Skip to main content

 

There is so much going on today that figuring out what to write about is hard. Do I write about Musk and DOGE? Do I write about Musk and our military plans? Do I write about Trump and his deportations? I think I will write about Trump wanting to shutter the Department of Education. Trump has now signed an executive order to close the Department of Education, according to NBC News. Trump has been promising that and now he has done it.  I am sure there are going to be a lot of lawsuits questioning whether Trump has the constitutional authority to shutter it. 

 The Department of Education was created by an Act of Congress during the Carter administration. The Republican President, Ronald Reagan ran on closing it but was never able to do it. George H. W. Bush wanted to be known as the Education President so it went pretty much untouched during his administration. In the 90s with the Republican-controlled Congress, stating they opposed the Department of Education, its funding grew by that same Congress. George W. Bush had his” No Child Left Behind”. It is almost like the Republicans have had a love-hate relationship. I too have had that same love-hate relationship. I am an old guy and I was educated before the Department of Education existed as a cabinet position. I will tell you that the schools in Kenosha, Wisconsin were excellent when I was in school. The Kenosha school districts had excellent programs like music and art.

The Department of Education does have a history before it became a cabinet post under Carter. In 1867 a Department of Education was created by legislation signed by Andrew Johnson. It was created to collect data about schools and provide advice just like the Department of Agriculture did with farmers. It became a bureau in the Department of the Interior known as the United States Office of Education. Even back then people were concerned it would have too much control over local schools. It had existed under various departments until it became its own Cabinet department in 1979. My point is that all the way back to 1867 the government recognized the need for a Department of Education in some form. The four key functions of the Department of Education are 1) establish policies on federal financial aid for education and distribution as well as monitor those funds. 2) Collect data on the schools and disseminate research. 3) Focus national attention on key issues in education, and make recommendations for education reform. 4) Prohibiting discrimination and ensuring equal access to education.

Will there be a huge change if Trump is successful in eliminating the Department of Education? I don’t know for sure but I have many concerns. One of my major concerns is with inclusion. When I was growing up, my hometown had a separate school for children with physical and intellectual disabilities. Today, children have been able to have the same school experience that every other student which I feel is the right of every child. Not everyone agreed with their inclusion in the regular classroom. They thought it took away from the classroom for the so-called normal students. With the Department of Education no longer being there to monitor civil rights will the rights of those disabled students going to be taken away? Are they no longer going to be welcomed in a normal classroom? They are part of the Inclusion that is part of DEI.

You could also call Inclusion as Handicap Rights. Many things we have today are just part of everyday life because of inclusion: sidewalk ramps, access ramps into restaurants, crosswalks that beep or countdown for the handicapped, and elevators to improve handicapped access to schools, jobs, and entertainment venues. If it starts with inclusion in the schools, you will have a hard time convincing me that it will not spread to every aspect of our society. Donald Trump has not shown very much empathy for the handicapped in the past. While campaigning he mocked a handicapped reporter that asked a question that he didn’t like. I have read an article where he told his nephew he should just let his handicapped son die and move to Florida. Is Trump going to return us to the day when students with disabilities were hidden away and taught in the basements of schools? Are we going to institutionalize people again because society doesn’t want to be inconvenienced by having them around?  Will taxpayers deem it is just too expensive for handicapped services including the services supplied by our schools?

I think when historians write about our society they will not only write about the successes and failures we make but also about how we treat the least of us by the people who have to most, who will be hurt the most as the federal government cuts back not only the money and the oversite of our schools. Even now you see many of our southern states like Oklahoma and Alabama lag behind the northern states such as Massachusetts with school support. To give more control to a State that already doesn’t value education will just hurt those children in the state more.  States that ban books will continue to stifle the learning of the children within that state. Oklahoma, a state that wants the Ten Commandments and the Bible in every school has one of the worst school systems in the country. Massachusetts which to many is one of the most liberal States in the Union also has the best school system in the country. Who will suffer the most will be the ones who are already suffering now. It will only get worse.

 

 

Comments

  1. AnonymousMarch 25, 2025 at 11:05 PM

    As a resident of Alabama, a mother of 2 grown children, and a disabled woman, I can confirm that the loss of federal oversight will exacerbate problems with existing discriminatory practices.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousMarch 27, 2025 at 4:55 AM

    as far as Trump is concerned, the only people that matter are white men who profess that he is the best. It is his goal to get rid of everyone else. There is no empathy or caring only what do I want. He does not even need a purpose other than his getting even with any and all that he perceives as harming him.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

  There’s a simple way to judge a country: look at whose lives it protects, and whose lives it’s willing to forget. For years now, we’ve heard the phrase “All Lives Matter.” It sounds fair. It sounds equal. It sounds like common sense. But a country doesn’t reveal its values through slogans. It reveals them through actions, through the lives it defends, the lives it ignores, and the lives it quietly pushes out of sight. And lately, America has been doing a whole lot of looking away. When Black Americans said they were being killed during traffic stops and routine encounters, the response from many leaders wasn’t concern; it was irritation. Instead of saying, “Let’s fix the problem so fewer people die,” we heard “Blue Lives Matter,” “Stop resisting,” and “BLM is a terrorist group.” A man died in a chokehold on camera. We all saw, from the beginning to the end. It was like a modern-day lynching. Millions marched peacefully. The answer from those in power was “law and order,” and “...
1 comment
Read more
  On Saturday, I was looking at Facebook and a person I was friends with, in fact, someone I went to High School with, posted something I knew was wrong. The post claimed that four lawmakers in Colorado decided jail time shouldn’t be mandatory for people who committed sexual assault of children. She claimed they were pedophile protectors. I opened up Perplexity and asked about the situation, and this is the reply I got back: You’re referring to a recent controversy in Colorado over a proposed bill that would change sentencing rules for certain sex crimes. Here are the verified facts to clarify what’s actually happening: • In early 2026, the Colorado House Judiciary Committee held a vote on a sentencing reform bill that aimed to give judges more discretion in certain felony cases. • Some lawmakers voted against an amendment that would have made mandatory prison sentences apply to all sex crimes, including child sexual assault, preferring instead to let judges determine sentences...
4 comments
Read more
  Dove or hawk? Donald Trump ran for President promising to end “endless wars”, avoid new ones, and put American families first. He cast himself as an outsider who would bring peace – the only candidate who wouldn’t drag America into another conflict. The message worked because let's face it, after so many years in Iraq and Afghanistan, America was tired of war. As a country, we were all tired of War. The country wanted stability, not another generation of men and women sent into danger. But once in office, he governed very differently. He governed like a Hawk, quick to threaten, quick to escalate, and willing to use both bombs and tariffs as weapons. What was missing wasn’t just consistency. It was an honor: the sense of responsibility and restraint that should come with the power to risk other people's sons and daughters. This isn’t about ideology. It's about whether someone who promised peace, but repeatedly chooses confrontation, can still claim to be a “dove”. A core...
2 comments
Read more