Ryan McMaken’s compelling argument for abolishing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on Mises Wire highlights a broader scrutiny of various U.S. cabinet departments, which includes the Department of Education (ED). The discussion about the elimination of DHS isn’t unique, as other departments, such as Agriculture, Commerce, and Education, have also faced criticism and calls for consolidation or abolition over the years. A notable instance from the Republican presidential primary in 2012 is former Texas Governor Rick Perry’s struggle to recall the third federal agency he intended to eliminate, eventually resulting in an embarrassing moment when he simply stated, “Sorry, oops.” This awkwardness underscores the general disconnect or ambivalence towards some of the less prominent federal departments.
The U.S. Department of Education was established in 1979 during Jimmy Carter’s presidency, largely fueled by the National Education Association’s desire for a dedicated education department. Prior to its formation, federal educational duties were divided among various agencies and departments, with limited government involvement in education. Critics argue that education should be primarily a state responsibility, as the Constitution does not mandate federal control over K-12 or higher education. Prominent voices, including those associated with the Reason Foundation and The Heritage Foundation, argue for the abolition of the ED, deeming its existence unconstitutional and advocating that education never truly belonged in the purview of the federal government.
Various recent scandals have further fueled calls to abolish the Department of Education. Under Secretary Miguel Cardona’s leadership, the department has faced significant issues, particularly relating to the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). The revamping of FAFSA, mandated by Congress, has led to confusion and a lack of necessary financial aid for many students. Delays have negatively impacted college admissions, with institutions citing the FAFSA fiasco as a significant factor in reduced student enrollment for the upcoming academic year. This operational failure illustrates the growing perception of incompetence within the Department.
Another point of contention has been the changing regulations surrounding Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally funded education programs. The legal landscape around Title IX has been contentious, reflecting the political shifts in administrations. The Biden administration’s push to expand protections for LGBTQ+ and pregnant students met with significant backlash, resulting in several states filing lawsuits to block these changes. These ongoing legal challenges highlight the contentious cultural and legal climate surrounding educational regulations and suggest a trajectory of shifting rights based on the political party in power.
In a similar vein, the complexities of federal student loan debt and the resulting “forgiveness” proposals under the Biden administration have added to ED’s scrutiny. While the administration suspended loan repayments during the pandemic, subsequent plans for forgiveness have experienced legal challenges and tumultuous developments. The Supreme Court’s ruling against the proposed loan forgiveness scheme raised uncertainty about the future of student debt alleviation efforts. The Biden administration’s promises of significant debt cancellation have been partially fulfilled, but ongoing litigation and the intricacies of federal student loan policies have muddied the waters moving forward.
Looking ahead, the future of the Department of Education remains in doubt amid ongoing management issues and controversies. While there’s a visible effort by some political figures, including former President Donald Trump, to abolish or significantly downsize ED, accomplishing this within the framework of a Senate that may lack the required supermajority seems improbable. The ramifications of shutting down ED could be vast, particularly for districts that rely heavily on federal funding, raising concerns about the impact on low-income schools and special education programs. While discussions surrounding the potential elimination of ED may persist, any tangible progress seems distant, requiring considerable political coordination and public support to overcome the existing institutional hurdles.