0 votes

Ron Paul on Education. Clarify please.

Can someone please clarify Ron Paul's position on education. I know he wants to eliminate the DOE. But I was having a conversation with a coworker who brought up some good points.

If the DoE was eliminated, How would that effect the standard of education. If every state does things their own way. a student in MN could be passing with A's but that same student in TX could be failing. So if there is no baseline. how could this effect college admissions. and scholarships and such.

I did make the point that a private company could make a standardized test that each student could take to determine their ability and schools/home-schoolers could ad the cost of the test into their budget. just like they would for text books, computers, and other needed teaching items.

But I am just curious how eliminating the DoE could effect the overall education system.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I too wished the Doc makes the distinction, so those who

erroneously equate "public education" to be synonymous with "Dept. of Ed," are not scared off when he talks about these things.

The most ironic thing is that at the time of its inception, the Teachers Union were AGAINST the formation of Department of Education!


Yeah, everyone in politics has a selective memory of convenience.

Frankly, it all arises out the fact the most Americans are so ill-informed, misinformed, and uninformed. The problem with the Doc sometimes is that he trusts the people, too much.o) He assumes people know the distinction between the fact that Dept of Ed is NOT synonymous with public education, already.

but as you may have already guessed, your property tax + State govt funds pay for about 90~95% of ALL your public education. Period.

Dept of Ed only intervenes by dictating unfunded mandates that they expect the States to pay for anyway, not to mention bickering moronically over what book should be read and what curriculum they should dictate, or which publishing company should print their approved sex ed program, etc. Think Scholastic Publishing, another govt-corporatist monopoly. If they actually had competition, they'd have long gone with iPads or Kindle. Books are heavy, expensive, and date rather quickly.

Though, obviously, there is something to be said about learning on a book where one can much more tangibly browse through different chapters and pictures. But, if accuracy of the information is the key concern, as it should be, they should be more than open to having kids stay up to date with info, as they evolve, change or are simply disputed.

At 'higher learning' levels, Dept of Ed acts as nothing more than a gvt middleman to corporatist PRIVATE student loan lending schemes via the likes of CitiBank, who is by far the largest student loan lender.

Student loans are nothing more than debt slavery: in this country, you're taxed when you're born, when you live, when you work, and when you die. Since the entire monetary system is based on a House of Cards fraud, they HAVE to indoctrinate the kids into debt-credit based system early on, so they have very little chance to escape it, and are taught learned-helplessness into a system that will not function if people don't keep taking out loans.

That's all it's there for. It has nothing to do with Education. Just as Dept of Commerce has nothing to do with Commerce, but another agency that's solely tasked with deciding to whom, to which corporatist it doles out TaxPayer 'money' to which govt-approved monopoly.

Another example: Dept of Energy has nothing to do with energy independence, nor R&D to get off oil and into a cleaner non-emission source of energy. It was merely a spin-off from the DoD's Nuke Regulatory commission. It's a subsidy for Nuke industry & DoD contractors.

In fact, most govt agencies do just that, their sole purpose is to facilitate the auctioning off of taxpayer 'money' to corporatist interests. Nothing more.

As you can see, almost every single thing that govt bureaucrats name, it almost always does and means its exact opposite. Case in point, the "Patriot Act." We all know it's not "patriotic."

So, simply put, eliminating Dept of Education will literally affect "public education" by the precise amount it influences, in reality: ZERO.

It'll simply be 'diverted back' to the States and local municipalities... except, it never needed to be diverted back, as "public education" has ALWAYS been the purview of the local govt.

By the way, if we were a country of real 'grown ups' the first criteria to be invoked when discussing these issues, SHOULD be: Is the Dept of Education Constitutional? NO. And that should be the end of the discussion.

But no, we're arguing over needless things all the while running up debt, in effect enslaving the current and next generation of Americans to pay for an illegal activity, just because a bulk of the population will always be pliable for brainwashing with disinfo, the same ones who bring up the "Constitution!" yet, never read it.

Then again, other than a handful other than the Pauls in govt ever read or uphold the Constitution, so frankly, the govt truly is merely a reflection of its populace at large.

Only real change that will come about upon Dept of Education's elimination will be that we'll save some Federal Reserve Notes, and useless bureaucrats will be out of work: got no complaints there!

Predictions in due Time...

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

The standard would most definitely improve.

The only thing that's holding back education is government schools.

Give me a break----what baseline?

Oh please....I'm going to be ill. Baseline education? For some real enlightenment, go to youtube and see videos of John Taylor Gatta, famous educator....

Who says this so-called "baseline education" is best thought up by the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT????? Explain to me how the home-schooled kids are wiping the public schooled kids out in competitions at every level!

Go read about "outcomes" education. It will nake you sick.
Get this: John Gatta says that in Switzerland, only one in four citizens goes beyond grade school....is this not a wealthy nation?

Personally, I feel I could have learned everything in grade school. High School was a waste---I spent it figuring out ways to skip class, not get caught, and do various prank things....The only thing that required any output from me was Trigonometry....these days everything
can be commoditized, stuck on a computer, and people can do it themselves.

More...food for fodder...it is my understanding that the great industrialists, bankers and so forth, wanted dutiful employees, not creative thinkers...if you read how this scenario has been implemented it is gross.

Nobody is encouraged to have their own business...no..it is to go to college to "get a good job" and look what has happened..we have a bunch of dependent people on hand, expectant of having "good jobs" and the "good jobs" have moved to where the jobs are, and that is not here.

Please read about education in this country....you will be amazed at how the goals of controlling the masses through schooling have been implemented.....start with the Prussian empire.... by the way...I understand Australia dumped OUTCOMES BASED EDUCATION in 2007 and South Africa dumped it in 2010.....should tell you enufffff



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4pN-aiofw this is an old john stossel clip on this subject.

For any who are not aware,

For any who are not aware, some of the most important things happening in the field of education are happening right under our noses. Apple very recently held an education event in New York where they announced several things that all educators should be very excited about. Take a look and then tell me what this says about the future of private education initiatives:


And here's the video of the event presentation:


Now, you don't have to be a big fan of Apple to realize that the quality and quantity of completely free or lower priced (compared to traditional printed textbooks) educational material about to be available makes the elimination of the DOE very plausible and probably even more desirable.

I know teachers that hate the

I know teachers that hate the fed involvement. They would be able to teach in more creative ways but the federal rules and guidelines prevent it. Teachers and parents would be able to find the best ways to teach each individual child the best way for that child to learn. Now teachers are forced to follow a specific guideline that does not promote free and critical thinking.

Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto. - T. Jefferson rЭVO˩ution

"Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone.” - BASTIAT

Well, the private

Well, the private organizations creating standards is really it.

Without the Dept. of Ed., entire new markets for jobs would be opened up. I can see institutions rating high schools based on the type of material that is included in their curriculum, among other factors. Colleges could use something like that alongside a GPA to help determine how apt a student is. There already exist institutions like the college board, who administer standardized college testing like the SATs.

Even today, with the Dept. of Ed., a student in one school with the same grades as another student in a different school may not know any of the same things. The problem here may have some to do with varying curricula, but the real problem that can never be resolved (without giving every student the same, multiple choice homework and tests) is that grading is done subjectively by teachers. Sometimes, even within the same school, two students with the same grades may not have even close to the same abilities.

The most important thing to realize is that (most) colleges are private institutions and it is up to them and them alone to figure out how to best screen their potential students. There are many possibilities for that to be accomplished. If given the opportunity, I'm sure different colleges would try different things, creating competition in the agencies that try to standardize some way to determine a student's ability. I hope I don't need to explain why competition is good on the DailyPaul.

the "baseline" you're talking

the "baseline" you're talking about cannot be legitimate at the level of the DOE. there is way too much corruption involved. no child left behind expanded federal testing mandates which limited the diversity in subjects children could develop an interest at an earlier age. all of our kids are primed for war making and corporate servitude, rather than intellectual growth. i don't want to go back to "the good old days" of education, because i believe we can do a lot better than that as well, but if you look at operations, it still worked in much of the same way, only we were more prosperous.

a voucher system(like belgium has) would work much better in transition to a truly diverse, free market including free association and development of interests through education suited for individuals, instead of a uniform monoculture. private interests are still rent-seeking then, so it would still be necessary to abolish the voucher system.

we are conditioned to believe in the system of colleges and set trades dictating the boundaries of education, but historical evidence proves that is the wrong way to approach this kind of development in all its stripes and colors.

Last I checked colleges

Last I checked colleges decided admissions based on the SATs and ACTs...neither of which is part of the dept of education....The fact is ever since the dept of education was created American test scores plummeted compared internationally. Teachers should be allowed to cover what they feel is important to class of whatever level...since they tend to know what the college and or field is looking for...this is they way it was done before the establishment of the dept of education in the 70s/80s. Remember this rule: everything the government touches turns to crap...the reverse midas touch

Thanks for your reply.

question from coworker:

Where does the funding to provide access and updates to the SATs and ACTs come from. The DoE doesn't fund them? the money has to come from somewhere?

Get your God D*** hands off my mother F***ing Junk - Paul from the movie Paul.

Source of surplus wealth

Production over consumption

Anyone claiming to justify a need to take from one person and then "give" to another person may be earnest in their mind, but as it happens the same "justifications" are used by criminals who know better, but are working victims with confidence schemes.

That understanding leads to the concept of a Democratic Federated Republic. The idea is to maintain a voluntary government; one that does not justify taking from one person and then supposedly giving to another person.

If I understand Ron Paul's take on the DOE it is along the lines of enumerated powers written into the voluntary agreement that was once a Democratic Federated Republic Like this:

13 Legal entities or States agree to form a voluntary Union and they write up a rule book and that rule book is supposed to be The Constitution.

The idea was to have a method by which the 13 States were made powerful enough to defend against any larger legal entity, such as England, while at the same time the idea was to avoid becoming another England.

The idea was to allow the Federal part of the Republic to collect taxes from the States, not collect taxes directly from The People in each State.

The idea was to preserve a level of competition between the state entities, and that is where the DOE comes in.

If one state entity becomes more like despotic England, then The People can vote with their feet by moving from that state that grows more and more despotic.

What happens?

The tax revenue drops to nothing in the state that grows more despotic while tax revenues rise to the states where people still have choices, such as the choice of which school to start as a business venture, or which school to pay for when shopping for a better school.

The idea is a principled one and the principle here has to do with the differences between despotic force and competitive force, or market forces resulting from competition.

A. Despotic force is obedience or punishment

B. Market forces have to do with an aggregate sum of all the choices made by all the people who choose. When most of the people choose higher quality and lower cost, which is almost everyone, then the result is a force that forces producers to supply higher quality stuff, at lower costs, or go out of business.

Which do you prefer:

A. Lower quality education at higher costs because all the competition is forced out of business by despotic forces where the supposed leaders, who are really only criminals in disguise, eliminate all competition where ever and when ever competition offers options.

B. Higher quality education at lower prices because no rational being existing without despotic forces would settle for less.

You tell me, please.


You're right.

And a lot of schools would probably look to major universities to set their standards as well. "What is Stanford teaching/testing, MIT, etc?" It wouldn't be the crisis people think it would be.