Letter: Elimination of DOE would save money

In her recent column, Lt. Gov. O’Brien attempted to justify the U.S. Department of Education. I wasn’t convinced. As a state official, Ms. O’Brien should be objecting to the powers taken by the feds from state prerogatives. Sticking to the Constitution is an even more compelling reason.
Educating our children is the responsibility of state and local entities. At least that’s how it was when I was growing up in the ’30s and ’40s. None of the reasons for retaining the DOE in Ms. O’Brien’s column are valid. We don’t need the feds to “strengthen our education system.” We don’t need the feds “to produce engaged citizens and workers to compete globally.” We don’t need the administrative costs for transferring $621 million from one taxpayer-funded pot to another. If we have shortfalls and value education as we should, then we must tax ourselves to make up the difference. We don’t need the feds to fund programs for special education, Head Start, and school lunches. We don’t need the feds “to insure equality in schools.” Sharing of “best practices” could be done electronically in this day and age.
All of the other DOE services admired by Ms. O’Brien could be handled by local school boards and the state with less red tape and monetary savings. School boards run the schools, and the state furnishes coordination, supplemental funding, and other services authorized by the legislature without interference from federal bureaucrats.
Since the federal government is broke, the elimination of DOE should bring cheers in Washington.
Dick Prosence