Posted on 02/16/2025 8:20:10 AM PST by karpov
Federal statutes require the United States Department of Education (ED) to fund race discrimination at postsecondary institutions through laws such as § 1059e. Predominantly Black Institutions, § 1059g. Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-serving institutions, and §§ 1101 – 1101d. Hispanic-Serving Institutions. ED’s Office for Civil Rights has chosen to abuse its power by redefining gender ideology and race discrimination as civil rights that colleges and universities must enforce at pain of lawsuit and losing eligibility for federal grants and loans—and by using administrative devices such as Dear Colleague Letters and case resolutions to allow ED to act as if it had the power to make law. The entire Biden administration ED acted with blatant illegality to “forgive” college-student loans.
ED has done great damage to American higher education by these means. At the same time, ED remains immensely popular with the American public for its core higher-education spending: Pell Grants for disadvantaged college students and William D. Ford Federal Direct Loans for just about every college student who applies for one. The Trump administration already has issued a flurry of executive orders to reform all parts of the federal government, including ED, but it’s not yet clear what strategy it will use to align ED’s postsecondary-education policies with these executive orders.
The National Association of Scholars (NAS) recommends in Waste Land: The Education Department’s Profligacy, Mediocrity, and Radicalism that education reformers enact comprehensive reform to simplify and depoliticize ED’s higher-education spending and regulations. This strategy will make ED transparent and accountable to the public and to policymakers. Reformers shouldn’t jeopardize real reform by a hasty attempt to eliminate ED entirely—which might be ineffective and certainly would alienate large swathes of the American public.
(Excerpt) Read more at jamesgmartin.center ...
“Colleges should have to co-sign on the loans.”
Yes, that would be an outstanding start. And tax their endowments, too.
“Move it to northern Alaska.”
Federal unionized workers might choose to approve 99% of all Social Security disability applications that come in.
F-35s might land ‘by mistake’ on Ukrainian airfields.
Tread as gently as possible, explain your motivations and the facts of the case well and try to work with people to get mutually satisfactory results.
And while we're at it...stop the mandate of EV school buses and Municipal vehicles.
"“No” to Killing the Department of Education"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
From related threads ...
Militia training aside, both President Thomas Jefferson, in a State of the Union address, also Justice Joseph Story, had both indicated that the states would first need to appropriately amend the Constitution in order for Congress to be able to dictate, regulate, tax and spend, and otherwise stick their big noses into INTRAstate schooling, something that the states have never done!
"The great mass of the articles on which impost is paid is foreign luxuries, purchased by those only who are rich enough to afford themselves the use of them. Their patriotism would certainly prefer its continuance and application to the great purposes of the public education, roads, rivers, canals, and such other objects of public improvement as it may be thought proper to add to the constitutional enumeration of federal powers [emphasis added].” —Thomas Jefferson: 6th Annual Message, 1806." (Jefferson is indicating that Congress cannot tax and spend in the name of intrastate infrastructure imo.)
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
"The power to regulate manufactures is no more confided to congress, than the power to interfere with the systems of education, the poor laws, or the road laws of the states [emphasis added]." —Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 2, 1833.
The congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had clarified the federal government's constitutionally limited powers as follows.
”Simply this, that the care of the property, the liberty, and the life of the citizen, under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Constitution, is in the States and not in the federal government [emphases added]. I have sought to effect no change in that respect in the Constitution of the country.” —John Bingham, Congressional. Globe. 1866, page 1292 (see top half of third column)
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Betty Pringle is fighting for the union thugs.
I remember a Dow Jones of around 660.
The Dow Jones is now around 44,000.
College endowments have boomed.
Perhaps tax deductibility for endowment contributions should be removed if a school has more than $500,000 per full-time student who for the previous academic year paid at least $10,000 via their own & family resources and loans.
Because Washington DC knew if they dangle $$ in front of the states, they’ll get takers. Once they got their foot in the door, its very hard to get them out.
“And tax their endowments, too.”
Yup, we need to effectively recoup the account receivable dollars Joe Biden illegally waived away.
“Because Washington DC knew if they dangle $$ in front of the states, they’ll get takers. Once they got their foot in the door, it’s very hard to get them out.”
Exactly right. As soon as the states, counties and school districts take $1 from Fed Gov, they are hooked. It’s like a heroin drip straight to the veins. You simply cannot ever cut it off.
Don’t kill it—reduce it to 500 people, with little money to dole out and power to do much of anything. They didn’t help us in the Covid crisis—what good are they?
I certainly can believe that.
“How did it ever get to the Federal Level to start with?? Every state did their own thing and it worked.”More specifically, Jimbo cut a deal w/ both teachers unions, the NEA and AFT (both fully politicized in the 70s), to create a Dept. of Education in order to win the Dim nomination in '76. The NEA had been promoting a Cabinet level Secretary of Education since the 1920s, but not even FDR took it seriously (he federalized education, nevertheless through New Deal teacher jobs and school building). Those endorsements and delegates got Jimbo over the top in the primary.
Thank Jimmy C44arter.
“public education”
Congress has the power to raise armies.
The Air Force (Army Air Corps if you would prefer) needs people who can read.
The US government got into the student loan business during the arms race.
I got several National Defense Student Loans totaling $3,500.
I worked for military and federal agency telecommunication system contractors after college.
Interesting - thanks for sharing.
“As soon as the states, counties and school districts take $1 from Fed Gov, they are hooked. It’s like a heroin drip straight to the veins. You simply cannot ever cut it off
How many Title I (urban) school districts have a Republican representative in the House?
“Parents can, and SHOULD, hold their local schools accountable for the education of their children, if they are unwilling or unable to do it themselves.”
The reasons for educational failures are about 70% student, 20% parental, 7% teacher, 2% union and maybe as high as 1% DoE.
BTTT
They wanted more uniform basic standards of education across the states, and also became a mechanism for federal funding of poor states to be able to have basic supplies. Of course it turns into federal control and mandates shortly after that...
Online learning has its uses but being the primary means delivering instruction to most people is not one of them.
Online learning requires considerable self-discipline. You either provide from yourself (That’s why it’s called self-discipline!) or is imposed by from the outside by instructors or parents. I think it’s totally inappropriate for K12. Some HS juniors and seniors might have the personal* maturity\self-discipline to be able to do it. (* parents\guardians impose it!) For the most part its devolved into a K12 instruction unionista scam to get out of teaching!
It’s barely appropriate for incoming college\university freshmen\sophomores given the level of immaturity and lack of preparation in students today.
I respect the James G. Martin Center for American Renewel. They’ve had a lot of good things to say over the years about problems in, and needed reforms in, education at all levels in the United States.
But I would ask in this case, why the states themselves cannot do the same things the Center is suggesting the federal Dep of Ed do?
Face it. There is only one reason to have the federal government do anything. To force everyone to do the same thing. But the great thing about the united states comes when the heavy hand of the federal government is not the force for great change or good policy. That great change and good policy comes from the states trying to do things better on their own, each going their own way, each succeeding or failing but able to learn and observe by results in the other states. That ability is matched by the peoples ability to freely leave failing states and move to better run states.
The federal government likes “one size fits all” solutions. That is not what education needs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.