Downsizing the DoE

Like most conservatives, I’m shedding no tears for the U.S. Department of Education losing 1,400 employees and consequent funding. The DoE is another example of the First Law of Bureaucracy: Upon the establishment of a government agency or department, the reason for which it was established becomes its second priority. The first priority is to justify itself. More than any other Cabinet department, the DoE seems vulnerable to an obvious test of justification: Has student performance improved since 1978?

Short answer: No. The latest NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) scores show 31% of fourth graders and 30% of eighth graders at or above reading proficiency. Only 26% of 12th graders are considered proficient in math, according to “The Nation’s Report Card.” That looks to me like a D− in educating young citizens.

It’s well known that Jimmy Carter backed the creation of a federal Department of Education to fulfill a promise to the National Education Association. What’s less well known is another pledge he made in a letter to Catholic school administrators: “I am committed to finding constitutionally acceptable methods of providing aid to parents whose children attend parochial schools.”

Jimmy Carter, school choice activist?

Not as far-fetched as it seems, perhaps. Senators from both sides of the aisle, notably Daniel Patrick Moynihan, D-N.Y., and Richard Schweiker, R-Pa., favored tax credits to parents who chose private education. In January 1978, almost a month after the first secretary of education had been sworn in, a Senate Subcommittee on Taxation and Debt Management held three days of hearings on the proposal. Witnesses in favor cited better private school performance, lower costs, and more opportunities for the disadvantaged. Opponents complained about less revenue for the federal government and fewer resources for public schools.

The same arguments we hear today, in other words. Yet school choice seemed to be gaining ground until, as Ira Stoll writes in Education Next, “at the key moment, Carter collapsed on the issue.” In a speech the following spring he axed the tax-credit plan: “I think the whole concept is fallacious and I don’t like it.” The NEA, never a fan of public money for private schools, cheered from the sidelines.

But today the organization is in battle mode, especially since a national school choice provision (the Educational Choice for Children Act, or ECCA) was included in the Big Beautiful Bill and signed into law. This year’s NEA Representative Assembly (July 3-6) was packed with political-action items and fiery speeches. President Becky Pringle’s keynote address clarified the dire threat of the current administration’s “fascistic” agenda: “They want to dismantle, defund, privatize, and voucherize public education. … This is an intentional, coordinated campaign to strip away the very tools that challenge power, demand justice, and preserve democracy.”

What’s to be done? “We must take action guided by these seven important verbs: Educate. Communicate. Organize. Mobilize. Litigate. Legislate. Elect.”

Good for the president of an educational association to put “Educate” at the head of the list. But what she meant was, “We will talk openly about what is happening to the world around us and what it portends for the future. As the rapid consolidation of power leads us down a treacherous and dark road toward authoritarian rule, we must be vigilant in teaching the lessons of history, and help not just our students, but our communities understand what is at stake and ensure they are able to fully imagine their world as it should be.”

The world as it should be must surely include a majority of citizens who can read and write. But of the many business items crowding the assembly agenda, not one concerned improving basic skills. To be fair, the NEA is a political organization. But shouldn’t there be some acknowledgment of the groundwork that must be done before kids can even comprehend “what’s at stake”?

Maybe not, if the primary goal is to mold little lefties. Political ideology, whether left or right, tends to view children as malleable units rather than individual humans with enigmatic souls. Passing the ECCA and downsizing the Department of Education are promising steps toward depoliticizing education. But they aren’t cure-alls. The ultimate remedy is for parents to recognize that they’ve always had school choice, because they are the primary school. The choice is whether to make the teaching of souls our priority, or leave it to the political winds.