Does a merger of the U.S. Departments of Education and Labor make sense or would it risk subjugating the needs of schools to the needs of industry?
Cast as part of a larger government reorganization sought by the Trump White House, a merger would likely encounter congressional resistance. Past attempts to dissolve the education agency were rebuffed. Ronald Reagan ran for president in 1980 on a pledge to abolish ED, but gave up on the idea.
In a 1985 letter to Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, R-Utah, Reagan conceded:
As you know, I have previously recommended the abolition of the Department of Education. This was because I believed that federal educational programs could be administered effectively without a Cabinet-level agency. While I still feel that this is the best approach, that proposal has received very little support in the Congress.
Trump may opt to blur rather than merge, perhaps transferring youth and workforce initiatives from Labor to Education as a first step.
Among the differing reactions this morning:
Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said in a statement:
In seeking to merge these two critical agencies, with distinct missions and important mandates, the administration sends a strong signal that students and laborers are simply not a real priority. While Secretary Betsy DeVos continues to diminish protections for our nation's public schools students, her support of this merger proposal lays bare the depths of her hostility for the agency's mission and work. This merger reflects just one of the various vectors at this administration's disposal in its brazen efforts to systematically destroy vital institutions. This administration has repeatedly used the guise of reorganization as a tool for gutting core agencies and dismantling enforcement mechanisms intended to protect our nation's most vulnerable. We urge Congress to oppose this move, which would gut two of the most critical and needed federal agencies in our country today.
Neal McCluskey, director of Cato's Center for Educational Freedom, said in a statement:
Since it first opened its doors in 1980, the U.S. Department of Education has been an unconstitutional federal bureaucracy that should have been shut down. Any proposal to eliminate it, even just by merging it with other departments and reducing the number of cabinet-level officials carrying the water of special interests, is worth considering. But it won't amount to much if all the unconstitutional, ineffective, expensive programs the department currently runs are just swept into a new, more expansive bureaucratic machine. The focus needs to be on phasing out all the negative things Washington does in education, not just reorganizing them.
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said in a statement:
In any normal administration, combining some of the core functions of the education and labor departments might make sense in terms of bringing together programs that educate children and prepare Americans for the jobs of today and tomorrow. Having workforce development—also known as adult education—in one department, and K-12, career and technical education, and college education in another, may not have made sense. But there is nothing normal about this administration, so we're extremely skeptical of the motivations here given how hostile Betsy DeVos and President Trump have been to public education, workers and unions. It seems like this move is just cover for continuing their agenda to go after public schools, gut civil rights and equity protections, provide support for predatory student loan companies and prey on workers. We strongly oppose this move, and Congress should reject it.
About the Author
