Point of View March 6, 2025 – Hour 2 : Constitutional Crisis, Department of Education

[00:00:04] Across America, Live, this is Point of View, Kirby Anderson. Second hour today, let's get into some of the issues in the news, and in a few cases, I'm going to raise the issues here on Thursday, and then wait until Friday to cover some of those.

[00:00:31] The first one deals with some legal issues, and I certainly know enough to be dangerous, but we are going to be privileged to have in the second hour tomorrow, Katrina, excuse me, Keisha Russell, and we'll be talking about some of the material that we will get into then on not only the legal issues, but in a minute I'm going to talk about education, and we'll have Katrina with us in the first hour, and of course Dr. Merrill Matthews through the entire hour, so we'll get into all of those issues along the way,

[00:00:59] but if you have some comments or questions, feel free to give us a call, 1-800-351-1212, but my first article relates to something I just said in passing yesterday, but it has created a little bit of a dust storm, and that is, as you may have remembered yesterday when we had Gary Bauer on,

[00:01:18] he pointed out that oftentimes you've had some federal judges that are making decisions that frankly are counter to the requirements of Supreme Court precedents, and contrary to some of the executive orders being put out by President Trump. So when you look at that, you'd have to say, by what right does one federal judge have to overturn an entire national policy?

[00:01:48] This isn't the first time we've covered this. I ask years ago, how is it one federal judge, say in Hawaii, in another case a federal judge, I think it was in Alaska, one was in Washington, so certainly Washington and Hawaii, but some others as well, could overturn the requirement by President Donald Trump at the time during his first term to build or rebuild the wall on our southern border.

[00:02:16] And this one has surfaced once again, because you have one Supreme Court justice, judge I should say, that in some respects has changed a law, changed an executive order, and this is just one judge in one federal court. And then one of the things I said just in passing to Gary Bauer is,

[00:02:39] yes, but one of those cases went to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court decided not to overturn that judgment from the one judge, in part because they wanted to wait to get more information. But here's the issue. This one comes from the editors of the National Review. The title of this is, The Supreme Court Should Not Encourage a One-Judge Constitutional Crisis. You know, we've been hearing about this idea of a constitutional crisis,

[00:03:07] and you can get a constitutional crisis in a couple ways, where the Supreme Court says you cannot actually forgive loans, and the President of the United States, certainly the previous President, Joe Biden, says, I'm going to do it anyway, and then you can come and slap my hand later on. That's a constitutional crisis. But I think there's another constitutional crisis in which one judge has the power almost of the Supreme Court,

[00:03:34] more power than even the President of the United States. And that certainly was not intended either. But let's get into it. The editors put it this way. The Supreme Court's main job is to settle questions of law that arise in cases of controversies. But it also supervises the federal judiciary. Sometimes this means getting outside of the court's comfort zone on an orderly appeals process

[00:04:00] when individual judges single-handedly provoke a separation of powers crisis. I don't think that's hyperbole. They're really expressing their concern that one judge could overturn all the things the federal government is doing. The case involved is the Department of State versus AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition. They argue that the court fell down its job. It issued a vague order doing little to rain in a D.C. federal district judge, Amir Ali,

[00:04:30] from inserting himself above the president in running the U.S. Agency for International Development, USAID. I think it is probably worth mentioning about now that this particular individual,

[00:04:43] who actually is sitting on the federal court, was only brought into the court because Joe Biden rushed through his particular nomination on a 50 to 49 vote because one Republican was absent on that day.

[00:05:05] And so as a result, this is not somebody who was sitting on the court with a resounding support from a majority of the individuals in the United States Senate. So I think it's worth recognizing that this was a controversial individual and only skated through 50 to 49 and only after the 2024 election on a day when one Republican was not in the chamber, for reasons we can go into later if you're curious.

[00:05:34] So the point is, is that Donald Trump, in his executive order, declared that no further foreign assistance shall be dispersed in a manner that is not fully aligned with the foreign policy of the president, finding that such current aid many times was not aligned with American interests and in many cases antithetical to American values. If you listened the other night to President Trump's speech before Congress,

[00:06:01] he rattled off a short list, and believe me, it was a very short list, although it went on and on and on, of all the things that foreign aid was spent on, that I don't think any reasonable American would agree advances the cause of the United States of America. And so, again, going back to the editorial from the editors, the argument should be made that the president is uniquely empowered by Article 2 to make

[00:06:29] and involve and make judgments for those kinds of issues. They go on to say, some foreign aid is explicitly mandated by Congress, we understand that, and some is committed by treaty. But much of the USAID's statutory mandate is vague and infected with what you might call serious mission creep that Congress did not authorize. In other words, we gave you the opportunity to give foreign aid,

[00:06:57] but then you started using it in ways that Congress never authorized you to use it. Now, when Elon Musk is trying to rein it in, we have this one judge saying, well, I guess we'll just put a pause on that. And here's the problem, because it's called a temporary restraining order. Well, a TRO, or a temporary restraining order,

[00:07:22] is something which you use to then pause every action so that you can reevaluate what's taking place. But this one was used in the reverse, because as they said, it's a misnomer, because now it says you can't pause the spending, so now it forces the government to spend the money, which then it can't recover later on. So there are all sorts of constitutional issues with this,

[00:07:50] and you would think that this would have been one of those 9-0 cases, but it was a 5-4 case where Justice Roberts, supposedly John Roberts is a conservative, and especially Justice Amy Coney Barrett, voted with the liberals. Although I think in both cases they simply wanted to say, wait, we don't want to try to decide this right now, so we will remove the attempt to prevent that from being spent.

[00:08:16] But, of course, that's just the opposite of what a temporary restraining order is. Well, I can get into the deep weeds, but I think you get the point. Are we going to let one federal judge actually have, in a sense, more power than the President of the United States? And in this case, the Supreme Court in a controversial ruling of 5-4 said, for the moment, yep, we're going to let them do that.

[00:08:43] And I don't think that is what anybody in America would actually believe in. We'll take a break. Got a lot more to cover. Talk about that right after this. This is Viewpoints with Kirby Anderson. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan may be the best known for a seminal essay he wrote three decades ago. The Democratic senator from New York said that the country back then was defining deviancy down.

[00:09:12] His concern was that deviant behavior had become so pervasive, even in the 1980s and 1990s, that commentators were beginning to redefine it to cope with it. He began by acknowledging that there was always a certain amount of deviancy in society, but when you get too much, you begin to think that it's not really that bad. Pretty soon you become accustomed to very destructive behavior. Anyone who's read the book of Isaiah will recognize this tendency. In Isaiah 520 we read, Woe to those who call evil good and good evil,

[00:09:40] who put darkness for light and light for darkness. Scott Hoganson referred to the Moynihan description of deviancy as he listed numerous examples of what used to be defined as medical malpractice, criminal molestation, voyeurism, and rape. He concludes that we have defined deviancy so downward it's positively subterranean. He reminds us that our laws are written by humans, but they're also written on the human heart. You may disagree with your neighbor, but you don't vandalize his home.

[00:10:08] You may not like the guy who stole your parking place, but you don't key his car. Jeremiah wrote that the Lord declared, I will put my law within them and I will write it on their hearts. The writer of Hebrews explains that God says, I will put my laws on their hearts and write them on their minds. That is why Christians need to speak out against evil and not let a secular society call evil good. The deviancy today is even worse than that of the 1980s and 1990s when Senator Moynihan lamented that we were defining deviancy down.

[00:10:38] I'm Kirby Anderson, and that's my point of view. Go deeper on topics like you just heard by visiting pointofview.net. That's pointofview.net. You're listening to Point of View, your listener-supported source for truth. Back once again, we're going to get into the whole issue of eliminating the Department of Education in just a minute.

[00:11:08] I suspect some of you have some comments about that, so I will give you that chance to join us at 1-800-351-1212. But just before we finish off on this, if you will, constitutional crisis, every day I find one more piece of evidence of just the way in which your tax dollars have been wasted or spent in inappropriate ways. This one comes from Barry Wise. Barry Wise, if you may remember, is an individual I quote from time to time, is Jewish,

[00:11:38] has written a very good book, which I highly recommend, on how to fight anti-Semitism. She was the opinion editor, I believe, for the New York Times, or the assistant opinion editor. I forget exactly where. And she's the one that finally just had to walk away because some of the wokeness at even the New York Times was too much for her. Hardly an individual that on many issues would agree with us,

[00:12:03] but I thought it was very interesting because she has actually developed an opportunity now to take the ideas that she's always wanted to communicate through the free press. This comes from a post that she put up there, and it's just a reminder of the way in which funds, which on the surface look like they might be legitimate, are used for completely illegitimate actions. Let me just read the piece, and you can come to your own conclusion.

[00:12:33] She says the Department of Justice is investigating the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. That's a $27 billion program. Just think of what we could do with $27 billion in terms of this. And it was part of Joe Biden's $740 billion Inflation Reduction Act, which, by the way, was originally a $1.2 trillion.

[00:12:58] They scaled it down to call it Inflation Reduction Act, but it really was just the Green New Deal funded. Okay, so we're talking about a so-called greenhouse gas reduction fund, $27 billion. Created in the spring of 2023 and managed by the EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency, the fund was supposed to be a first-of-its-kind program to address the climate crisis while revitalizing communities that it considered historically left behind.

[00:13:27] Of course, you always have to have the equity issue in there as well. But it now appears, and this goes to Barry Weiss, that little of that $27 billion revitalized anything except the coffers of a range of environmental nonprofits associated with former Obama and Biden administration officials. Here's a quote from the new EPA administrator. Quote,

[00:13:54] That comes from Lee Zeldin, who's now the head of the EPA, and went on to say, It is my utmost priority to get a handle on every dollar that went out the door in this scheme and once again restore to individuals oversight and accountability over these funds. This rush job operation is riddled with conflicts of interest and corruption.

[00:14:24] Again, Barry Weiss is with the Free Press Group, and a Free Press investigation, he says, quote, Reveals that of the $27 billion, $20 billion were rushed out the door to eight nonprofit groups after Joe Biden lost the election, but before Donald Trump took office. As one former EPA official put it in a secretly recorded video, it was akin to tossing gold bars off of the Titanic.

[00:14:53] You've heard that phrase before, and here it is again. Those eight groups were allocated sums ranging from $400 million to $6.9 billion. Several of them were formed in August of 2023, just one month after the applications went live in July of 2023, when it became clear that large nine- and ten-figure grants were up for grabs.

[00:15:20] The boards and staffs of these eight groups include, are you ready? They're going to be able to pay Democratic donors, people with connections to the Obama administration, the Biden administration, and prominent Democrats like Stacey Abrams. Now, in passing, President Trump last night, or Wednesday night, mentioned that, but I don't think anybody caught it because they didn't know the history, and I'm giving you the rest of the history when he had mentioned at one point Stacey Abrams.

[00:15:49] He said, and then they said, these are some of the biggest grants to individual organizations in American history. If you wanted any evidence of graft and fraud, there it is. $27 billion, at least $20 billion that they can figure out so far, rushed out the door after Joe Biden lost the election, which is why some said it was like throwing gold bars off of the Titanic.

[00:16:19] If that doesn't upset you, well, I don't know what we can say. And recognize that some of those people in the audience Wednesday night had various paddles. Some said false, but some of them said things about Elon Musk, like somehow he was the bad guy for uncovering this. And, of course, you can imagine not only has Elon Musk received death threats, I wonder if the current head of the EPA, that would be Lee Zeldin,

[00:16:47] whether he's received death threats for uncovering this kind of $20 billion plus boondoggle that was only rushed out the door after Joe Biden lost the election. I think you have the evidence that you need for at least a conversation or two with some of your friends that are just convinced that everything Elon Musk is doing right now is inappropriate and there is absolutely no graft, fraud, or abuse. I think there's a good example of one.

[00:17:17] My second article today is on the issue of the Department of Education. And today you have Donald Trump signing an executive order which seems aimed at abolishing the Department of Education. Now, to put it in specific, all I have right here in front of me is what the Wall Street Journal had was a draft of the order, but it's probably pretty close to this, in which it directs the education secretary, that would be Linda McMahon,

[00:17:47] to take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the education department which is based on, quote, the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law. It goes on to talk about the experiment of controlling American education through federal programs and dollars and the unaccountable bureaucrats whose programs and dollars support has failed our children, our teachers, and our families.

[00:18:14] And so, again, this is an attempt to begin to close down the Department of Education. Let's add some reality to this because most people are arguing, including a former secretary of education, Bill Bennett, and some other legal experts argue that completely unwinding the department, closing it down, would require a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority in the Senate.

[00:18:42] Do you even have more than 40 or 50, even Republican senators want to do this? Can you find even a few Democrats? Probably not. And so part of it is we're dealing with programs that it administers, some of which would have to be placed elsewhere. We're talking about money for students with disabilities, student loans. I looked this up.

[00:19:07] The budget for the department last year, during fiscal year 2024, was $268 billion. $160 billion of that was in the Office of Federal Student Aid, and that's the one that runs Pell Grants, federal direct subsidized loans, federal direct unsubsidized loans, federal work study programs, and the like. So those might have to go somewhere. Though I've said on this program before, when I went to school,

[00:19:37] I know that's back when the Earth's crust was warm and dinosaurs roamed the Earth, but nevertheless, when I went to college, I took my loan out through Wells Fargo. And it was only later that President Barack Obama tried to put all the student loan program under the Department of Education. I think we'd be better if we were to actually let the banks look at it again, because the banks might say, you know, are you a good credit risk for the student loan

[00:20:04] that we're going to give you, given the fact that you're majoring in something that has real no utility when you go out into the workforce? I think it would be a really good issue. But let's just also acknowledge, and we'll talk more about this tomorrow with Keisha Russell, because she's worked, of course, in the area of education. As a matter of fact, one of the things we'll talk about is the education issue she's been writing about right now. But again, during at least the confirmation hearings, Secretary McMahon actually,

[00:20:33] during those, said that Trump wasn't intending to cut federal programs just to make them more efficient. She also acknowledged that Congress would need to go along with scrapping the department. So we've got a lot to look at in terms of the Department of Education, but I'd love to get your thoughts. Let's open up the phones before we get to our next article. You've probably thought about, should we actually close down the Department of Education? That was something that Ronald Reagan proposed.

[00:20:59] But when Bill Bennett became the Secretary of Education and Gary Bauer became the Undersecretary of Education, people said, well, we kind of like that department. Now with all the problems with anti-Semitism and just a bloated government, do you think it's time to close down the Department of Education? I'd love to get your thoughts. 1-800-351-1212. 1-800-351-1212. We'll come back with your calls and some more comments right after this.

[00:21:30] If you appreciate the trustworthy news and biblical worldview that you hear on Point of View, would you consider joining our team, the Truth Team? Listeners like you have been the backbone of Point of View for 53 years. But today there are more voices competing for Americans' attention than ever before, and few of them are anchored to biblical truth. By joining Point of View's Truth Team,

[00:21:59] you can be an integral part of keeping truth on the air. In just a few weeks, Point of View will celebrate Truth Team Week. But you don't have to wait till then. You can join the Truth Team right now and help us get a head start on our $150,000 spring fundraising goal. If you appreciate Point of View, please join the Truth Team.

[00:22:25] Join today by visiting us online at pointofview.net. Or you can call toll-free 1-800-347-5151. Pointofview.net and 1-800-347-5151. Point of View will continue after this.

[00:22:51] You are listening to Point of View. The opinions expressed on Point of View do not necessarily reflect the views of the management or staff of this station. And now, here again, is Kirby Anderson. Point of half hour, if you'd like to join the conversation, 1-800-351-1212. On the table is whether or not we should eliminate the Department of Education,

[00:23:21] and we've got a couple of calls on that. Let me add one other issue, because perhaps you don't want to talk about the issue of education, but maybe you want to talk about something I haven't gotten to, but it's our third article, which we will get soon enough, and that is the way in which Democrats have responded to, first of all, the speech by President Trump, but then how they responded today, because there was a vote in the House of Representatives

[00:23:46] to actually censure the 77-year-old Representative Al Green from the state of Texas, and the vote went 224 to 198, actually two abstained, including Al Green himself. So you had 10 Democrats join the Republicans, but again, you have 198 Democrats that refused to even vote for censuring what Al Green did Wednesday night.

[00:24:15] I think you have to go back to when President Obama was speaking, and one of the members of Congress shouted, you lie, and that was seen as one of the great tragedies of congressional decorum, which I agree, didn't disagree with that, but the point is, that was news for days, and you had all sorts of Republicans call out that one statement,

[00:24:45] hardly an individual standing in the well of the House of Representatives, shaking his cane and shouting, and finally having to be removed by the Sergeant of Arms. So do you think this vote on the censuring of Al Green was too much, or even insufficient? Apparently 198 Democrats could not bring themselves to vote on the censuring of Al Green,

[00:25:14] and in case you think that this would be a draconian punishment, as oftentimes have pointed out on this program, the United States Senate actually censured Andrew Jackson. How effective was that? Pull out a $20 bill, at least on the front of it. So this is not exactly anything more than, if you will, a slap on the hand, and yet you couldn't even get 198 Democrats to agree.

[00:25:44] You know, that's maybe beyond the pales. Matter of fact, when the vote was being taken, you can watch it for yourself, all sorts of rancor, and even a willingness to tumble down on this. So if later we have people wringing their hands, if there's ever, say, a Democratic president speaking, and having people shout them down, I think you look back to this vote, where, again, you've had some shouts from Republicans. I'll be the first to admit it. I even go all the way back to Obama.

[00:26:14] One or two under Biden as well. But this is different, and if you don't think it's different, well, then I don't know what I can do to help you understand that standing, shouting, shaking your cane at an individual, and not being willing to sit down, and eventually having to be escorted out by the Sergeant of Arms. So, again, maybe you have some thoughts about that. 1-800-351-1212. Let's first take the calls on the subject of education. We'll head out to South Carolina first.

[00:26:44] Terry, what would you think about this issue? Yes. Dr. Anderson, thank you so much. I serve on the Commission on Higher Education for South Carolina, and I can tell you, we do not need a federal department of education. And I'll give you an example. Under Cardona, Biden's Secretary of Education, we normally, the federal government releases to each state an allotment

[00:27:12] of federal student loan funds. Those funds must be released so each state understands how much money is received by the state so the state can offer scholarships to willing, you know, qualified students to go to college. We had a horrible time in South Carolina this past year and the past two years because the federal Department of Education would not release those funds.

[00:27:42] I've never seen anything like this. I've been in state ed policy for about 25 years in South Carolina, both K-12 and higher ed. So it's a totally dysfunctional entity. We do not need a federal pass-through. You know, each state has a different economy, and the states should get that federal funds directly to their Department of Education and their commissions on higher education, whether it be a Board of Regents or a Coordinating Commission body,

[00:28:11] and use those funds. When the money goes closest to the people, it's used best. Well said. And we do not need a Department of Education. I'm so grateful for President Trump and his leadership to really just delete the U.S. Department of Education. It would put the funds needed in the state's hands and the states know best how to spend it and use it wisely to encourage everyone to get a college degree. So thank you so much

[00:28:41] for taking my call. Thank you for your service there in the Commission on Higher Education. And let me just say for some of you that say, okay, I'd like to read about this a little bit more. The article I've posted here today is very well written and it comes from the Wall Street Journal, which gives you kind of a look at the draft of Donald Trump's executive order, which ultimately could lead to the elimination or at least the downsizing of the Department of Education. The other one that will be

[00:29:09] up there tomorrow is one that I'm getting posted. It's by our friend Jim Garrity, the reality of Trump's executive order to abolish the Department of Education. Part of that is you've got to find a place where that $160 billion goes. But as Terry just points out, when the gatekeeper is up there holding on to them, when it's your money, I think you would be a lot better to do what you can to actually leave the money within the state and not have it go fund all

[00:29:38] these bureaucrats, add all those additional regulations and then trickle back to the states. That, I think, is the compelling argument that is being made. And, of course, you've heard me say I'm all about privatizing. And we at one time used to do that in terms of the fact that of this approximately $268 billion, about $160 billion or a majority of that has to do with the Office of Federal Student Aid and we're talking about Pell Grants

[00:30:07] and federal direct subsidy grants and work study and all the rest. But let's take some more phone calls because I can see a lot of you have an opinion. We'll stay in South Carolina for another minute and we'll go to Abby. What would you say about the Department of Education? Well, hello there and I'm so glad that you're bringing this up. I have 40 plus years in the public education sector. I've served at the state level and I have witnessed more than once

[00:30:39] misappropriation of federal funds at the federal level just as the previous caller was mentioning that you apply for these funds at the state level and you never get the funds. And then at some point in time you do get those funds but they're far lesser than what you applied for. Yes. And it is just mind-blowing that a federal agency would operate this way.

[00:31:08] So it is my opinion that the federal State Department of Education should be abolished and done away with. That money be dispersed among the states for each individual's state education and that's why we're called the United States of America and I just I've been in education at so many different levels and for a lot of years and it just is cycling out of control.

[00:31:38] I'm so glad that Trump is bringing some of this into a clearer picture for us if nothing else even if he he has voted down on some of these measures it really just brings it shines a light on it brings it into a clear vision of just what needs to happen in our country and state and federal education State Department is just ineffective it just doesn't work. Well again there's 4,500 employees

[00:32:08] and even if they bring it down to 1,500 employees I guess we're going to have to find jobs over the other 3,000 but the bottom line is I think it is a bloated agency it takes too much off the top and then as we've already heard from Terry and now Abby then you send the money off to the federal government and then just sometimes pennies or dimes on the dollar trickle back maybe in a few cases quarters on the dollar trickle back to the

[00:32:38] state does that make any sense this we had quite a robust education long before we had a department of education and actually the student scores have dropped I'm going to break because our next caller wants to get into that because if it was really working well and if we were seeing test scores going up we might even say okay maybe that's something that's been helpful but the trajectory is the other direction so come back and take

[00:33:08] some more phone calls but again I just mentioned a minute ago the fact that there is the third article which we might not get to today but it's talking about really kind of the strategy of Democrats and probably haven't helped themselves with a vote where 198 Democrats in the House of Representatives couldn't even bring themselves to censure Representative Al Green for that stunt that he pulled off Wednesday night maybe you have a thought about that as well

[00:33:37] 1-800-351-1212 come back and talk about education right after this

[00:34:23] as it says are individuals who are following the lead of James Carville who was an advisor for the former President Bill Clinton who believes that the out of power party should just engage in kind of a retreat wait for Republican error or dysfunction and then jump in the other camp though is really being forced right now from pressure from resistance grassroots groups to actually try to shell shock what is happening engage in outright opposition that was led of

[00:34:53] course by Representative Al Green who was censured today by the House of Representatives but again 198 Democrats couldn't even bring themselves to vote for that and Representative Tim Ryan he's from the Buckeye State Ohio said the minority party should not have negative stories coming out of the State of the Union and as this one particular article says it's safe to say Democrats failed to clear even that low bar Tuesday evening so you can read the article there's a real debate about do

[00:35:22] we just sit back and occasionally raise questions about what the President is doing or do we just march into the streets blockade the Department of Education as we saw and that of course gets us back to some of you that want to talk about whether or not we should continue the Department of Education let's go to the state of Georgia this time on the Good News Network Adrienne thank you for joining us today and my husband have both felt for years that you should

[00:35:52] get rid of the Department of Education because it really is one of the other callers said a state thing and the local school board and the local state government really should be in charge and one of the things is there are so many regulations that the federal people have given and the no child left behind well they left a whole lot of children behind I just had two granddaughters that are now 19 and 20 and they learned

[00:36:21] virtually nothing in high school of course they were in that COVID generation but the distance learning didn't work Georgia has got the common core curriculum and the teachers teach them to take a test sort of like a monkey pushing a button and getting a reward but yet they really in the big picture have learned nothing it is amazing

[00:36:52] the younger one is a freshman in college and her textbook was how to write an English sentence that's things my generation learned back in the 60s and 70s we learned how to write our sentences so I don't know it's not working for the children it's not working for the families and then the wokeness the things that the girls would come in and tell me about what happened at school today was just amazing

[00:37:22] and it had zero to do with education had to do whether some of these pronouns or were they an animal or did they identify with being a cat or I mean just craziness and very little learning was happening but yes hopefully that's the thing is every time government expands it you know keeps feeding itself and it's almost impossible to put it back when

[00:37:51] she's opened that Pandora's box we also would love to see school vouchers that would be an amazing thing because the education in the public arena is not what it was in the 60s 70s or even the 80s it's really sad I used to work with exchange students other countries when you have a high school exchange student those kids most of them have to either go back and take an exam to prove they actually

[00:38:21] did learn something or they have to just treat it as a gap year because our education system is so inferior to like Japan and Germany and places like that they just laugh at us really well let me give a few others a chance to comment but that's a good point you know I've considered a gap year to come to the United States and a lot of this has surfaced because of the administration of the student loan forgiveness the expansion

[00:38:50] of anti-discrimination rules transgender the woke and all the rest but just in the interest of time let me at least get in one more phone call here and if you didn't have a chance to get through there's always tomorrow Susan what would you add to our conversation today I'm from Georgia and I just wanted to say I would be ashamed if I were the Department of Education with what has happened in the United States most kids don't know anything unless they're

[00:39:20] homeschooled they're being tutored or they're paying for their education I know I homeschooled for a little while and most homeschoolers don't have degrees and yet all the homeschooled scores were way above the public education and that was the natives it's gotten so bad now it's just awful and it's just a shame for these people to keep fighting

[00:39:50] for something making money and to me it's criminal what they've done to the children in this country and that's all I have to say well I think you said some good things there and again one of the concerns that many people have is I might even put up with the amount of money we send to the federal government and a budget that is already 268 billion dollars 4500 employees if the educational outcomes were better but just before we end some of you might be saying well

[00:40:20] then what are we going to do if they close it first of all I would like to say that it might happen but realistically might not but if it did you might remember the heritage foundation had project 2025 that was that boogeyman there but they actually laid out a road map and they said look the department the education departments of office of civil rights actually could and should be in the justice department that's a good place for that to go what about the student loan

[00:40:49] portfolios because that's at least 160 billion or more because I've started looking and finding a few other places maybe it's at least that 160 billion dollars well that could be under the treasury department or of course as I suggested maybe we go back to actually having the loans coming from the bank with a little more scrutiny with a young person who maybe doesn't have a great opportunity to succeed in college to be strapping on a six figure amount of

[00:41:19] loan maybe we could encourage them to try something else matter of fact I've got another commentary coming out in the future here from Mark Rowe you might have heard my one this week I think a lot of young people maybe shouldn't be going to college in the first place maybe it would be an apprentice plumber and I'm probably going to make more money than the kids that go off to college

[00:41:48] we need welders pipe fitters we need all first of course the book what's a christian anyway one judge

[00:42:17] constitutional crisis eliminate the department of education a piece from the wall street journal we're going to have another one tomorrow they'll talk about and then just the whole idea of a democratic strategy really divided right now but illustrated by the fact that yes you did have 10 democrats that said yes we'll vote to censure Al Green representative but 198 said

[00:43:12] if prayer and that is why we have relaunched our pray for america campaign a series of weekly emails to unite americans in prayer for our nation imagine if hundreds of thousands of americans started praying intentionally together on a weekly basis you can help make that a reality by subscribing to our pray for america emails just go to point

[00:43:42] of view dot net and click on the pray for america banner that's right there on the home page each week you'll receive a brief news update a specific prayer guide and a free resource to equip you in further action we encourage you to not only pray with us each week but to share

[00:44:13] pray pray for america right there at the top that's point of view dot net let's pray together for god to make a difference in our land point of view is produced by point of view ministries