●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter
Forgot your password?
Close
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Load All Comments
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
/Sea
Score:
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
More
Login
Forgot your password?
Close
Close
Log In/Create an Account
●
All
●
Insightful
●
Informative
●
Interesting
●
Funny
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
bygkelley ( 9990154 ) writes:
States/counties/towns/cities already control education in their districts, not the Feds. The Ed department only manages funds for certain mandated (by Congress) programs and makes sure that schools were following the laws passed by Congress. This will most certainly affect red states more than blue states (loss of funds for special needs students and other programs that help low income students). I feel sorry for all the children that will be negatively affected by this decision.
twitter
facebook
bymigos ( 10321981 ) writes:
They also set curriculums so that Americans can get similar education across the board, and can apply for colleges on even footing. What this will do is that red states will start teaching bibles and shit instead of real science and elite schools will basically reject most students from the shitty states.
byjhaygood86 ( 912371 ) writes:
The Ed does not set curriculum.
They don't actually really deal with the education part of education. There's no reason why it needs to exist as its own government department. The functions it has, sure. But those can be housed elsewhere (a mix of DOJ, DHHS, and Treasury would make the most sense)
byGideon Fubar ( 833343 ) writes:
> There's no reason why it needs to exist as its own government department.
well that's quite a statement. I guess you'll have to go into denial very quickly now if it turns out that actually tariffs don't fix the economy or something.
byukoda ( 537183 ) writes:
No need for denial, just blame Biden for the results of tariffs. Remember logic does not have to apply, any lie can be considered a fact now.
byGideon Fubar ( 833343 ) writes:
I don't disagree... but there's a point at which one says "actually 67% of indictments against a sitting president in the last 100 years have been against one man" and yet you can't ask the listener out loud not to consider the fact that the indictments might actually be justified, they have to have already accepted that the oppression must exist. Also, the bumper might fall off yer cybertruck on a freeway.
As a correlating parallel... The problem with the putinist post-logic philosophy of propaganda is that
bygtall ( 79522 ) writes:
"a mix of DOJ, DHHS, and Treasury would make the most sense"
Sounds stupid, why not consolidate then in the Dept. of Ed. and stop the duplication that sprinkling them around will cause? Or do you really want another right wing-nut wank-fest by slowly cutting those programs in the various depts. where picking them off one-by-one will be easier?
bysabbede ( 2678435 ) writes:
Why have Treasury provide funds to the Dept of Ed to then hand out to States and municipalities when Treasury can just do that directly? Why have Ed investigating one specific sort of legal infraction when DoJ can handle all of them?
Basically, consolidating matters of finance under Treasury, matters of Justice under Justice, and matters of health and human services to DHHS. Not maintaining a redundant agency that replicates (poorly) some of the duties of the other departments.
bysnowshovelboy ( 242280 ) writes:
Why have the treasury when the president can just sign the checks himself?
bychiefcrash ( 1315009 ) writes:
It doesn't appear so. Per the DOE's website:
In creating the Department of Education, Congress specified that: No provision of a program administered by the Secretary or by any other officer of the Department shall be construed to authorize the Secretary or any such officer to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, over any accrediting agency or association, or over the selection or content of library resources, textbooks, or other instructional materials by any educational institution or school system, except to the extent authorized by law. (Section 103[b], Public Law 96-88)
Thus, the Department does not:
establish schools and colleges;
develop curricula;
set requirements for enrollment and graduation;
determine state education standards; or
develop or implement testing to measure whether states are meeting their education standards.
These are responsibilities handled by the various states and districts as well as by public and private organizations of all kinds, not by the U.S. Department of Education.
Parent
twitter
facebook
bydryeo ( 100693 ) writes:
except to the extent authorized by law. (Section 103[b], Public Law 96-88)
Were not laws such as "No Child Left Behind" passed? Wiki says,
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 was a 2002 U.S. Act of Congress promoted by the presidency of George W. Bush. It reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and included Title I provisions applying to disadvantaged students.
which references another law, Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which wiki says,
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was passed by the 89th United States Congress and signed into law by Pr
bychiefcrash ( 1315009 ) writes:
"No Child Left Behind" was replaced a decade ago with the "Every Student Succeeds Act", which also reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, but actually narrowed the Federal government's role in elementary and secondary education.
Without getting too far into the weeds, ESSA/ESEA don't directly establish schools, develop curricula, set requirements for enrollment/graduation, determine state education standards, or develop/implement testing to measure whether states are meeting their educat
byAnonymous Coward writes:
It's only a lie because education has always been in the states alone.
Someone needs to educate Trump, the masses, and remind all the lawyers of the two distinct jurisdictions for which Congress legislates:
1. Subject matter jurisdiction: the Constitution explicitly enumerates a very small list of subjects for which the power has been delegated to Congress to legislate on these matters for all of the 50 states
2. Federal territorial jurisdiction: Congress has full legislative authority to pass laws on /any su
bysabbede ( 2678435 ) writes:
Why do you think the funds will be lost? They're shifting those programs to other departments. Treasury can handle most of the disbursements, for example. DoJ will handle Title 9 issues. Maybe funds will be given as block grants, which would let the States and local districts decide how best to distribute them.
Congress has allocated the funds. They will still be paid out. It was never necessary to create a new cabinet department to handle that. Especially since the Federal government has no Constit
● threshold.
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Slashdot
●
●
Submit Story
Arithmetic is being able to count up to twenty without taking off your shoes.
-- Mickey Mouse
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...
Working...