.
Can you provide of an example of legislation, real or hypothetical, that the general welfare clause and / or the common defense clause does not grant the implied power to create?

The general welfare clause "implies" nothing. It's a limitation on the taxation power. It prohibits taxation that isn't for the general welfare and common defense. The Founders sought to prevent taxation merely for the purpose of enriching state coffers.
The implied power required to run government comes from the "necessary and proper" clause.

Better tell Flopper, as -he's- basing his argument on the general welfare clause.

The Elastic Clause, of course, necessitates an underlying explicit power for its implementation.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The EXISTENCE of the Department of Education is unconstitutional, as Congress lacks the power to spend money on education.

However, no government agency is ever cancelled or abandoned, so Trump should command the Department of Education to re-form itself to conform to the model of the FBI w/r/t local law enforcement. It is a catalyst for new technologies, a source for valuable law enforcement data and information, and a clearing house for statistics. That's what the Dept of Education should be to public schools. Nothing more.

What do you think the Education Department does that conflicts with that model?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The dept of education is crooked to the core same as Jimmy Carter

Carter left the southern baptists because of not letting women be pastors

Carter DID NOT leave the democrat party when they went against science and instead promoted and brainwashed abortion to the students

Why did Carter do this??

He is an unwise ADAM TYPE man who thinks pleasing women is the way to help women

Too unwise to see what an outrageous hypocrite he is with still carrying the bible

Carter was one of our best presidents . In the Navy he was an engineering officer and part of the nuclear sub program which only took in the best and brightest. He attempted to introduce solar power while president but reagan put a stop to that as soon as he got in office. Can't have solar horning in on petroleum with all it's government subsidies and all that glorious pollution. Carter probably has the cleanest record, no criminal acts and scandals, unlike reagan, the two bushes, and now the present guy in the white house.

Carter is a great man, but as a President he sucked balls!

I guess you are unfamiliar with all of the criminal activities of the "Georgia Mafia"?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Would you miss it?

What is the constitutional basis for the DoE?

I am a public school teacher....

And NO. Shut it down. Good for nothing but waste and more edicts we don't need.

Such as?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Public education is run at the local level, so if you have a problem with that.....that is where you should start.

China, India, and Pakistan have more genus children PER CAPITA than the US? The US has has 326M people. China, India have 2.53B with Pakistan having 197M.

The Department of Education has been in existence since 1953 with their efforts focusing on: Student Loans, Grants, Laws, and Data. It also goes after fraud in education such as tRump University.

as for trump U that was the prosecutors that went after him not the dept of ed,,,

and as we have seen education in this country has declined since the 60's so thats proof enough to show it doesnt work,,,

and the locals have very little control of what they can or cant do,,,

and of course there is the constitution that doesnt allow fed input,,,

The primary controls on local school boards is the state not the federal goverment. 92% of the funds to run schools comes from either local or state tax payers with only 8% from the federal government. Most of that 8% goes to states to support various grants and programs which the state distributes to the schools.

So in what circumstances does the federal department of education interact with public schools? In short very little. There primary role in regard to K-12 is assisting the state DOEs in setting standards, collecting and distributing national education data, enforcing civil rights laws in education, provides partial support for pre-school education, and providing competitive grants directly to schools.

If we abolished the department education there would be a huge impact on universities and community colleges as well about 1/3 of the college students who receive some form of financial aid. The huge college loan portfolio would still managed by the federal government, and all state DOE would increase in size and responsibility.

well the fact that it exist and tax money is being used,,,, ,,,,

The Department of Education is administered by the United States Secretary of Education. It has under 4,000 employees (2018) and an annual budget of $68 billion (2016).
United States Department of Education - Wikipedia

United States Department of Education - Wikipedia

Congress can easily cut their budget in half by elimination financial aid to college student. However supporters of that bill would find themselves looking for job after the next election.

If corporations paid the same percentage of tax as you we could balance the budget.

The corresponding increase in the costs of goods and services by those corporations would just cause increased costs to the consumers, so the end result would be what?

 

[dblack]

Congress can't create legislation that the constitution does not empower them to create via explicit (enumerated) or implied powers in the constitution.

Uh huh.
Can you provide of an example of legislation, real or hypothetical, that the general welfare clause and / or the common defense clause does not grant the implied power to create?

The general welfare clause "implies" nothing. It's a limitation on the taxation power. It prohibits taxation that isn't for the general welfare and common defense. The Founders sought to prevent taxation merely for the purpose of enriching state coffers.
The implied power required to run government comes from the "necessary and proper" clause.

Better tell Flopper, as -he's- basing his argument on the general welfare clause.

The problem isn't Flopper. The SC sold us out to this conceit long ago.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

There is no Department of Education in the Constitution. It never should have been created.

Let the States run education in their own States.

Shut down the unneeded DOE.

There are no departments in the Constitution. Try reading it.

Just lock up the crooked education leaders

 

[GreenAndBlue]

Make people learn that crookedness does not pay

Lock up the crooked education leaders

 

[dblack]

Make people learn that crookedness does not pay

Lock up the crooked education leaders

Sounds like Trump's inane babbling.

Let's take your POV to it's logical conclusion. Each election, if Republicans win, we lock up all Democrats. Vice-versa if Democrats win. Just kindly leave libertarians out of your little game.

 

[Flopper]

Congress can't create legislation that the constitution does not empower them to create via explicit (enumerated) or implied powers in the constitution.

Uh huh.
Can you provide of an example of legislation, real or hypothetical, that the general welfare clause and / or the common defense clause does not grant the implied power to create?

Legislation passed by congress will carry citations which point to constitutional authority usually in first few paragraphs of the bill. Typically, this is prepared by the Office of Legislative Council. If the constitutional authority for a bill does not exist, the bill will never reach the floor of either house for a vote. I know of no legislation that does not carry that authority.

Are you aware of the Necessary and Proper Clause?
Congress draws its often controversial implied power to pass apparently unspecified laws from Article I, Section 8, Clause 18, which grants Congress the power, “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”

This so-called “Necessary and Proper Clause” or “Elastic Clause” grants Congress powers, while not specifically listed in the Constitution, are assumed to be necessary to implement the 27 powers named in Article I. There are a number of examples in the link of the use of this power.

Probably the first use of implied powers in the constitution was back in the earliest days of the republic. In a classic argument for implied powers, Hamilton explained that the sovereign duties of any government implied that government reserved the right to use whatever powers necessary to carry out those duties. Hamilton further argued that the “general welfare” and the “necessary and proper” clauses of the Constitution gave the document the elasticity sought by its framers. Convinced by Hamilton argument, President Washington signed the banking bill into law.

In 1816, Chief Justice John Marshall cited Hamilton’s 1791 argument for implied powers in the Supreme Court’s decision in McCulloch v. Maryland upholding a bill passed by Congress creating the Second Bank of the United States. Marshall argued that Congress had the right to establish the bank, as the Constitution grants to Congress certain implied powers beyond those explicitly stated.

Over the years both political parties have passed numerous pieces of legislation based on implied powers and the necessary and proper clause. What constitutional authorities debate today is not the existence of implied power but rather how can we limit the use of implied powers and still pass necessary and proper legislation.
What are the Implied Powers of the US Congress?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Congress can't create legislation that the constitution does not empower them to create via explicit (enumerated) or implied powers in the constitution.

Uh huh.
Can you provide of an example of legislation, real or hypothetical, that the general welfare clause and / or the common defense clause does not grant the implied power to create?

Legislation passed by congress will carry citations ....

Since you avoided the question, I'll ask again:
Can you provide of an example of legislation, real or hypothetical, that the general welfare clause and / or the common defense clause does not grant the implied power to create?

 

[Flopper]

I see it more as the ability for bare minimums to be equivalent between the States, setting a floor as such.

It has to do with commerce between the States, and the ability of people to move freely between the States, so I see this limited scope as part of the federal mandate.

That being said, the current laws on the books for this could probably be reduced by a factor of 100 to meet the requirements I listed above.

Yeah, but once you start loosely applying the commerce clause, ANYTHING can be deemed regulation of interstate commerce, thereby preempting all state authority.

The slippery slope argument can be applied to anything.

If you allow people to attend educational facilities across state lines, there needs to be Standards. Unless congress allows States to enter into agreements between themselves, it's up to the fed to regulate this.

Jimmy Carter created the Dept of Education. Those problems worked themselves out before its creation, they'll work themselves out after it is gone.

Mark

Do you know who performed the functions of the Education Department before it was created?

It was another Cabinet level position called Health, Education, and Welfare.

I think it was in the Dept of Interior at one time. As I remember, it was called Office of Education. At any rate, it's been a part of the federal government a long time. If there were no federal department of education, most of it's responsibilities would be transferred to other departments. The importance of such a move would be to make education in America less a priority.

 

[Unkotare]

I answered "yes", but I'd much prefer a president with the leadership skills to build consensus for an actual repeal of the laws creating the DoE.

To what, make it harder if not impossible for Americans to get an education?

To make it harder for political zealots to control education.

Yeah, like people who think the earth is thousands of years old and we were shimmered into being from dirt.

Let's talk about irrational beliefs. A poll was done regarding what percentage of demographics believe in the "scientific validity" of various absurd ideas. I have highlighted the lines for Democrat and Republican in red.

Reincarnation : 30% Democrats vs. 17% Republicans
Spiritual Energy: 30% Democrats vs. 17% Republicans
Astrology : 31% Democrats vs. 14% Republicans
Evil Eye: 19% Democrats vs. 12% Republicans
In touch with dead: 36% Democrats vs. 21% Republicans
Ghosts: 21% Democrats vs. 11% Republicans
Fortune Tellers: 22% Democrats vs. 9% Republicans

View attachment 257371

View attachment 257373

Of particular concern is the fact College Graduates were more likely to believe in the scientific validity of Fortune Tellers than people who never attended college by a margin of 17% to 13%.

And that’s why some things can’t always be up for a vote.

Typical modern "liberal".

Educators are now hiding science more than ever for their greed money

Modern science screams abortion is murder of a human being

poltical correctness is going
Against prosperity

Educators should be locked up

??????

 

[dblack]

To what, make it harder if not impossible for Americans to get an education?

To make it harder for political zealots to control education.

Yeah, like people who think the earth is thousands of years old and we were shimmered into being from dirt.

Let's talk about irrational beliefs. A poll was done regarding what percentage of demographics believe in the "scientific validity" of various absurd ideas. I have highlighted the lines for Democrat and Republican in red.

Reincarnation : 30% Democrats vs. 17% Republicans
Spiritual Energy: 30% Democrats vs. 17% Republicans
Astrology : 31% Democrats vs. 14% Republicans
Evil Eye: 19% Democrats vs. 12% Republicans
In touch with dead: 36% Democrats vs. 21% Republicans
Ghosts: 21% Democrats vs. 11% Republicans
Fortune Tellers: 22% Democrats vs. 9% Republicans

View attachment 257371

View attachment 257373

Of particular concern is the fact College Graduates were more likely to believe in the scientific validity of Fortune Tellers than people who never attended college by a margin of 17% to 13%.

And that’s why some things can’t always be up for a vote.

Typical modern "liberal".

Educators are now hiding science more than ever for their greed money

Modern science screams abortion is murder of a human being

poltical correctness is going
Against prosperity

Educators should be locked up

??????

I think the idea of locking people up gives some of them a hard on.