when you look at the wealth it controls, and the influence it exerts over children and television.
https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...les-Surrounded-By-Moats&p=2858653#post2858653
The fact that the tax dollar funded ED is unconstitutional has not been good enough to shut it down. Ronald Reagan tried but Democrats blocked him. Perhaps billions of tax dollars handed to parasites every year will light a fire under the feet of those who support hundreds of thousands of parasites without getting anything of value in return. The ED has approximately 4,000 employees. That makes the funding numbers all the more staggering. This is only the first page listing where the money goes:
https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget16/budget-factsheet.pdf
If you have a strong stomach —— triple the federal amount by adding in all of the state and local taxes that support and enrich teachers. Is it any wonder that our parasite culture will destroy this country faster than did any of their parasite ancestors?
Now, and ask yourself why the federal government is determined to abolish Social Security that is funded by valuable labor performed. SS would have been the first time in history where government tax revenues were earmarked to protect taxpayers. Instead of protect, the Social Security Trust Fund was eventually looted.
In 1967, Democrat President, Lyndon Johnson, along with a large Democrat majority in Congress, took all of the money out of the Social Security trust fund and mixed it with government tax revenues. What replaced the stolen money? Answer: Nothing but IOUs called G-Notes.
Politicians in both parties saw nothing wrong in stealing the money. That is why they are all very careful to refer to Social Security as a promise to senior citizens without connecting that promise to general tax revenues; hence, SS has to be reformed in order to save it. That line of crap comes from the very people who looted the Trust Fund to begin with.
Incidentally, Save Social Security means reduce benefits if not eliminate them altogether.
Unlike general tax revenues in every government throughout history SS was specifically earmarked for the people who paid into it. Ergo, the Social Security Trust Fund had to be looted, corrupted, and finally bankrupted in order to preserve the historical status quo.
NOTE: Neither the Secretary of Education (1981) nor the Secretary of Labor (1933) should be cabinet posts. Both give Democrats two seats on the Cabinet irrespective of the president that appoints the secretaries. Notice that conservatives do not have one guarantied Cabinet post.
Here is great piece about eliminating the ED:
Parenthetically, there are two popular images of teachers. Mr. Chipping and Ichabod Crane. Hollywood movies, and television shows worked long and hard to make Americans believe that Mr. Chips is a true picture of today’s teachers. It is not working. The image of Ichabod Crane persists because he, too, was an accomplished parasite before the welfare state existed. The fact is that Americans should view teachers collectively as Ichabod Crane rather than Mr Chipping.
https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...les-Surrounded-By-Moats&p=2858653#post2858653
The fact that the tax dollar funded ED is unconstitutional has not been good enough to shut it down. Ronald Reagan tried but Democrats blocked him. Perhaps billions of tax dollars handed to parasites every year will light a fire under the feet of those who support hundreds of thousands of parasites without getting anything of value in return. The ED has approximately 4,000 employees. That makes the funding numbers all the more staggering. This is only the first page listing where the money goes:
Funding Highlights:
The President’s 2016 Budget provides $70.7 billion in discretionary funding and $145 billion in new mandatory funding for the U.S. Department of Education. This includes:
An increase of $1 billion for Title I Grants to LEAs to support efforts to provide equitable access to high-quality education for all students, for a total of $15.4 billion.
$1.3 billion in mandatory funding in 2016 and $75 billion over 10 years for the President's landmark Preschool for All proposal to ensure four-year-olds across the Nation have access to high-quality preschool programs.
$750 million to significantly extend the reach of the Preschool Development Grants program, which is paving the way for Preschool for All by supporting State efforts to develop and expand high-quality preschool programs in targeted communities.
$1 billion in mandatory funding, and $5 billion over five years for the new Teaching for Tomorrow program to support transformations in how States recruit and prepare new teachers, and in how States and districts develop, support and compensate teachers already in the classroom.
Investing in what works in K-12 and postsecondary education with $300 million for Investing in Innovation and $200 million for the First in the World initiative for college opportunity and completion.
Two years of free community college for responsible students through a $60.3 billion mandatory investment in America’s College Promise over the next ten years and $200 million for the American Technical Training Fund to provide accelerated training in high-demand fields.
A $29.7 billion mandatory investment over 10 years to continue indexing Pell Grants to inflation after 2017. Reforms:
Simplifying the FAFSA to make it easier for families to access critical resources to help pay for college and also helping borrowers manage their debt by streamlining and better targeting income-driven repayment.
Promoting greater use of evidence and evaluation across the Department’s programs to identify what works best to support student success throughout the education pipeline.
The President’s 2016 Budget provides $70.7 billion in discretionary funding and $145 billion in new mandatory funding for the U.S. Department of Education. This includes:
An increase of $1 billion for Title I Grants to LEAs to support efforts to provide equitable access to high-quality education for all students, for a total of $15.4 billion.
$1.3 billion in mandatory funding in 2016 and $75 billion over 10 years for the President's landmark Preschool for All proposal to ensure four-year-olds across the Nation have access to high-quality preschool programs.
$750 million to significantly extend the reach of the Preschool Development Grants program, which is paving the way for Preschool for All by supporting State efforts to develop and expand high-quality preschool programs in targeted communities.
$1 billion in mandatory funding, and $5 billion over five years for the new Teaching for Tomorrow program to support transformations in how States recruit and prepare new teachers, and in how States and districts develop, support and compensate teachers already in the classroom.
Investing in what works in K-12 and postsecondary education with $300 million for Investing in Innovation and $200 million for the First in the World initiative for college opportunity and completion.
Two years of free community college for responsible students through a $60.3 billion mandatory investment in America’s College Promise over the next ten years and $200 million for the American Technical Training Fund to provide accelerated training in high-demand fields.
A $29.7 billion mandatory investment over 10 years to continue indexing Pell Grants to inflation after 2017. Reforms:
Simplifying the FAFSA to make it easier for families to access critical resources to help pay for college and also helping borrowers manage their debt by streamlining and better targeting income-driven repayment.
Promoting greater use of evidence and evaluation across the Department’s programs to identify what works best to support student success throughout the education pipeline.
https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget16/budget-factsheet.pdf
If you have a strong stomach —— triple the federal amount by adding in all of the state and local taxes that support and enrich teachers. Is it any wonder that our parasite culture will destroy this country faster than did any of their parasite ancestors?
Now, and ask yourself why the federal government is determined to abolish Social Security that is funded by valuable labor performed. SS would have been the first time in history where government tax revenues were earmarked to protect taxpayers. Instead of protect, the Social Security Trust Fund was eventually looted.
In 1967, Democrat President, Lyndon Johnson, along with a large Democrat majority in Congress, took all of the money out of the Social Security trust fund and mixed it with government tax revenues. What replaced the stolen money? Answer: Nothing but IOUs called G-Notes.
Politicians in both parties saw nothing wrong in stealing the money. That is why they are all very careful to refer to Social Security as a promise to senior citizens without connecting that promise to general tax revenues; hence, SS has to be reformed in order to save it. That line of crap comes from the very people who looted the Trust Fund to begin with.
Incidentally, Save Social Security means reduce benefits if not eliminate them altogether.
Unlike general tax revenues in every government throughout history SS was specifically earmarked for the people who paid into it. Ergo, the Social Security Trust Fund had to be looted, corrupted, and finally bankrupted in order to preserve the historical status quo.
NOTE: Neither the Secretary of Education (1981) nor the Secretary of Labor (1933) should be cabinet posts. Both give Democrats two seats on the Cabinet irrespective of the president that appoints the secretaries. Notice that conservatives do not have one guarantied Cabinet post.
Here is great piece about eliminating the ED:
Since its inception 40 years ago as a political payoff from President Jimmy Carter to the National Education Association, the Department of Education has engaged in scores of dubious actions that have made millions of Americans yearn for its expulsion. [Tens of Millions.]
The most recent example of comes from a long string of audits showing the federal department is doing a lousy job keeping tabs on the $38 billion it receives to administer federally funded K–12 programs. “Complex and persistent” is how Congress’ spending watchdog, the Government Accountability Office, described the agency’s mismanagement of data, oversight, and evaluation.
It’s not surprising a colossal central bureaucracy cannot efficiently run 100,000 schools attended by 50 million children in 50 gloriously variegated states. The U.S. is a richly diverse country, and its families have widely different educational interests and needs.
The founders of our constitutional republic anticipated the pitfalls posed by big, intrusive government. They did not include education among the powers granted to the federal government. In fact, under the Bill of Rights (the often-overlooked 10th Amendment), they left authority over matters such as education expressly with the states and the people — where it rightfully belongs.
So, what is the expiration date for a federal education behemoth that shouldn’t exist in the first place?
Unfortunately, very few laws contain sunset provisions and “regulations almost never do,” Institute for Policy Innovation President Tom Giovanetti noted a few years ago. In other words, “we are piling up taxes, laws, and regulations that are outdated, ineffective, redundant, sometimes contradictory, and otherwise simply past their prime.” In 2015, Giovanetti proposed that every new law or regulation should contain a sunset clause after five years and after 10 years for any and all new agencies. If that commonsense guideline were actually in place, the Education Department would have probably been on the chopping block 30 years ago.
Partly by design and partly by accident, Idaho could be on the verge of providing a national test case for the sunset strategy. The Gem State stipulates that agency regulations will expire unless the legislature votes to reauthorize them. This year’s session ended in feuding, with House and Senate voting down each other’s bills. One of the casualties, the Associated Press reported, “was a bill approving 8,200 pages containing 736 chapters of rules and regulations that touch on just about every aspect of daily life in Idaho.”
The upshot of that fortuitous gridlock is that Republican Gov. Brad Little — a critic of excessive governmental regulations who in January ordered agencies to kill two regulations for every one they birthed — must decide by July 1 which regulations are important enough to be reinstated. News accounts suggest Little and his budget chief, Alex Adams, are downplaying the likelihood of sweeping policy changes.
Of course, some rules, such as those licensing hunting and fishing, are fairly innocuous. However, Wayne Hoffman, president of the Idaho Freedom Foundation, says Little could do more than simply tap the brakes on the administrative state: “He has a chance to discontinue a plethora of bad public policies.” For instance, he could pull out the failed Common Core education standards by their regulatory roots.
Regardless of what happens in Idaho, there is a lesson here for other states and the federal government in the value of having termination dates — not just for regulations, but for entire agencies too.
Meanwhile, Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., offered a sunset bill for the Department of Education, abolishing it at the end of 2020. A dissolution deadline would likely prompt a thorough examination of everything the department does and fails to do. Even better, it could devolve obsolete one-size-fits-all education federal programs, return taxing power to the states and localities, or transfer certain activities to other federal agencies.
Obviously, the Massie bill will not see the light of day in the current Democrat-led House of Representatives, where socialist schemes are the cause du jour. But if a sunset clause is never implemented, will inept and costly bureaucracies such as the Department of Education ever be dissolved?
The most recent example of comes from a long string of audits showing the federal department is doing a lousy job keeping tabs on the $38 billion it receives to administer federally funded K–12 programs. “Complex and persistent” is how Congress’ spending watchdog, the Government Accountability Office, described the agency’s mismanagement of data, oversight, and evaluation.
It’s not surprising a colossal central bureaucracy cannot efficiently run 100,000 schools attended by 50 million children in 50 gloriously variegated states. The U.S. is a richly diverse country, and its families have widely different educational interests and needs.
The founders of our constitutional republic anticipated the pitfalls posed by big, intrusive government. They did not include education among the powers granted to the federal government. In fact, under the Bill of Rights (the often-overlooked 10th Amendment), they left authority over matters such as education expressly with the states and the people — where it rightfully belongs.
So, what is the expiration date for a federal education behemoth that shouldn’t exist in the first place?
Unfortunately, very few laws contain sunset provisions and “regulations almost never do,” Institute for Policy Innovation President Tom Giovanetti noted a few years ago. In other words, “we are piling up taxes, laws, and regulations that are outdated, ineffective, redundant, sometimes contradictory, and otherwise simply past their prime.” In 2015, Giovanetti proposed that every new law or regulation should contain a sunset clause after five years and after 10 years for any and all new agencies. If that commonsense guideline were actually in place, the Education Department would have probably been on the chopping block 30 years ago.
Partly by design and partly by accident, Idaho could be on the verge of providing a national test case for the sunset strategy. The Gem State stipulates that agency regulations will expire unless the legislature votes to reauthorize them. This year’s session ended in feuding, with House and Senate voting down each other’s bills. One of the casualties, the Associated Press reported, “was a bill approving 8,200 pages containing 736 chapters of rules and regulations that touch on just about every aspect of daily life in Idaho.”
The upshot of that fortuitous gridlock is that Republican Gov. Brad Little — a critic of excessive governmental regulations who in January ordered agencies to kill two regulations for every one they birthed — must decide by July 1 which regulations are important enough to be reinstated. News accounts suggest Little and his budget chief, Alex Adams, are downplaying the likelihood of sweeping policy changes.
Of course, some rules, such as those licensing hunting and fishing, are fairly innocuous. However, Wayne Hoffman, president of the Idaho Freedom Foundation, says Little could do more than simply tap the brakes on the administrative state: “He has a chance to discontinue a plethora of bad public policies.” For instance, he could pull out the failed Common Core education standards by their regulatory roots.
Regardless of what happens in Idaho, there is a lesson here for other states and the federal government in the value of having termination dates — not just for regulations, but for entire agencies too.
Meanwhile, Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., offered a sunset bill for the Department of Education, abolishing it at the end of 2020. A dissolution deadline would likely prompt a thorough examination of everything the department does and fails to do. Even better, it could devolve obsolete one-size-fits-all education federal programs, return taxing power to the states and localities, or transfer certain activities to other federal agencies.
Obviously, the Massie bill will not see the light of day in the current Democrat-led House of Representatives, where socialist schemes are the cause du jour. But if a sunset clause is never implemented, will inept and costly bureaucracies such as the Department of Education ever be dissolved?
Should we shutter the Department of Education?
by Robert Holland
April 26, 2019 12:05 AM
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/should-we-shutter-the-department-of-education
by Robert Holland
April 26, 2019 12:05 AM
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/should-we-shutter-the-department-of-education
Last edited:
