 |
| Has the U.S. Department of Education been bullied? Image Credit: Gerd Altmann/Pixabay. |
In 1982, the Christian Science Monitor, in the article “US Department of Education, down but not out” presented a humbling scene. The U.S. Department of Education was essentially labeled the delinquent student by President Reagan and forced to resort to timidly attending school while under the constant threat of being banished forever. Now that President Trump has disassembled the U.S. Department of Education in one sweeping executive order signed March 20, 2025, it beckons a sobering question: Did the U.S. Department of Education ever have a fair chance at securing a long and prosperous future? I doubt it. The vicious attacks on its identity ensured that the U.S. Department of Education always had one foot steeped in the grave.
President Ronald Reagan was highly skilled at assembling scathing political symbols that roused the American electorate. These striking symbols have haunted the American political consciousness for decades, and they still manage to generate a visceral response, whether in agreement or disagreement. Once President Reagan targeted the U.S. Department of Education for elimination and transformed the image of this fledgling federal agency into a lurid symbol of “all that was wrong with a bloated and intrusive federal bureaucracy,” it was guaranteed that the U.S. Department of Education’s future would permanently remain imperiled. Although The Christian Science Monitor reported that bipartisan opposition to closing the department remained strong in 1982, these symbols created by President Reagan inserted a seed that solidly rooted itself into public discourse. Opposition against the U.S. Department of Education is now strongly rooted in conservative political culture. Once President Trump was granted the “dramatic shift of power... in the... congressional elections” that Reagan pined for, he was able to finally carry out President Reagan’s vow to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education. In fact, he adopted President Reagan’s template to declaw the federal agency with extreme funding cuts, installing personnel who were antagonistic to the department, rewriting regulations that weakened the department’s scope of power, and redistributing integral responsibilities of the department to other governmental agencies.
 |
| What the U.S. Department of Education’s seal symbolizes, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, “... the tree expresses the confidence and strength imparted to the individual through the development of the mind and the assimilation of knowledge. The glory and satisfaction of achievement are exhibited in its leaves. The background of sun and rays suggests the role of the Department in the promotion, nurturing, and encouragement of the best in all aspects of the nation’s educational system.” Image Credit: Maryland GovPics/Flickr. |
The U.S. Department of Education has survived due to the Democratic Party’s insistence on its practical usefulness. The United States is a geographically and ethnically diverse territory that happens to be sitting on top of a massive landmass. A federal agency seems to be the most suited to facing these momentous challenges. In the report published in 1967, “The Case for a Federal U.S. Department of Education,” the author, Rufus E. Miles, Jr., implored the federal government to cease stalling on establishing the U.S. Department of Education. According to Miles, Jr., the complex social issues that assaulted urban areas struggling with decay desperately required a national spotlight and resources. In addition to addressing the issues that besieged the urban areas, Miles, Jr., envisioned that the U.S. Department of Education could embark on an important mission to be the “full-time spokesman” that solely focused on advocating for the educational fitness of Americans. Despite these practical concerns thoughtfully presented in the public administration review, President Reagan’s disparaging symbolism prevailed. Miles, Jr., acknowledged that in order for a particular federal agency to be endeared by the public, they must believe that this federal agency is recognized as valuable by other prestigious federal agencies. I imagine that in the early 1980s, this acknowledgement was especially crucial for the burgeoning U.S. Department of Education. These factors, according to Miles, Jr., could ultimately determine if the organizational structure of the U.S. Department of Education would be designed to enhance or decrease its power. President Reagan’s constant vows throughout the 1980s to abolish this vulnerable department most likely significantly weakened its ability to grow in power over time since its organizational structure was routed for disempowerment.
President Reagan conspicuously demonstrated to the American public that the U.S. Department of Education was undeserving of being a high priority. President Reagan’s attitude was that this department should undergo swift termination for wasting even a dime. The Christian Monitor illustrated a sobering scene of the U.S. Department of Education possibly being relegated to tiptoeing around its own school. This is contrary to Miles, Jr.’s recommendations to ensure the U.S. Department of Education’s success, which included being “well-staffed, and with national and international respect.” He conjoined respect for the U.S. Department of Education with its ability to enhance educational progress and opportunity for Americans.
The symbolic attacks that were blasted by various politicians, including President Reagan, throughout the 1980s have fractured American politics. Its sharp shards were repurposed to construct the current American political scene that is dominated by extreme political polarization. According to The Christian Monitor, during Reagan’s tenure, both the Democratic-controlled House and the Republican-controlled Senate protected the U.S. Department of Education and actively worked to reduce any further budget cuts to this department. But now the political cleavages have disabled the ability for both political parties to express a shared value for the same governmental agency. President Reagan’s political symbols seem to have taken on an even more crucial role in American politics. The survival of conservative politicians is contingent on whether they maintain positions on politicized issues or institutions that are amiable to the Republican political party’s symbolic interpretations. Historically, Democratic administrations saved the U.S. Department of Education, but bipartisanship was the core component in these frequent rescues. The Democratic Party’s efforts to resume saving the U.S. Department of Education will be an almost insurmountable endeavor if polarization continues its dominion over American politics.
Did you or do you work for the U.S. Department of Education? Share you story with Novelty Sense at: Contact Form: Story Submission 📢
REFERENCES:
Bencivenga, J. (1982). US Department of Education, down but not out. The Christian Science Monitor (1983).
Miles, Jr., R. E. (1967). The Case for a Federal Department of Education. Public Administration Review, 27(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.2307/973178
© 2024 Proudly Produced by Novelty Sense. All Rights Reserved.
Post a Comment