March 21st, 2025

Dear Readers,

The (possible) impending doom of the Department of Education begs the question: To what extent should the federal, or even state, government be involved in public education?

Obviously, if you believe in public education, then you favor the state having a significant say in how the youth of a nation or community are educated.

Whereas some believe that public education should be abolished and the free market should dictate the level of education a society requires.

Both of these extreme examples leave tremendous room for error.

Let’s start with a “state-run” school.

Now, the primary benefit (?) of this type of school is that it is fully funded by the state. Students of all levels, ages, and backgrounds can receive an education for free. Fantastic! The more educated a society is, the more society benefits. Educated individuals can make better decisions and (in theory) make more money, improving their lives and the lives of those around them. Educated men and women are more likely to vote, invest in the community, and start families, benefiting society economically and politically. But, there is a glaring issue. A solely state-run school is only as good as the state, both morally and idealistically. So, if the state is immoral, unethical, tyrannical, or otherwise destructive, then the education that that state produces will also be all of those things. These are not beneficial to society. Economically, the country will falter, and morally, the people will suffer because they lack what is good, true, and right.

Let’s look at the inverse. School is completely privatized. There are no longer any laws requiring how school must be done since there are no longer any state funds being sent to said schools. Let’s up the ante on this one a little bit…let us also imagine that in the wholly privatized world of elementary and secondary education, it is no longer a requirement to be educated. Meaning that families can choose not to send their students to school for any reason. While it may be well within their right, it would, of course, cause issues. For example, many families would not send their students to school, but instead of educating them, the families just let them exist as they are. They may pick up a few things here and there, but for the most part, these students will not be able to function in society. Not only would they not be able to obtain a job because of their lack of reading and basic arithmetic skills, but they also lack the prerequisite social skills to function appropriately in social or work settings. Whereas those students with families investing in their education would receive all of the benefits and go on to hold all of the skilled labor jobs, receive the majority of the money, and, ultimately, look down on the rest of the uneducated society. These educated people would hold all of the positions of power in society, becoming an oligarchy and, ultimately, tyranny.

While both examples are very hyperbolic, they will come to fruition if we don’t do something about education in our country.

There is an answer to this possible problem: Balance.

A balance between what the free market can offer and what the state may require.

This can take multiple forms.

States can mandate that children be educated up to a certain age but not have any schools themselves. Allowing the free market to dictate what types of schools are created. States could offer some tax benefit or other incentive to these schools to give them a reason to not only start the schools but keep them going. By taking away government funding, schools would no longer have the crutch of tax dollars to lean on, forcing them to create the best schools possible for the community they reside in and ultimately driving the cost of a quality education down, making it more affordable for students and families. In theory, this could reduce taxes on the state and local level since those funds no longer have to bolster public education. Meaning that individuals would be taxed less.

This is just one of many ways that a state could function without a state-run school. While this may not be a perfect solution, it’s impossible to fix an inherently imperfect system.

Whether the Department of Education is erased from existence or not, there are many more things that can and should be done on the state level to affect education.

The federal government should not have any dealings in educating the youth because its goal is not to make a well-rounded individual but one that exalts the state.