Time to Rethink Federal Education Control

The federal government has been meddling in education for far too long. Education has always been a responsibility of states and local communities. Yet, Washington, D. C. , has been calling the shots for decades, often with lackluster results. It's high time to have a serious talk about scaling back the Department of Education's influence and giving power back to where it belongs. The federal government has been expanding its control over education for nearly 50 years. Congress has been renaming and rewriting programs, from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to No Child Left Behind and the Every Student Succeeds Act. But these changes haven't fixed the core issue: education policy shouldn't be decided in Washington. The Department of Education disrupts the balance of power between states and the federal government. It hampers innovation, wastes taxpayer money, and hasn't improved student outcomes. In 2022, the department spent a staggering $268 billion. About $68 billion of that was given back to states and school districts as grants. But there's a catch. States have to jump through hoops to get this money. For instance, Utah has to prove poverty rates for Title I funding and submit detailed plans for Title II teacher development funds. The paperwork is so overwhelming that in some Utah classrooms, paraprofessionals do most of the teaching because licensed teachers are bogged down by federal requirements. The goals behind these programs are noble. And there are likely good people working hard in the department. But the idea that states need Washington bureaucrats overseeing their schools is outdated. The real problem is that states have grown dependent on these federal funds. If a state opts out, its taxpayers don't get their money back—they end up funding other states. This isn't fair or sustainable.

So, how do we fix this? Recent federal workforce reductions are a step in the right direction. But Congress and the president could go further. They could consider proposals like the LEARN Act, which would give tax credits to residents of states that opt out of federal education programs. This way, taxpayers keep more of their money, and states decide which programs to continue locally. Utah has a strong history of investing in education, including supporting low-income schools. But with more flexibility, less bureaucracy, and greater accountability to local families, Utah could do even better. If eliminating the department entirely is too much to ask, shifting to flexible block grants would be a sensible improvement. It would cut red tape, save money, and let states innovate in ways that best serve their students. Some critics worry that without national oversight, some states might fall behind. But that's the beauty of federalism. Our founders expected states to experiment with different approaches and learn from each other. Innovation thrives when states lead, not when Washington imposes one-size-fits-all solutions. Plus, forcing uniformity often leads to resistance and sectionalism. Lowering the political temperature starts with clearly distinguishing between national and state responsibilities. Restoring that balance will make our country stronger. Many people rely on federal education dollars and are cautious about change. But trusting states and local communities to do what they do best is a bold and common-sense move. Washington doesn't have all the answers. It's time to let states and local communities take the lead.

Actions