Trump prepares EO to close down the unconstitutional federal department of education

[j-mac]

We don't argue the Constitution with illiterates from the libertarian and constitutionalist camps.

Because you can’t…

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Because you can’t…

... because the MAGA illiterates can't understand it. Never have.

 

[j-mac]

... because the MAGA illiterates can't understand it. Never have.

You’re right, we don’t understand your warped version.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

You’re right, we don’t understand your warped version.

You don't understand what the Founders wanted. Never have.

 

[TimFitz]

It's like funding thousands of unelected bureaucrats, exactly like Elon Musk, only, Elon works for free.

I just love it when Dims complain of Elon being an unelected official making government decisions, as if that is not Ok when the entire Executive Branch is made up of these types of Elons that they have absolutely no problem with.

Now you’re inventing rationalizations.

 

[initforme]

The dept of commerce should also be abolished.

 

[TimFitz]

White House preparing executive order to abolish the Education Department

President Donald Trump promised for years to abolish the department — which he can't do without congressional approval.

www.nbcnews.com

The truth is, there is no provision listed beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, [Congress’s power to lay and collect taxes] allowing for a federal “Department of Education”


In fact, prior to the adoption of our existing Constitution, the People of Maryland delegated the power for a state funded and regulated educational system to their state elected officials, and not to a national governing power --- the wording being as follows:



“The General Assembly, at its First Session after the adoption of this Constitution, shall by Law establish throughout the State a thorough and efficient System of Free Public Schools; and shall provide by taxation, or otherwise, for their maintenance.”


The Maryland Constitutional also states, in emphatic terms:

“the People of this State have the sole and exclusive right of regulating the internal government and police thereof, as a free, sovereign and independent State.”


In fact, under Art. 3 of Maryland’s Constitution, the command is for local regulation and funding of education as opposed to a federally funded and regulated public school system!

The Maryland Constitution also states:


“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution thereof, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people thereof.”

This very provision of Maryland’s Declaration of Rights is also agreed to by the People of the United States by their ratification of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States!

Now, with respect to our federal Constitution and its delegated powers, upon researching the record of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, we find Delegate Charles Pickney, on August 18th, proposed a broad power "To establish seminaries for the promotion of literature and the arts and sciences", but this proposal was rejected by the Convention in favor of a limited grant of power expressed in Article 1, Section 8, Cl.8, of the proposed constitution. The limited power, later agreed upon by ratification of our Constitution authorizes Congress "[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts” and what is authorized to accomplish this? by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

The fact is, the federal Department of Education and its current functions are in defiance of the defined and limited powers granted to Congress. And every time a member of Congress votes to fund this agency they are committing a fraud upon the people of the United States and are usurping a power not granted!

So, why are members of Congress funding this rouge agency?

I don’t know which Constituion you’re citing. The provision for universal public education was established during the State Constitutional Convention of 1864.

Not that citing the constitutionality of a Federal agency by excerpting the Constitution of one state is obviously irrelevant.

Nor does any President have the power to abolish anything created by Congress.

 

[j-mac]

You don't understand what the Founders wanted. Never have.

Yeah ok buddy…Keep telling yourself that…What I do understand is, dems like you are irrelevant now, with the exception of looking like damned fools, or petulant children with zero leadership.

So, throw your tantrums, sing your songs, hold up your message paddles, it doesn’t matter. The American people rejected your stupidity, and until you come to grips with that, and chart a way forward serving the people’s interest instead of this game of the ‘dozens’, and ignorance, you’ll continue to politically be in the wilderness, lost, and bitter.

Until then, you’re just entertainment…

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Libertarians, nihilists, constitutionalists, etc., just don't get they will not get 2% of what they want in constitutional change.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Needs an act of Congress.

 

[TimFitz]

Congress established the Dept of Education in the 1970's and I don't think Trump has the authority to abolish it. But I'm pretty sure I remember that was on the Republican Party platform and a GOP controlled House and Senate certainly has the power to abolish it.

Education has declined so much since the 1970's, I suspect even a few Democrats might agree the Dept of Education has accomplished little or nothing to promote education and possibly has even hindered it.

This is the smallest of cabinet level departments with 4400 employees, but it should save us at least $79 billion if Congress does abolish it.

In the 1970’s they used to complain that education had declined since the 1930’s.

Abolishing it will cost a lot, and hit virtually every school district in the nation.

Of course, in typical GOP fashion, the biggest impact will be felt by the poorest districts. Federal funds provide free and reduced meals, fund additional teachers, and specialists in remedial assistance.

The total Federal funding for Title 1 funds is usually 10% of their total budget or less.

This 2ill hit every family in the nation.

 

[Foxfyre]

In the 1970’s they used to complain that education had declined since the 1930’s.

Abolishing it will cost a lot, and hit virtually every school district in the nation.

Of course, in typical GOP fashion, the biggest impact will be felt by the poorest districts. Federal funds provide free and reduced meals, fund additional teachers, and specialists in remedial assistance.

The total Federal funding for Title 1 funds is usually 10% of their total budget or less.

This 2ill hit every family in the nation.

If the Dept. of Education was effective and efficient, given the amount of funding we pour into education--more than any other nation I believe--we would still be No. 1 in the world. We aren't. I'm pretty sure we won't do any worse without a Dept. of Education that isn't doing anything to educate students. What few essential services the Dept. provides can easily be moved to another department to administer.

 

[Moonglow]

Stipper poles?

We didn't use stripper poles in 1979

 

[Moonglow]

Yup, that’s what they called themselves. They were committed to a decentralized government, hence why they put together the Constitution with a strong emphasis on state”s rights,

Federalists [ushistory.org]

Nope, the Articles of Confederation failed.

 

[Moonglow]

johnwk

Slow horses obviously is a product of the DOE-run public school system, and shows us why the progressive left should not be allowed to indoctrinate our children.

Private schools are no better at teaching kids about invisible deities that call for genocidal actions.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

If the Dept. of Education was effective and efficient, given the amount of funding we pour into education--more than any other nation I believe--we would still be No. 1 in the world. We aren't. I'm pretty sure we won't do any worse without a Dept. of Education that isn't doing anything to educate students. What few essential services the Dept. provides can easily be moved to another department to administer.

We won't be No. 1 now or in the future.

The parents have failed.

Get rid of the DOE, and save us some money.

 

[konradv]

So the President can dismiss congress, make up his own laws and run the country by himself.

No, that’s hardly what I said. It’s what the constitution allows, not an individual’s whim.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

No, that’s hardly what I said. It’s what the constitution allows, not an individual’s whim.

Is it true that the President can dismiss congress, make up his own laws and run the country by himself?

No, that's not true. In the United States, the President does not have the authority to dismiss Congress, unilaterally make laws, or govern the country alone. The U.S. government is designed with a system of checks and balances to prevent any one branch—Executive (the President), Legislative (Congress), or Judicial (the courts)—from holding too much power.

Here’s how it works:

• Laws: Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) is responsible for creating laws. While the President can propose legislation or influence policy, only Congress can pass laws. The President can either approve or veto these laws, but Congress can override a presidential veto with a two-thirds majority vote.
• Congress: The President cannot dismiss Congress. However, the Constitution allows the President to call Congress into special sessions in certain emergencies, but that’s different from dismissing them.
• Powers: While the President has significant powers, such as issuing executive orders, these orders must align with existing laws. Executive orders cannot create new laws or bypass Congress.

This separation of powers ensures that no single individual or branch can dominate the government. It's one of the core principles of democracy in the United States.

 

[Lisa558]

Is it true that the President can dismiss congress, make up his own laws and run the country by himself?

No, that's not true. In the United States, the President does not have the authority to dismiss Congress, unilaterally make laws, or govern the country alone. The U.S. government is designed with a system of checks and balances to prevent any one branch—Executive (the President), Legislative (Congress), or Judicial (the courts)—from holding too much power.

Here’s how it works:

• Laws: Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) is responsible for creating laws. While the President can propose legislation or influence policy, only Congress can pass laws. The President can either approve or veto these laws, but Congress can override a presidential veto with a two-thirds majority vote.
• Congress: The President cannot dismiss Congress. However, the Constitution allows the President to call Congress into special sessions in certain emergencies, but that’s different from dismissing them.
• Powers: While the President has significant powers, such as issuing executive orders, these orders must align with existing laws. Executive orders cannot create new laws or bypass Congress.

This separation of powers ensures that no single individual or branch can dominate the government. It's one of the core principles of democracy in the United States.

Obama sure did an end run around Congress to get the Iran “deal” done, didn’t he? He ran it up to the Islamic-siding U.N. Instead.

And what about Biden, who tried to singlehandedly excuse student debt, and then when the SCOTUS ruled his action unconstitutional, did an end run there as well? Or worse, open up the border to the illegal invasion, and the SCOTUS had to shut him down there too.

 

[j-mac]

Is it true that the President can dismiss congress, make up his own laws and run the country by himself?

No, that's not true. In the United States, the President does not have the authority to dismiss Congress, unilaterally make laws, or govern the country alone. The U.S. government is designed with a system of checks and balances to prevent any one branch—Executive (the President), Legislative (Congress), or Judicial (the courts)—from holding too much power.

Here’s how it works:

• Laws: Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) is responsible for creating laws. While the President can propose legislation or influence policy, only Congress can pass laws. The President can either approve or veto these laws, but Congress can override a presidential veto with a two-thirds majority vote.
• Congress: The President cannot dismiss Congress. However, the Constitution allows the President to call Congress into special sessions in certain emergencies, but that’s different from dismissing them.
• Powers: While the President has significant powers, such as issuing executive orders, these orders must align with existing laws. Executive orders cannot create new laws or bypass Congress.

This separation of powers ensures that no single individual or branch can dominate the government. It's one of the core principles of democracy in the United States.

1. I think you're supposed to have a link to your source when you copy and paste...

2. What you posted is true, but what you're not taking into account is that the Republican's right now have control of the House, and the Senate. Dems have very little, if any power at all...

3. What you had better be concerned with is Article 5. There is a very popular movement right now in the country to meet the parameters of an Article 5 convention. If that happens, you're screwed.