Day 19 of reading and sharing my notes on Project 2025 (the long title is Mandate for Leadership 2024: The Conservative Promise, in case you're searching for it).

Here's my approach and why I’m doing this.

We're still in Chapter 11: Department of Education by Lindsey M. Burke. I covered her bio earlier, along with my experiences and biases around education. (I skipped several chapters per request. I'll eventually get to everything.)

SUMMARY

This section is "Needed Reforms."

Burke says reading outcomes haven't improved, and math outcomes have declined over the past 30 years, "academic stagnation since the 1970s."

She says The Heritage Foundation found that 41% of the salary costs of state education agencies is paid for by the federal government, and those people mostly just report back to the DOE.

"Streamlining existing programs and funding so that dollars are sent to states through straightforward per-pupil allocations or in the form of grants that states can put toward any lawful education purpose under state law would bring a needed easing of the federal compliance burden," Burke said.

**-"The federal government should confine its involvement in education policy to that of a statistics-gathering agency that disseminates information to the states."

MY OPINION

I don't entirely disagree with her. I said before that I think chasing specific grants all the time isn't good for education. But sometimes those grants are specifically to tackle inequities in the system, and the money comes with strings for a reason. I also think the federal government is in a unique position to research what's working around the world and support meaningful change, both through funding and professional development. I don't think enough of that is going on, and that's where I'd like to see reform.

SUMMARY

The next section, where she gets into the details of how she wants to see the Department of Education either reorganized or eliminated, is titled "Program and Office Prioritization Within the Department."

The first subsection is "Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE).

Burke's suggestions include:

1. Reducing the number of programs managed by the office.

2. Transfer Title 1A (which is for lower-income school districts) to Department of Health and Human Services, and make the grants available with no strings.

MY OPINION

I don't think the grants should come with no strings, but I think a lot of creativity should be allowed at the local level. Propose a grant that would work in the community, developed by the people it affects, and you get the money. But you have to have some kind of a plan to use it.

SUMMARY

3. "Restore revenue responsibility for Title I funding to the states over a 10-year period."

MY OPINION

I think she's saying the states should pay for Title 1. I covered how much state and local revenue pays for K12 schools in my previous post.

SUMMARY

4. "Eliminate Impact Aid not tied to students." Impact Aid, according to Burke, "provides funding to school districts to compensate for reductions in property tax revenue due to the presence of federal property (such as that associated with a military base or tribal lands)."

MY OPINION

So would that mean you couldn't pay teachers with it? And this seems contradictory. Grants should be no-strings, but Impact Aid, which is just making up for lost revenue, should have significant strings.

SUMMARY

5. Move Impact Aid to the Department of Defense Education Authority or the Bureau of Indian Education.

MY OPINION

I don't know enough about this program to know if that makes sense.

SUMMARY

6. "Transfer all Indian education programs to the Bureau of Indian Education."

MY OPINION

I would like to hear from the tribes about this.

SUMMARY

7. The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program should be transferred to the Department of Human Services.

**-8. "All other programs at OESE should be block-granted or eliminated."

The next subsection is "Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education."

She says all of the programs except those for tribal members should be transferred to the Department of Labor, and the Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Career and Technical Education Program should be moved to the Bureau of Indian Education.

MY OPINION

All of these transfers of programs don't necessarily sound like a bad idea, but it does sound expensive, and if they would be doing essentially the same thing, why? I don't get what the point is.

SUMMARY

The next section is the "Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS)."

This office has "nearly two dozen programs, ranging from funding for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the National Technical Institute for the Deaf to the Special Olympics Funding and the American Printing House for the Blind."

Her suggested reforms:

1. Convert IDEA funding into "no-string formula" block grants targeted at students with disabilities and distributed by Health and Human Service's Administration for Community Living.

MY OPINION

See my general comments about grants above and previously, with a special caveat. I don't think anyone would argue that special education doesn't need reforms. But I'm not sure taking away the strings, which are there to protect these funds from being misused, is the way to go about it.

SUMMARY

2. "Transfer the Vocational Rehabilitation Grants for Native American students to the Bureau of Indian Education."

3. "Phase out earmarks for a variety of special institutions, as originally envisioned."

MY OPINION

Earmarks for what institutions? And envisioned how and by whom?

SUMMARY

4. The funds that support "federal efforts to enforce our laws against discrimination of individuals with disabilities" should be moved to the Department of Justice and the Office of Civil Rights.

MY OPINION

I wonder (but don't know) if some of those funds are to prevent discrimination. Which, I think, is always a better use of funds that punishment afterward, not that enforcement doesn't need to happen.

SUMMARY

The next subsection is "Office for Postsecondary Education."

1. "The next Administration should work with Congress to eliminate or move OPE programs to ETA at the Department of Labor."

MY OPINION

So no postsecondary funding for colleges?

SUMMARY

2. "Funding to institutions should be block-granted and narrowed to Historically Black Colleges and Universities and tribally controlled colleges."

MY OPINION

I can't tell if she's saying only those colleges should get funds via block grants, or if she's saying the funding they get should be narrowed.

SUMMARY

3. "Move programs deemed important to our national security interests to the Department of State."

MY OPINION

We're talking about colleges here. Why would we be putting their programs under the Department of State? I worry that would get in the way of academic freedom (which is a whole other topic, I know).

SUMMARY

The next subsection is "Institute of Education Sciences."

She says the Education Department's statistical office should be moved to the Department of Commerce's Census Bureau. She (more than) hints that there are problems at the institute that "keep it from being a productive contributor to the knowledge base related to teaching and learning."

MY OPINION

These kinds of statements are deeply frustrating. Say what the problems are. I can't tell if she's right or not because she doesn't define the problems she's addressing through most of this section.

More generally, she talked about declining test scores earlier, but nowhere does she say how these proposed changes will improve anything. It's just decentralization, and there may be a case to be made for that, but Burke doesn't even attempt to make it, nor does she connect it to her stated goals.

I'll end there for today. The next section is the Office of Federal Student Aid.