Congressman Paul believes that the federal government does not have the constitutional authority to create and maintain a national education system and that the department of education should be mostly dissolved. He supports vouchers over the current system, but favors school systems being run by local governments. He is an advocate of home-schooling.
In 1988, Congressman Paul stated in an interview that the federal government should be removed from education and a private school system should be enacted. He cited the poor track record for government involvement in education and the lack of legal authority. He notes that ending the public school system all together would be difficult and called for a voucher system to allow students to select their schools.
Also in 1988, Congressman Paul spoke in favor of legislation to prohibit the executive branch from enacting a national testing standard. He noted that even though he supported legislation to prevent the creation of a national test without congressional approval, he notes that that education is not a power granted to the federal government and they have no authority to intervene.
Again in 1999, Congressmen Paul noted that the doctrine of enumerated powers stated that the federal government powers were limited to those areas designated to it by the federal government and education was not one of those areas. He also notes that the course being taken by the government to address education was failing.
In 2001, Congressman Paul introduced legislation to extend HOPE Scholarships to K-12 to allow them to be used to pay for private or parochial schools or to offset the cost of home-schooling.
In 2002, Congressman Paul reasserted his views that vouchers were a better solution than mandatory public school. He argued that vouchers for parochial schools did not violate the separation of church and state, and that anything that created more competition would be good for education.
In 2008, Congressman Paul voiced his criticism for the success of the public school system in support of the public school system.
In 2011, Congressman Paul argued against government loans for college noting that this was not the role of the government. He stated that no one had the moral or legal right to take money from one person to loan or give to another person for the purposes of education. He stated that education was simply not a right, but rather something that should be purchased.
While in office, Congressman Paul has voted against No Child Left Behind and against the DC Scholarship program.
Federal Government and Public Education
In a 1988 interview, Congressman Paul spoke about the failure of the federal education system, support for vouchers and/or tax credits to establish competition.
Education Not an Area Designated to the Federal Government
In February of 1998 Congressman Paul spoke on the House floor about his opposition to the President attempting to use executive authority to establish a national testing standard through executive power only.
National Testing and the Educational Crisis
In April of 1998, Congressman Paul spoke on the House floor about the educational crisis and legislation that he was introducing to remove taxes from earnings made through educational processes for educational purposes.
Student Results Act of 1999
In October of 1999, Congressman Paul spoke on the House floor about his opposition to the Student Results Act of 1999. Congressman Paul notes the lack of success in the federal education system, and states that our approach to education is not working.
Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to this legislation. I know that the goal of everyone here is to have quality education for everyone in this country. I do not like the approach. The approach has been going on for 30 years with us here in the Congress at the national level controlling and financing education. But the evidence is pretty clear there has been no success. It is really a total failure. Yet the money goes up continuously. This year it is an 8 percent increase for Title I over last year.
In 1963, the Federal Government spent less than $900,000 on education programs. This year, if we add up all the programs, it is over $60 billion. Where is the evidence? The scores keep going down. The violence keeps going up. We cannot keep drugs out of the schools. There is no evidence that our approach to education is working.
I just ask my colleagues to think about whether or not we should continue on this same course. I know the chairman of the committee has made a concerted effort in trying to get more local control over the schools, and I think this is commendable. I think there should be more local control. But I am also convinced that once the money comes from Washington, you really never can deliver the control back to the local authorities. So that we should give it serious thought on whether or not this approach is correct.
Now, I know it is not a very powerful argument, but I might just point out that if Members read carefully the doctrine of enumerated powers, we find that it does not mention that we have the authority, but I concede that we have gotten around that for more than 35 years so we are not likely to reconsider that today. But as far as the practicality goes, we should rethink it.
If we had a tremendous success with our educational system, if everybody was being taken care of, if these $60 billion were really doing the job, if we were not having the violence and the drugs in the school, maybe you could say, well, let us change the Constitution or let me reassess my position. But I think we are on weak grounds if we think we can continue to do this.
There are more mandates in this bill. Even though we like to talk about local control, there are more mandates, and this bill will authorize not only the $8 billion and an 8 percent increase this year, but over the next 5 years there will be an additional $28 billion added to the budget because of this particular piece of legislation.
I ask my colleagues, give it serious thought. This does not deserve passage.
Hope
In June of 2001, Congressman Paul spoke on the House floor and introduced two pieces of legislation. One would provide HOPE Scholarships to K-12 for use is private or parochial schools or to offset the cost of home-schooling.
INTRODUCTION OF EDUCATION BILLS -- HON. RON PAUL (Extensions of Remarks - June 29, 2001)
HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, June 28, 2001
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce two bills designed to help improve education by reducing taxes on parents, teachers, and all Americans who wish to help improve education. The first bill, the Hope Plus Scholarship Act, extends the HOPE Scholarship tax credit to K-12 education expenses. Under this bill, parents could use the HOPE Scholarship to pay for private or religious school tuition or to offset the cost of home schooling. In addition, under the bill, all Americans could use the Hope Scholarship to make cash or in-kind donations to public schools. Thus, the Hope Scholarship could help working parents finally afford to send their child to a private school, while other parents could take advantage of the Hope credit to help purchase new computers for their childrens' school.
Mr. Speaker, reducing taxes so that Americans can devote more of their own resources to education is the best way to improve America's schools. This is not just because expanding the HOPE Scholarship bill will increase the funds devoted to education but because, to use a popular buzz word, individuals are more likely than federal bureaucrats to insist that schools be accountable for student performance. When the federal government controls the education dollar, schools will be held accountable for their compliance with bureaucratic paperwork requirements and mandates that have little to do with actual education, or for students performance on a test that may measure little more than test-taking skills or the ability of education bureaucrats to design or score the test so that ``no child is left behind,'' regardless of the child's actual knowledge. Federal rules and regulations also divert valuable resources away from classroom instruction into fulfilling bureaucratic paperwork requirements. The only way to change this system is to restore control of the education dollar to the American people so they can ensure schools meet their demands that children be provided a quality education.
My other bill, the ``Professional Educators Tax Relief Act'' provides a thousand dollar per year tax credit to all professional educators, including librarians, counselors, and others involved in implementing or formulating the curriculum. This bill helps equalize the pay gap between educators and other professionals, thus ensuring that quality people will continue to seek out careers in education. Good teaching is the key to a good education, so it is important that Congress raise the salaries of educators by cutting their taxes.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join with me in returning education resources to the American people by cosponsoring my Hope Plus Scholarship Act and my Professional Educators Tax Cut Act.
Voucher Debate and Public Education
In a February 25, 2002 article, Congressman Paul wrote about the failure of the federal education system, the lack of the constitutional authority for a federal education system, and support for vouchers.
The Voucher Debate and the Failure of Federal Education
The Supreme Court heard arguments last week in the now- infamous Cleveland school vouchers case. At issue, at least in the Cleveland case, is whether publicly-funded vouchers can be used by children attending private and parochial schools. While the court will focus on the tenuous argument that a "separation of church and state" renders vouchers unconstitutional, the larger issue for all of us is whether the federal education system needs to be scrapped. After all, if centralized Washington control of education was working, parents wouldn’t be clamoring for vouchers in the first place.
I applaud the proponents of vouchers for having the initiative to try something new that challenges the federal government’s virtual monopoly on education. It’s admirable to apply a market approach to schools. Forty years of Great Society federal programs have done nothing but make our public schools worse. Fifty years ago, before the federal government became involved in public education, American grammar and high schools were the best in the world. Students faced a demanding curriculum of math, hard sciences, geography, literature, western civilization, spelling and grammar, Latin, and useful trades. They even learned American history, which is sadly lacking in today’s schools. Teachers were respected, and free to enforce discipline without fear of lawsuits or being undermined by school administrators and parents.
The stark contrast between our public schools then and now shows that federal control of education has failed. Today’s public schools often produce graduates who lack even basic reading and writing skills. Politically-motivated multiculturism and leftist indoctrination take the place of rigorous learning. Teacher unions fight to protect their turf and save jobs, rather than focusing on the education of our kids. Many public schools are dilapidated and dangerous, with teachers afraid of students and discipline nonexistent. Given this reality, we can hardly be surprised that parents are demanding vouchers to get their children out of a failing system. The federal bureaucrats may claim that vouchers will undermine public schools, but the truth is that federal education already has failed miserably, and competition could only improve matters.
However, the voucher debate really ignores the more important question of whether public schools should be run by federal or local government. The Constitution does not authorize any federal involvement in education; Article I grants Congress no authority to create, fund, or regulate schools at all. Therefore, under the 10th Amendment public education should be purely a state and local matter. This means Congress should not be taxing you to fund a huge federal education bureaucracy that exercises dictatorial control over curriculum and standards nationwide. Those tax dollars should be left with parents and local voters, who can best decide how to allocate precious education resources. Public schools should be funded at the local level with local tax dollars, where waste is minimized and accountability is greatest. The failed federal system of public school funding has become a bureaucratic black hole, where the majority of tax dollars never reach the classroom.
The Supreme Court, like Congress, should simply follow the Constitution. The Constitution allows states and local governments to decide for themselves whether to have a voucher program. It does not, however, allow the federal government to fund, regulate, or control those voucher programs. The emphasis on local control established in the Constitution is especially important when it comes to education, and it is no coincidence that our schools have declined as federal control has increased. It’s time to end the 40-year Washington stranglehold on education by returning control -which means returning tax dollars- to parents and local school systems. The best immediate approach is to give parents a federal tax credit for amounts spent on education. Ultimately, however, we can only resurrect our public schools by following the Constitution and ending the federal education monopoly.
Campaign Speech on Home Schooling
During the 2008 Presidential election, Congressman Paul spoke about home schooling and the public education system.
Education Is Not a Right
In March of 2011 Congressman Paul appeared on MSNBC and stated that the federal government should not be involved in granting loans to students. Congressman Paul notes that there is not right to an education and that if someone desires an education they should work to pay for that schooling.
Fox News / Google Debate
On September of 2011, Congressman Paul participated in the Fox News / Google debate. He is asked education and notes his support for removing the federal government from that role.
BAIER: Congressman Paul?
REP. RON PAUL, R-TEXAS: If you care about your children, you'll get the federal government out of the business of educating our kids.
(APPLAUSE)
In 1980, when the Republican Party ran, part of the platform was to get rid of the Department of Education. By the year 2000, it was eliminated, and we fed on to it. Then (inaudible) Republicans added No Child Left Behind.
So the first thing a president should do is -- the goal should be set to get the government out completely, but don't enforce this law of No Child Left Behind. It's not going to do any good, and nobody likes it. And there's no value to it. The teachers don't like it, and the students don't like it.
But there are other things that the federal government can do, and that is give tax credits for the people who will opt out. We ought to have a right to opt out of the public system if you want.
Michigan Economic Debate
On November 10, 2011 Congressman Paul participated in the Michigan Economic Debate. He was asked about Obamacare and discussed the need to remove the government from the market.
EPPERSON: So, Congressman Paul, you've already talked about the fact that you want to get rid of the Department of Education. You've said that you want to get rid of federal student loans. So how would you make college more accessible, more affordable for these students and students around the country?
PAUL: Well, I think you proved that the policy of student loans is a total failure. I mean, a trillion dollars of debt?
(APPLAUSE)
And it's going to be dumped on the taxpayer? And what have they gotten? A poorer education and costs that have skyrocketed because of inflation, and they don't have jobs. There's nothing more dramatically failing than -- than that program.
So, no, there's no authority in the Constitution for the federal government to be dealing with education. We should get rid of the loan programs. We should get rid of the Department of Education and give tax credits, if you have to, to help people.
But the inflation is the big problem. It's three times the rate that the government admits that inflation is, and that is natural and normal. When governments inflate the currency, it goes in the areas that the government gets involved in, housing, high prices, stock market, skyrocketing prices, medical care, skyrocketing, education...
EPPERSON: But how do they pay for it? How do they now pay for college, if they're not...
PAUL: The way -- the way you pay for cellphones and computers.
(APPLAUSE)
You have the marketplace there. There's competition. Quality goes up. The price goes down. Can you imagine what it would have been like if the Department of Homeland Security was in charge of finding one person or one company to make the cellphones? I mean, it would have been a total disaster. So when the government gets involved in the delivery of any service -- whether it's education, medical care, or housing -- they cause higher prices, lower quality, create bubbles, and they give us this mess that we're in. That's why we have to eventually get our -- we have to wise up.
And look at where the bubbles come from. It's from the Federal Reserve. And we should start by auditing the Fed, and then we should end the Fed.
Campaign Website Statements
ISSUE - Education
The federal government does not own our children. Yet we act as if it does by letting it decide when, how, and what our children will learn. We have turned their futures over to lobbyists and bureaucrats.
I support giving educational control back to parents, who know their children better than any politician in D.C. ever will.
The federal government has no constitutional authority to fund or control schools. I want to abolish the unconstitutional, wasteful Department of Education and return its functions to the states. By removing the federal subsidies that inflate costs, schools can be funded by local taxes, and parents and teachers can directly decide how best to allocate the resources.
To help parents with the costs of schooling, I have introduced H.R. 1056, the Family Education Freedom Act, in Congress. This bill would allow parents a tax credit of up to $5,000 (adjustable after 2007 for inflation) per student per year for the cost of attendance at an elementary and/or secondary school. This includes private, parochial, religious, and home schools.
Another bill I have sponsored, H.R. 1059, allows full-time elementary and secondary teachers a $3,000 yearly tax credit, thus easing their financial burden and encouraging good teachers to stay in an underpaid profession.
I have also introduced legislation to help families cope with the out-of-control costs of higher education. H.R. 193, the Make College Affordable Act, creates a full tax deduction for undergraduate college tuition, reasonable living expenses, and interest on qualified student loans.
Many parents have already shown their desire to be free of federal control by either enrolling their children in private schools or homeschooling them. And students enrolled in these alternatives have consistently performed better and tested higher than those in state-run schools.
Years of centralized education have produced nothing but failure and frustrated parents. We can resurrect our public school system if we follow the Constitution and end the federal education monopoly.
2012 Presidential Campaign Website Statements
HOMESCHOOLING CHAMPION
Ron Paul believes no nation can remain free when the state has greater influence over the knowledge and values transmitted to children than the family does.
And the truth is, no big government spending program can or will solve our nation’s education problems.
One-size-fits-all central planning simply does not work.
As a congressman, Ron Paul has been a consistent supporter of homeschooling and educational freedom.
Being a homeschooling parent takes a unique dedication to family and education.
TAX CREDITS FOR HOMESCHOOLING
In many cases, homeschooling families must forgo the second income of one parent, as well as incur the costs of paying for textbooks, computers, and other school supplies.
And with combined taxes taking almost 50 percent of the average family’s income, there is little left over for low- and middle-class parents to even consider other educational opportunities.
That’s why, during his time in Congress, Ron Paul has introduced legislation to:
* Help parents better educate their children by providing parents with a $5,000 per child tax credit for tutors, books, computers, and other K-12 related educational needs.
* Ensure that the federal government treats high school diplomas earned through homeschooling the same as other high school diplomas.
PUT PARENTS BACK IN CHARGE
Congressman Paul wants parents to have the freedom to choose the best educational options for their children, and his commitment to ensuring homeschooling remains a practical alternative for American families is unmatched by any other Presidential candidate.
As President, he will veto any legislation that encroaches on homeschooling parents’ rights.
Returning control of education to parents and teachers on the local level is the centerpiece of Ron Paul’s education agenda.
Voting Record
America COMPETES Reauthorization Act
In May of 2010 the House voted on reauthorizing the America COMPETES Act. The act passed the House 262-150. Ron Paul voted against reauthorizing the America COMPETES Act.
Ron Paul voted against reauthorizing the America COMPETES Act.
College Cost Reduction and Access Act
The College Cost Reduction and Access Act is a significant education bill dealing largely with funding for higher education. The bill removes tuition sensitivity for Pell Grants, increases the amount available for Pell grants, Funds the Upward Bound program, establishes the TEACH Grants, reduces student loan repayment rates, sets deferments based on need and establishes some partner based grants. The bill got the full support of the Democrats, but passed with the support of only about 1/4 of the Republicans. Ron Paul voted against the College Cost Reduction and Access Act.
Ron Paul voted against the College Cost Reduction and Access Act.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
No Child Left Behind was the primary focus of the Bush administration prior to 9/11. The bill requires states to develop assessments in basic skills to be given to all students in certain grades, if those states are to receive federal funding for schools. The Act does not assert a national achievement standard; standards are set by each individual state. The bill got the support of most Democrats and Republicans and passed the House in a 384-45 vote. Ron Paul voted against the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
Ron Paul voted against the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
DC Scholarship Program
In 1998, the House voted on an amendment to the yearly appropriations bill to Washington D.C.. The amendment allocated $7 Million dollars to a program for scholarships to low-income children. The amendment was ' agreed to with the support of most Republicans and most Democrats. Ron Paul voted against the DC Scholarship Program.
Ron Paul voted against the DC Scholarship Program.
Education Savings and School Excellence Act of 1998
This 1998 legislation would have allowed people to take money from their IRAs to pay for qualified elementary and secondary education expenses, including home schooling expenses. It increased the annual contribution limit from $500 to $2,000. It permits corporations to contribute to education IRAs. Although the bill passed both the house and the Senate, it was vetoed by the President. Ron Paul voted against the Education Savings and School Excellence Act of 1998.
Ron Paul voted against the Education Savings and School Excellence Act of 1998.
Allows each state to submit to the Secretary of Education a declaration of intent, applicable for up to five years, permitting it to receive federal funds on a consolidated basis that would otherwise be directed toward specific programs furthering the stated purpose of title I (Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Requires each declaration to be formulated by a combination of specified State Authorizing Officials or by referendum, and list the programs for which consolidated funding is requested. Allows states to use such funds for any educational purpose permitted by state law, but requires states to make certain assurances that they will use fiscal control and fund accounting procedures, abide by federal civil rights laws, and advance educational opportunities for the disadvantaged. Allows states to amend their declarations. Requires each declaration state to: (1) inform the public of its student achievement assessment system and annually report on student progress toward the state's proficiency standards, disaggregating performance data by specified student groups; and (2) keep aggregate spending on elementary and secondary education at no less than 90% of such spending for the school year coinciding with this Act's enactment. Limits administrative expenses. Requires consolidated funds to be distributed in a manner that allows for the equitable, as determined by each state, participation of private schools.
Requires the Secretary of the Treasury to make an annual determination of states that have chosen to opt-out of K-12 education grant programs.Requires the Secretary of Education to determine credits due to states as opt-out state education amounts.Amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow individual taxpayers in states that opt-out a refundable tax credit for a share of the opt-out amount creditable to such states.
Authorizes states to transfer or consolidate funds made available to them under certain federal transportation, education, and job training programs: (1) beginning with the calendar quarter after the United States experiences economic growth at an annual rate of less than 1% for two consecutive calendar quarters; and (2) continuing until 18 months after it experiences economic growth at an annual rate of 1% or more for two consecutive calendar quarters.
Allows each state to submit to the Secretary of Education a declaration of intent, applicable for up to five years, permitting it to receive federal funds on a consolidated basis that would otherwise be directed toward specific programs furthering the stated purpose of title I (Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Requires each declaration to be formulated by a combination of specified State Authorizing Officials or by referendum, and list the programs for which consolidated funding is requested. Allows states to use such funds for any educational purpose permitted by state law, but requires them to make certain assurances that they will use fiscal control and fund accounting procedures, abide by federal civil rights laws, and advance educational opportunities for the disadvantaged. Allows states to amend their declarations. Requires each declaration state to: (1) inform the public of its student achievement assessment system and report annually on student progress toward the state's proficiency standards, disaggregating performance data by specified student groups; and (2) keep aggregate spending on elementary and secondary education at no less than 90% of such spending for the school year coinciding with this Act's enactment. Limits administrative expenses. Requires consolidated funds to be distributed in a manner that allows for the equitable participation of private schools.
