OPINION – So, imagine this: the federal Department of Education gets dismantled, sending control of schools directly back to each state. For New Jersey, that might sound like local freedom—but it could come with a whole lot of issues, and here’s why.
Radicals run New Jersey. When the Supreme Court sent abortion back to the states, New Jersey was the first to create an abortion Wild West, creating among the least restrictive abortion laws in America.
New Jersey’s Department of Education is also run by radicals, and the governor has shown that he can and will use education funding as political payback, holding children hostage in Republican-controlled communities.
Funding Cuts Could Hit Republican-Heavy Areas Hard
One of the big concerns? Funding. Federal funding helps balance educational resources across the country, supporting everything from special education to lunch programs. But if the Department of Education is cut, those funds go back to the state government, where leaders decide how to allocate it.
Under Governor Phil Murphy, New Jersey’s education funding has already seen targeted cuts in conservative-leaning areas. If the federal support dries up, funding might get even tighter in these districts. In a New Jersey where Murphy and his administration control the purse strings, it’s easy to imagine that urban and progressive areas might see more support, while conservative towns get left behind. Schools in Republican-heavy districts may face larger class sizes, fewer resources, and potentially limited access to the programs they’ve relied on for years.
New Jersey’s Department of Education: A Liberal Powerhouse?
The New Jersey Department of Education (NJDOE) is full of appointees from Governor Murphy, many of whom critics say bring a “far-left” philosophy to the table. These officials have introduced initiatives focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion—programs that, while popular among some, have been divisive for others. Without federal oversight, the NJDOE would have much more control over curriculum and school policy, allowing them to push forward progressive agendas that some parents might feel don’t align with their values.
For families looking for a traditional, more conservative education model, this shift could feel like a radical change. If the state is given full control, New Jersey schools might become the proving ground for a one-sided approach to education, leaving those who prefer different viewpoints feeling sidelined.
Could a State-Controlled Education System Leave New Jersey Kids Behind?
Let’s face it, the NJEA cares more about drag queens and inclusion than it does about math and reading scores for children.
On the national stage, former President Trump argues that returning education to the states will save money and improve school quality. The United States spends more per student than many other nations, yet lags behind in global rankings, so the idea is that states will bring fresh, local approaches.
But this plan assumes that states have the resources and oversight capabilities to handle these responsibilities better than federal agencies. New Jersey’s DOE is already stretched thin, managing a complex web of public, charter, and private schools across urban, suburban, and rural areas.
Taking on everything might mean that some districts simply can’t keep up with the demands, especially those already facing budget cuts and fewer resources. New Jersey imposes unfunded mandates against local districts as it is.
Trump needs to offer a liberal protection clause, meaning if New Jersey continues to radicalize the education system, the state will lose other critical funding, as a safeguard for communities under attack already from the Murphy regime.
The Bigger Picture: Risk of Partisanship Over Progress
New Jersey is one of the most politically left-leaning states in the country, yet with state control, we could see Democrat partisan decisions play a larger role in shaping what kids learn and how. For instance, if New Jersey shifts more power to the governor’s office.
Dismantling the federal Department of Education might sound like a great way to streamline things and save money, but for New Jersey, it could mean more partisanship, funding issues, and educational instability for students. At the end of the day, maintaining a balance between local control and federal support may just be the best way to give kids the quality education they deserve, without the political whiplash.
For most normal states, not run by the insane left, this is a great move. For New Jersey, we’re screwed!
