Don’t just get all huffy and post a comment without thinking. I’m not interested in comments about how angry my insinuation makes you. I’m not interested in how long the government has provided education. All I’m posting this for is to get people to consider a United States in which the government did not provide education.
For one, the Department of Education is a HUGE tax dollar drain. In 2008, the requested budget for the Department of Education was $62.6 BILLION. If the extremely inefficient government gave those dollars back to the people from whom they took them, how better could those dollars be spent? What’s more, what do we GET when the Department of Education gets this money? Well, $300 million of that money is actually going to help low-income families obtain more choices in sending their children to PRIVATE schools. So now we’re taking money from the taxpayer in order to allow them more options in sending their children to a private school? What say we cut out the middleman?
Oh yeah, let’s not forget about the increasing drive to force children to accept deviant lifestyles as normal and healthy, thereby prohibiting my family’s free exercise of religion. Sex education at an increasingly young age. I object to these sorts of things and they are the reason I will not be sending my children to public schools. However, I will be forced to pay for the Department of Education, regardless of that fact.
The biggest argument for cutting the Department of Education, however, is that it’s not a power allowed for in the U.S. Constitution. That’s right, folks. You CAN read the U.S. Constitution and understand what it says. Go ahead. I’ll wait….
….
Well, anyway, show me in the U.S. Constitution where the Department of Education is permitted, and I’ll grant you the argument. However, you need to remember something as you’re reading it: Whenever a power is not granted to the Federal Government, it is reserved for the States. Yes, that means we may be pushing the problem down one level, but I support that, as it inevitably means that some States will get it right. At the VERY least, they have the potential to get it right.
Any arguments about how beneficial the DoEd is are easily refuted by the Constiutution. What’s more, when you carry this line of thinking to its logical conclusion, you might think of some other Federal Departments that could also be removed under the same argument. Before you start telling me, “well if we have to get rid of the Department of Education because it’s not allowed in the Constitution, then that means we should also get rid of the Department of Whatever”, you should be aware that I agree with you on that count.
And you’re only giving me ideas…not proving that the DoEd is indispensable.
