Abolishing the Department of Education Is the Best Thing for Our Kids

on February 6, 2012 at 9:14 AM

school kids Since Jimmy Carter established the Department of Education in 1980, teacher performance has improved, students are smarter, and parents couldn’t be more pleased with the education their children are getting at state-run institutions that they didn’t pick themselves, but were assigned to based on zip code.

Just kidding.

None of those things happened. While there are definitely good teachers out there, lack of competition combined with a practical inability to fire incompetent teachers has lead to complacency across the spectrum. From rubber rooms for sex-offending teachers still collecting paychecks to bloated salaries and pensions for educational administrators all over the nation, public schools are getting a bad rap.

Add to the mix the fact that teachers are now trained to ‘teach to the test,’ a la No Child Left Behind, and the entire educational system is going to suffer from bad juju from both sides of the aisle.

Republicans don’t like federal control over what they consider to be a state and local issue, and Democrats don’t like the Ted Kennedy-sponsored, George Bush-approved No Child Left Behind (NCLB).

President Obama increased Department of Education spending to $77.4 billion in 2012, up from $46.2 billion 10 years ago, when the infamous NCLB mandate was made law. Since our government is putting a ginormous tax burden on us, this seems like an awesome place to start slashing costs. The department with the smallest staff of 15 Cabinet agencies should not have the third largest budget. That’s just silly.

We’ve tried mandating education at a national level, and it hasn’t worked. Teachers are cheating on standardized tests, parents face jail time for trying to practice school choice in a system that makes it incredibly difficult for them to do so, and our children are suffering as a result.

Let’s save the money from the Department of Education, and let communities keep that to spend how they see fit to educate their kids. There’s absolutely no need for federal control over our children’s education. Let’s give the power (and the funds) back where it belongs -- communities that know a heck of a lot more about how to raise and educate their children than some bureaucrat in Washington.

This post is part of a weekly conversation with our 5 Moms Matter 2012 political bloggers. Read the original question and find links to all their responses here: Should the Department of Education Be Abolished?

Image via USFWS Mountain Prairie/Flickr

Filed Under: 2012 election, education, taxes

Like What You Just Read?

Click the "Like" button below to get Jenny Erikson's stories on Facebook.

Comments (59)

Nonmember comment from Jessy

on Feb 6, 2012 at 9:53 AM

I can't even begin to wrap my head around the argument that the education of a country's children shouldn't be dealt with on a federal level. It is absolutely the federal governments responsibility to set standards and ensure that all states and communities live up to them and receive adequate and proportional funding.

Report this comment

Nonmember comment from Kimberly

on Feb 6, 2012 at 10:10 AM

I agree with Jessy. This article terrifies me--how is it ok to spend so much on defense contracting and slash education? Education is something that everyone should have access to; destroying the Dept of Education would limit availability and access to education.

hoticedcoffee

on Feb 6, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Totally agree. I don't understand why anyone would support the federal government being in charge of educating our children. The fed strives for mediocrity at best, calling it "equality", usually falls short, and always makes things more expensive than needed. Getting rid of the Department of Education is yet another excellent reason to get rid of Obama - he keeps throwing money in the hole, and things keep getting worse (funny how you can apply that to everything he does....).

Nonmember comment from cookie

on Feb 6, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Is this serious? There are a lot of things our public schools need, but non-intervention on the part of the federal government is not one of them. How about better pay for teachers to create a more competitive job market. If you don't agree with the idea of public schools then home school.

Nonmember comment from Areyoukiddingme

on Feb 6, 2012 at 10:50 AM

You are totally right Jenny.
My sister is a hard working, deeply involved, incredibly loving elementary school teacher, and her salary of 40,000 a year is much too large.
Are you kidding me?
Yeah, let's cut spending for education, genius plan.
I love how Conservatives bitch and whine about spending, but could care less about those who would be affected.
Jenny, you are highly delusional/ uneducated if you honestly believe the bullshit you spew.

elizabethmathis

on Feb 6, 2012 at 11:04 AM

I think each state should be in charge of it's educational system. The needs of students across the country are vastly different that it's difficult to have one set of standards and one set of funding for the entire the country. I live in Texas and because of our low-SES and bilingual needs near the border, we have a very specific set of needs. If our state had more autonomy to set standards and distribute funding and devise testing/regulation, I think it would be better than trying to meet the standards set for other states.

J_andrews8081

on Feb 6, 2012 at 11:17 AM

I don't want to seem contrary, but if you all did more research, you'd see that highly educated experts have put together enormous amounts of data on our education system. EVERY GOP candidate has qualms with the current state of education, and it isn't without cause. Barack Obama is no fan himself. No one is asking for education to go away here. One issue to really consider is that state by state, our needs are different. Some states like mine, with VERY high drop out rates that increased with NCLB, are proof that things aren't working as they are. I would also like the throw out there that with ALL the government involvment in our lives, I'm happy to see Policitions even remotely concerned with my constitutional rights. )

EBee12

on Feb 6, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Wait a second, I'm confused now. If we take the money away from the schools, how are the schools going to be able to provide better services?

jagamama0710

on Feb 6, 2012 at 11:24 AM

I think Colorado offers school choice. Maybe? We've got open enrollment for schools in other districts here where I am. I don't have school age children yet so I'm not fully versed in it all. I've been trying to look more and more into it though. I know when my daughter starts I can send her to any school in our district, not just the one in our neighborhood. There's a charter montessori school I've been looking at in a different district and I can also send her there if I fill out an open enrollment form. I like the idea of school choice, so, against all odds, I may actually agree with you here. Only here. ;)

I second what elizabethmathis said.

on Feb 6, 2012 at 11:35 AM

They wouldn't get rid of funding, they would get rid of the standarization that comes when something get federalized. So, as the poster in Texas said, Texas could use their funds to tackle issues unique to Texas, rather than issues that apply to the majority of states as determined by the DOE. States would still receive funding, like an allowance, and they could spend it to meet the educational needs of their students on a local level.