
H.R.899 – To terminate the Department of Education - Operyl
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/899
======
Arizhel
Sounds great to me. Let education in the US become an inconsistent hodge-
podge, and mostly much worse overall with religion being taught in science
class like in Turkey. I'm sure America's competitors will love that America is
shooting itself in the foot and guaranteeing its long-term demise as
superpower. But if that's what the voters want, let them have it.

~~~
rajacombinator
Would you say the Dept of Ed is effective in its current role, whatever that
is? I can't think of any impact it had in my education.

~~~
wfo
The DoE collects a huge amount of nationwide data. If any policy, rule, or
idea that was based on evidence and is related to education affected you,
there's a good chance it's thanks to the DoE.

Education in the US is pretty decentralized but there's plenty of work the
federal DoE does that's very important, here's a good place to start looking:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_for_Civil_Rights](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_for_Civil_Rights)

The DoE enforces many of these laws which prevent abuse, bullying (teacher
tolerance of it), discrimination, etc in education, which is pretty important.
It's almost certainly the case that the DoE has seriously impacted the
education of you or someone you care about through lawsuits, intervention,
investigation which all change policy at the local level in a big way.

There's plenty of more things that it does. Take some time to look at what the
DoE does and answer the question for yourself, it isn't hard.

In particular there are a lot of states that would love to let private
religious schools torture gay children to try to turn them straight. The DoE
is the only reason they can't do that.

~~~
angry_octet
From that perspective its pretty obvious why some Republicans (Tea
Party/Trumpists) want to shut it down then, they don't think government should
be an equalising force on society at all. Given that philosophy, it seems
almost inevitable they will shut it down. Can anyone think of reasons they
wouldn't?

------
snowwrestler
It's worth pointing out that bills get introduced all the time, and
essentially mean nothing until they are scheduled for actual consideration by
a committee.

Introducing a bill is an easy way for any member of Congress to "take a stand"
on some issue, and it happens thousands of times per Congress.

~~~
Operyl
If anything, just curious that it's right after DeVos got confirmed. Heh..

~~~
shaftway
It's a direct response to DeVos's confirmation:

> "Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. should not be in charge of our
> children’s intellectual and moral development."

[https://massie.house.gov/newsroom/press-releases/rep-
massie-...](https://massie.house.gov/newsroom/press-releases/rep-massie-
introduces-bill-to-abolish-federal-department-of-education)

~~~
jklowden
We won't mention that our elected bureaucrats have an 18% approval rating.

------
bfrog
I was able to go to engineering school thanks to FAFSA. FAFSA seems to be run
by the Dept of Edu. I want my taxes to go to such programs personally. My
family has certainly become wealthier and been able to pay _more_ in taxes
because of FAFSA. Big govs investment in me has paid back 10 fold by now.

The next looming debt crisis is one founded on education loans. Does this sort
of government gutting really help with that? Is congress planning on giving a
check to every college student enrolled instead with the money saved? Are they
planning on forgiving a large portion of mortgage sized education loans? If
not I fully expect another financial crisis to arise in the next 10 years
primarily caused by student loans.

~~~
paulddraper
Economics 101: supply and demand. Grant money makes prices _higher_ not lower.

Take a look ITT. They took billions per year of poorly spent government
grants, and left taxpayers on the hook for hundreds of millions. That school
would not have existed were it not for federal grants.

Separating the payer from the decision maker yields very uneconomical
decisions, in education, healthcare, whatever.

There are two options (1) restore sanity by regulating the hell out of
education pricing or (2) restore sanity with market pressure.

I lean towards #2, but either way, grants aren't effective at lowering costs.

~~~
jklowden
Ah, but the facts contradict ye. Look at private school tuitions. Look at the
cost of daycare. They're not publicly subsidized, and they've risen just as
fast as private college tuition.

You're also overlooking the rising value, and rising recognized value, of a
college degree. Since 1979, only college-educated workers have seen median
wages rise. A high school diploma earned a -27% real return over the same
period. Is it any surprise young people are encouraged and willing to pay
anything, anything for a shot at economic opportunity? (Further information at
epi.org.)

The rise in public university tuition is largely explained by reduced
subsidies. Year after year, states "hold the line" on higher education
spending, leaving ever more of the cost to students (and students' families,
of course). To the point that California famously once spent more on college
than prisons, and now spends more on prisons than college.

~~~
paulddraper
Private school tuition can be subsidized by federal student grants and loans
as well.

Grants and loans have been around for a long time. I'm not saying they're the
cause of rising tuition. I'm saying increasing them wouldn't help.

I agree that the value of a college degree has a lot to do with increased
tuition costs. If the average person will earn more than a $1 million more
over his lifetime for getting a college degree, even expensive college is
still "a good deal".

------
thetopher
If you want to know what the department does, just look at its budget:
[https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget17/17action....](https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget17/17action.pdf)

Eliminating the department doesn't necessarily mean eliminating all of its
current functions. It just means that it will not exist in the same tier of
government, with a cabinet member at its head.

~~~
Hydraulix989
I don't see any proposals for other departments picking up the slack though...

------
headcanon
This administration will likely render the federal Dept. of Ed useless anyway,
even if it sticks around. Getting rid of it is a way to make the removal of
its policies, and the increased state control that follows, more permanent.

~~~
gragas
> removal of a department of government

> increased state control

I don't follow.

~~~
DerpyBaby123
I think the GP means 'controls by individual states'

~~~
headcanon
That is correct - in the US, typically the term "state" is used to refer to
the 50 states, rather than the abstract term which is meant to refer to any
governing body.

------
nickm12
Some folks might find it interesting that Thomas Massie is an MIT alum, former
entrepreneur, and junkyard wars competitor.

[http://news.mit.edu/2002/two-teams-mit-battle-it-out-tvs-
jun...](http://news.mit.edu/2002/two-teams-mit-battle-it-out-tvs-junkyard-
wars)

------
rogerthis
John Taylor Gato and you'll be free.

------
computerwizard
Sounds great if they terminate outstanding student loans as well!

