Abolish the Department of Education
The federal government furnishes a relatively tiny amount of K-12 funding—but the feds need relatively little money to exert power.

Love or hate the Project 2025 blueprint for the next conservative president, it has done at least one good thing: revive discussion of ending the U.S. Department of Education. That department has no constitutional business existing. But eliminating the programs it administers, many of which predate the department, is just as important.
In the early 1970s, the National Education Association transformed from a professional association to a labor union and offered its endorsement to a presidential candidate who would support a stand-alone education department. Democrat Jimmy Carter made the promise and was elected in 1976.
The idea was controversial, including on the left. Joseph Califano, Carter's secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW), objected to taking education programs from under the broader welfare roof and saw a standalone department as a threat to higher education's independence. Albert Shanker—the president of the other major teachers union, the American Federation of Teachers—opposed a department as likely ineffectual and a threat to state and local K-12 control.
In 1979, the department squeaked by: 20–19 in the House Rules Committee and 210–206 in the full House. In 1980, Republican Ronald Reagan ran for president pledging to kill it, but there was little congressional Republican desire to fight again.
The department became the K-12 controller that Shanker feared, peaking with the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) from 2002 to 2015. Though the Constitution gives the federal government no authority to govern education, NCLB required states to have uniform math and reading standards and make "adequate yearly progress" to full proficiency by 2014. In 2010, the department brought the country to the brink of a national curriculum, coercing states to adopt the Common Core standards and associated tests. Only when teachers unions opposed tying test scores to teacher evaluations did left and right converge against federal overreach. NCLB was replaced by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which removed the adequate yearly progress mandate that was the linchpin of federal control, as well as several other prescriptive parts of NCLB.
With around 4,100 employees, the Education Department is the smallest Cabinet department. The federal government also furnishes a relatively tiny amount of K-12 funding, averaging only about 8.5 percent of public school revenues for the last five decades. But the feds need relatively little money to exert power. A state might spend $20 billion, but if headlines say it risks even a few million dollars by bucking federal rules, that looks big. So even though the ESSA is a release from NCLB, Washington retains the ability to take greater control.
The achievement impact of federal dollars is hard to isolate, but during the NCLB era, National Assessment of Educational Progress math and reading scores generally rose, though they mainly stagnated for the oldest children. NCLB's obsessive focus on those subjects might have helped spur some improvements.
But education is about more than standardized tests, or reading and math, and NCLB crowded out many subjects and instructional approaches. It also likely kneecapped the standards-based reform movement that bore it. The movement originated in the states, and it might have been more sustainable had "laboratories of democracy" been able to adjust to their own needs and cultures.
Eliminating the Department of Education would only soften these problems.
The threat of micromanagement would diminish were education in a broader department, like a new HEW (similar to the 2018 Trump administration proposal to combine the Education and Labor Departments). That secretary would have more to do than pull K-12 strings, and the head of a mere office would command less public attention. But Washington would retain dangerous spending leverage, and the Constitution would still be violated.
So yes, end the Department of Education. But don't just merge it with other departments. End all its unconstitutional programs.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Not only this but eliminate any tax dollar from going to education.
this one most of all. close the conformity factories.
In 1980, Republican Ronald Reagan ran for president pledging to kill it, but there was little congressional Republican desire to fight again.
Worse than that. What Reagan actually did was gut the interstate compact for education. That had been created in the 1960's as the only constitutional way that states are allowed to agree or cooperate on anything. Basically what it did then was share benchmarking info - with state employees seconded to that compact.
By the late 70's, its main focus was testing standards. Stuff like what are 8th graders expected to know for entry into high school (for both residents and new residents moving to the state). But since that was being done in the interstate compact, it was state employees doing that. And what Reagan and R's wanted was for all that testing work to be done by the private ETS (previously known for SAT level testing) and then mandated for the states. A new cabinet level department provides a new opportunity for lobbyists and those lobbyists are not just bureaucrats and unions but EVERYONE who is effectively 'frozen out' at the state level. For R's - that means private sector, charter schools, and presumably religious schools.
That transfer from the interstate compact to the DoE is what created the first 'new' function of DoE. And created the wedge - testing standards - to begin executive branch involvement in mandating to the states.
Commie-Indoctrination Camps.
The most successful campaign tactic of [Na]tional So[zi]alist[s] is their soft-core and misleading word/naming themes.
Public Education *IS* Commie-Education who’s ?Education? is dictated (indoctrinated).
‘Guns’ don’t make knowledge either.
The DOE is just one of many reasons why public schools should be defunded and disbanded.
I dunno if outright abolish is possible. But what you can do is let natural staff attrition wind down the dept over time, and steadily reduce spending.
Once educational content delivery catches up to the 21st century, the Dept of Ed won't be needed anymore.
Frankly; The Dept of Ed *is* the very reason "content delivery" isn't "caught up to the 21st Century".
The Cause is never going to fix the Effect.
The notion that the US can remain globally competitive by allowing lowest common denominator local school boards and individual states to set and direct education policy is pointy-headed nonsense. Think about it. The US should have the world's best national education department with commensurate funding and powers. Most US public and private education is floundering and we can't blame Covid for decades of dumb laws and policies which set no coherent national coherent priorities. I don't necessarily defend the current Education Department, but with sensible federal legal reforms it could be a world game changer.