Rand Paul's Idea To Eliminate U.S. Department Of Education Would Most Severely Affect The Poor

The Lexington Herald-Leader:

Students from poor families would feel the most pain if calls by Kentucky Republican U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul and fellow Tea Party movement conservatives to abolish the U.S. Department of Education are successful, officials and policy experts say.

Read the whole story: The Lexington Herald-Leader

Comments

[packeryman]

12:20 AM on 10/04/2010

Rand Paul's elevator doesn't run to the top. No one with common sense would make such crazy statements if they really wanted to win or he had the perception of what he is saying. He must not realize he is only speaking too a few far out nuts. This guy has to go down, the Republican party cannot afford these "baggers", Delaware, Nevada, California, Kentucky, etc. The "baggers" are Republican far out right wing nuts. They have got publicity because the news media loves to keep a ruckus going. The "baggers" were doomed from the start. They never left the umbrella of the GOP. They were infiltrated by Republican opertatives(Dick Armey and Freedom Works). Steve Forbes and Palin have been used to keep them in the party.But they are a radical group illustrated by candidates they are picking. Most can't win in the general election(same radical right wing group that took over in 1964 with Goldwater). Republicans know their party has been hijacked by the radical fiscal and religious right. Those that can't see it, are part of that group. As Independents we move further away from the GOP as they let the "baggers take control. They have lost many of us with the christan right hijacking of the GOP.

[nationalhealth]

08:08 PM on 09/27/2010

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/09/27/new-evidence-that-rand-paul-may-be-the-craziest-man-alive/

Rand Paul may be the Craziest Man Alive.

[dlo2]

11:48 AM on 09/27/2010

It is becoming very clear that Rand would like the US to have an elite educated minority with an uneducated majority, a perfect prescription for adding one more endangered animal to the federal list: democracy. Demagogic tongue syndrome.

[Aaron Nichols]

09:49 PM on 09/23/2010

Get rid of the DOE ! It has failed our children and thus the nation

[Rose Anderson]

05:41 PM on 09/23/2010

I know Education was better controlled locally than it has been since the Education Department and the Teachers Unions have had control.
The worse pollution problems exist in CA since the EPA mess it up.

[tandra88]

06:59 AM on 09/23/2010

Anarchist...He believes a Business has the right to discriminate. SAD back to the 50's...........

[rain33]

10:19 AM on 09/22/2010

listen all poor and working folks- if you have children entering college, rand paul and all tea baggers will get rid of department of education because they don't want poor and middle class families getting ahead plus removing all student loans and pells would hurt us the most! rich kids are counting on their families but their families aren't paying their bills so all voters should go out to the polls and vote against gop tea baggers coz if dems lose the house, we are all screwed for good plus we're heading back to the stone & civil war days!

[istvan13]

08:57 AM on 09/22/2010

When will a reporter ask the teabaggers that want to get rid of the Dept. of Education, what that department does. I've talked to a couple of supports of that idea, and they have no idea what the Dept. of Education does.

The Dept.of Education budget grew by 75% under Bush, because of the ill-conceived No Child Left Behind.

[LoveAlaska]

08:04 AM on 09/22/2010

WAKE UP FOLKS, It is a favorite for the republican party platform. If you watched the Repub platform committee during last presidential election, this was on Cspan, the platform committee spent alot of time trying to figure out wording to "hide the obvious" plan to eliminate the Dept ofEducation! I was amazed. Reading the platforms of the various parties and learning the background of the planks is a ral wake up call on the repubs.

[Lisa Shields]

07:48 AM on 09/22/2010

Well of course it would.
The poor are to be ignored.
I find it elitist to assume that the Department of Education could simply be erased, with no ramifications across the board for the nation. Clearly Mr. Rand has no CLUE what the US Department of Education does. Maybe he thinks everyone could afford private schooling for their children?

Is anyone else stunned that decades after a basic public education became part of our nation, there are still short sighted cretins seeking to do away with it? No, the system has issues, I grant you...but I am pushing 50, and while I know some people can educate their children, I know the majority, including those with college in their background would be clueless. Parents who work would not have the time, and teaching is a skill.

Mr. Paul has a rare gift for suggesting radical change, and trying to make it sound like makes sense. He also fails at it. I hope he is a better dentist, than he is a thinker.

[Poboy]

07:43 AM on 09/22/2010

Randy Paul:

"No, don't give them education, give them FOX News instead. Why do they need to think for themselves, anyway? I did just fine without having to."

[The Dude67]

06:52 AM on 09/22/2010

First off let me say I do not support Rand - mainly becasue, unlike his father, he is unable to separate his personal beliefs and his job as a legislator. 

That said, this article is completely bogus.  Dollars in an education budget are fungible meaning that regardless of where a certain dollar came from it is of no more or less value than a dollar from another source. 

So if the sinister Dept of Ed was elliminated, those funds could be made available directly to the State without the overhead of having to support a draconian organization which attaches conditions to how education dollars must be spent. 

That $429 million also comes with condition on how all of the other dollars (money from State and local taxes) are spent as well.  Wresting this control away from the feds allow decisions to be made by people closer to their communities unfettered by federal interference.  Another plus. 

[doublels]

08:11 AM on 09/22/2010

Do you really trust states like say...Texas to use the money wisely? They're already re-writing history in their new textbooks.

[mmille732003]

06:04 AM on 09/22/2010

DO NOTE vote Republican: period!

[The Dude67]

08:53 AM on 09/22/2010

Duly "noted".  I will make sure to vote republican on your recommendation.  :  P

[1differentdrummer]

06:01 AM on 09/22/2010

Paul is none too bright but he wants to further dumb down America.

[The Dude67]

08:55 AM on 09/22/2010

Anyone familiar with the catch phrase "dumbing down America" knows that the department of education is the main cause. 

http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/

[taddles]

04:19 AM on 09/22/2010

Why is it that Libertarians always want the services of society but they always want someone else to pay for them. Why is it that Libertarians can flippantly say they want to abolish this government entity or that one but they can't ever explain how they would deal with the consequences of that action. Maybe that's it, Libertarians aren't able to think deeply enough about any subject to be able to understand the consequences of their actions, in that way they are much like 6 year olds.

[The Dude67]

07:00 AM on 09/22/2010

The only consequence there would be to eliminating the Dept of Education would be the deluge of funds it would free up not having to support a federal bureaucracy bent on churning out "non thinkers". 

The $50bl budget (not including pell grants) if given back to the States could instantaneously put 10,000 new full time teachers or administrators to work in every state.  That's 500,000 new permanent positions nationwide. 

Who is it that can't think deeply?

If you're going to rebut this, you had better come with something to justify the 100s of billions of dollars we've thrown down this rat hole. 

[Titus]

07:18 AM on 09/22/2010

You're making your points with generalities Dude. Your implying that if that money is freed up, it will be used by the States or local groups for Education. It is more likely that the money (even if used for education) will be applied to where it is needed most, state by state, county by county, city by city, et al. Education may not be the final recipient of the funds that would flow. Now, there are elements of the Dept of Education I don't like, such as the tendency by teachers to "teach the Test" that is a result of NCLB regs. I think programs such as Pell Grants, Head Start, School Lunch programs and so on have had a positive effect. Is there a need to improve the effectivness of the Department of Education? You bet. I don't think we should eliminate it though.

As an aside, the budget for last year's Department of Education was about $46.7 billion. The cost for the first 20 B2 Bombers in 1994 money was about $45 billion. Perhaps we can find a way to equalize where the money goes to insure any tax dollar spent is a wise investment. I've really not seen the need for those B2 Bombers, but I'd wager that money spent on a kid that helps them learn works out better for us in the long run.

[Sienna Brown]

03:26 PM on 11/04/2010

I'm not going to rebut this; but I support it. I wish you would send this message every day personally to Obama. We need jobs, jobs, jobs, not more weighty and non-productive government entities. Much more funding should be returned to states, and the student to teacher ratio should be increased.