What “Leaving Education to the States” Really Means and Why It’s Misleading.

In recent months, a growing chorus of political figures has advocated for “returning education to the states,” suggesting that such a move would enhance local control and improve educational outcomes. However, this rhetoric often obscures the potential consequences of dismantling federal oversight mechanisms designed to ensure equitable access to quality education for all students.

More importantly, it’s just not true.

Political Advocacy for State Control

Prominent among these advocates is Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota, who introduced the “Returning Education to Our States Act” in late 2024. This legislation aims to abolish the U.S. Department of Education, transferring its responsibilities entirely to individual states. Rounds argues that states are better positioned to manage educational policies without federal intervention. ​

Similarly, the President has expressed a desire to dismantle the Department of Education, labeling it a “big con job” and asserting that its elimination would rectify inefficiencies within the education system. He has proposed reallocating the department’s functions to other federal agencies and emphasized the need for congressional action to fully dissolve the department.

High Stakes Fear Mongering

The push to leave public education up to the states is largely driven by concerns over federal overreach, local autonomy, curriculum content, and funding distribution. Many citizens who support this idea have specific fears about the way education is handled at the national level.

There are some examples listed at the end of this article.

The problem–NONE of this is true!

Enter GEPA

The General Education Provisions Act (GEPA), particularly a section called the “prohibition on federal control of education,” which Congress passed in 1974. This provision (Section 438 of GEPA) restricts the federal government from directing or controlling curriculum, programs of instruction, or specific educational content in public schools. In other words, while the federal government can set funding rules and enforce civil rights laws (like IDEA for special education), it’s prohibited from telling states and districts exactly what or how to teach.

This law is one reason why curriculum decisions still rest at the state and local levels, even as federal laws like IDEA ensure certain rights and protections for students. It’s a balancing act: states control curriculum and standards, while the federal government makes sure certain protections are in place to support equitable access to education.

Public Education has been “left up to the states” for over 50 years.

The GEPA ensures that all curriculum decisions, and the other concerns used in fear mongering, are always left up to the states.

The irony: You know who oversees the GEPA? The US Department of Education.

In other words, dismantling it will actually remove all the protections of the GEPA, if there is no agency to enforce it.

Myths vs Facts

Here are some of the most common reasons people advocate for state control over public education. Currently–the federal government is prohibited from doing any of this by GEPA.

Fear of Federal Overreach

Myth: Many Americans believe the federal government has too much power over education policy, imposing one-size-fits-all regulations that do not reflect the needs of local communities. They argue that states and local school boards should have the authority to shape curriculum, standards, and testing requirements without interference from Washington, D.C.

Fact: The GEPA prohibits the Federal Government from doing any of this. However, removing the US Department of Education means removing the agency that oversees the GEPA.

Concerns Over Curriculum and Ideological Influence

Myth: Some citizens worry that federally influenced education promotes political agendas or values that do not align with their own. Controversial topics such as sex education, diversity and inclusion, critical race theory (CRT), and historical interpretations of race and gender issues have fueled concerns that federal control leads to indoctrination rather than education. Parents who prefer a more traditional or conservative curriculum often believe state or local control would better reflect their values.

Fact: The GEPA prohibits the Federal Government from implementing curriculum. Full stop. However, removing the US Department of Education means removing the agency that oversees the GEPA.

The Right to Choose: School Choice and Vouchers

Myth: Supporters of state-controlled education often advocate for increased school choice, including charter schools, private school vouchers, and homeschooling. They worry that federal oversight limits parents’ ability to choose the best educational path for their children. Many believe states would be more willing to expand school choice options if they had full control over education policy.

Fact: The GEPA prohibits the Federal Government from doing any of this. Many states have (albeit unsuccessful) school choice programs already in place. However, removing the US Department of Education means removing the agency that oversees the GEPA.

Fear of Losing Local and Parental Control

Myth: Many parents feel increasingly disconnected from their children’s education, believing that decisions about curriculum, testing, and policies are being made by unelected officials far removed from their local communities. They fear that continued federal involvement will further erode parental rights in decision-making.

Fact: The GEPA prohibits the Federal Government from doing any of this. School district decisions have always been at the state and local levels. However, removing the US Department of Education means removing the agency that oversees the GEPA.

Religious and Moral Concerns

Myth: Some parents worry that federal education policies undermine religious freedoms by restricting faith-based schools’ ability to receive funding or by requiring public schools to teach material that conflicts with their religious beliefs. They argue that states should have the ability to set policies that accommodate religious perspectives without federal restrictions.

Fact: The GEPA prohibits the Federal Government from doing any of this. States already have the ability to do this. However, removing the US Department of Education means removing the agency that oversees the GEPA.

The Argument That States Know Their Needs Best

Myth: Supporters of state-led education argue that what works in rural Montana may not work in urban New York City. They believe that local policymakers, educators, and parents are better equipped to understand their communities’ specific needs than federal bureaucrats. By decentralizing education policy, they hope to see more effective and targeted solutions.

Fact: The GEPA prohibits the Federal Government from doing any of this. School district decisions have always been at the state and local levels. However, removing the US Department of Education means removing the agency that oversees the GEPA. (seeing a pattern yet?)

The Legacy of States’ Rights and Federalism

Historically, education has been viewed as a state and local responsibility, with federal involvement growing significantly in the second half of the 20th century. Many conservatives and libertarians see the push for state control as a return to the principles of federalism, where states govern themselves without unnecessary federal intervention.

Fact: The GEPA prohibits the Federal Government from doing any of this. School district decisions have always been at the state and local levels. However, removing the US Department of Education means removing the agency that oversees the GEPA.

Why This Lie is Dangerous

The real reason some politicians want to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education? Money and power.

• Without federal oversight, states could slash education funding and cut programs for kids with disabilities, low-income students, and English language learners.
• They could lower teacher standards, eliminate accountability, and funnel public school funds into private programs with zero oversight.
• Civil rights protections? Gone. Kids with disabilities? On their own.

We already know what happens when states run education without guardrails because history has shown us. Before federal protections, kids with disabilities were denied education entirely. Southern states ran segregated schools. Low-income districts got crumbs while wealthier areas thrived.

Returning to a system where states have zero accountability is not about improving education. It’s about defunding it.

What You Can Do

• Call out the lie. The next time a politician says this, ask them what they actually mean. Because “returning education to the states” is just code for “taking away funding and protections.”
• Support candidates who protect education. We need leaders who actually invest in schools and not ones who want to dismantle them.
• Stay informed. If you have a child with an IEP, 504 plan, or any special education needs, this fight affects you directly.

Bottom line: The federal government doesn’t control your local schools. It never has. And anyone who says otherwise is either clueless… or lying.

So don’t fall for it. And don’t let them destroy public education under false pretenses.