Connect with us

Washington, D.C

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox says he supports dismantling Department of Education in D.C. column

Published

on

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox says he supports dismantling Department of Education in D.C. column


Utah Gov. Spencer Cox supports President Donald Trump’s recent cuts to the Department of Education and said he backs the president’s plan to dismantle the federal department entirely.

He announced his position in an opinion piece published Monday in the Washington Examiner, a conservative news outlet based in Washington, D.C.

“If we’re serious about improving education, it’s time for a thoughtful, commonsense discussion about winding down the department altogether,” Cox wrote. “That’s why it’s encouraging to see President Donald Trump and newly confirmed Secretary of Education Linda McMahon reducing the role of the Department of Education and returning power where it belongs: to states and local communities.”

A spokesperson for Cox did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advertisement

The piece was published about two weeks after Cox and other GOP state leaders on Feb. 28 announced a series of public education investments, including a $1,400 raise for all public school teachers.

“We see you. We recognize you,” Cox said to public educators at the time.

That raise announcement came after Cox signed a bill into law on Feb. 14 that bans collective bargaining for teachers and other public workers. Utah labor unions have since launched a referendum to repeal the measure; Cox said Feb. 28 that the raises weren’t meant to squash the then-planned effort.

“This is the right thing to do,” Cox said about the pay increase. “If there is a referendum, the people in the state of Utah will get to decide if that’s a good thing or not.”

Why Cox says he supports dismantling the Education Department

In his opinion piece, Cox maintained that public education should be governed solely by the states, even if the lack of national oversight, as some have argued, may cause some states to fall behind.

Advertisement

“That’s how federalism works,” Cox wrote. “Our founders expected states to try different approaches and learn from one another. Innovation happens when states are free to lead, not when Washington imposes one-size-fits-all solutions.”

He argued that Washington, D.C., has overstepped its role and is “telling states how to educate their children.”

One of the primary roles of the Department of Education is to provide federal funding to public schools, especially through Title programs such as Title I. This program gives extra funding to schools with a high number of economically disadvantaged students.

Many Title I schools rely on that funding, because state contributions often inadequately support high-need students.

Cox in his opinion piece argued that the process to receive Title I funds has become too “burdensome” and that states must jump “through expensive, time-consuming hoops” to apply for the funding.

Advertisement

“That’s not to say the goals behind these programs aren’t worthwhile,” he wrote, “But the idea that Utah — or any state — needs Washington bureaucrats overseeing our schools is both outdated and wrong.”

Sarah Reale, a member of the Utah State Board of Education, called the governor’s remarks “ironic.”

While he and others argue that slashing the department will cut bureaucracy and time-consuming funding requirements, she said Cox has “signed dozens of bills into law that, on a state level, have added layers of bureaucracy, removed local flexibility and governance and created additional red tape for [schools] through various state monitoring requirements.”

In his piece, Cox wrote that cutting the Department of Education’s workforce in half is a “promising start” for fixing the problem that is “federal control” over public education.

“Utah has a long track record of investing in education, including supporting low-income schools,” his piece added. “But we could do it with more flexibility, less bureaucracy, and greater accountability to Utah families — not Washington regulators.”

Advertisement

Reale argued that leaving education purely up to the states means there is “no guarantee” that various student populations will be served equally.

“Our most marginalized and disadvantaged students would suffer without those federal guidelines,” Reale argued.

Utah currently maintains its second-to-last position in the nation for funding students, according to the latest rankings released last year, which were based on financial figures from 2021, the most recently available nationally. Utah at the time allocated roughly $9,095 per student, about a third of New York’s $26,571, which took the top spot.

The state’s largest teachers union, the Utah Education Association, did not immediately respond Monday to a request for comment on Cox’s column.

“Dismantling the Department of Education may sound bold,” Cox concluded in his piece. “But it’s also common sense. Washington doesn’t have all the answers. It’s time to trust states and local communities to do what they do best.”

Advertisement



Source link

Washington, D.C

Fact Check Team: Iran conflict revives Washington fight over who can authorize US force

Published

on

Fact Check Team: Iran conflict revives Washington fight over who can authorize US force


As the war in Iran intensifies across the Middle East, a constitutional battle is unfolding in Washington over a fundamental question: Who has the authority to declare war, Congress or the president?

The debate focuses on the War Powers Resolution, a 1973 law designed to prevent years-long military conflicts without congressional approval. Lawmakers passed the measure in the aftermath of the Vietnam War to reclaim authority they believed had drifted too far toward the executive branch.

What Is the War Powers Resolution?

The War Powers Resolution was intended to put limits on a president’s ability to send U.S. troops into combat without Congress signing off.

Advertisement

Under the law, a president can deploy forces into hostilities only if Congress has formally declared war, passed a specific authorization for the use of military force, or the U.S. has been attacked.

The resolution also sets strict deadlines.

The president must notify Congress within 48 hours of introducing U.S. forces into hostilities. From there, a 60-day clock begins. If Congress does not approve the military action within that time, troops must be withdrawn — though the law allows an additional 30-day wind-down period.

Some argue the law was crafted to prevent “never-ending wars.” While others say presidents from both parties have routinely stretched and sidestepped its requirements.

WASHINGTON, DC – JANUARY 14: Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) visits with Senate pages in the basement of the U.S. Capitol Police ahead of a vote on January 14, 2026 in Washington, DC. Republicans voted to block a Venezuela war powers resolution after receiving assurances from President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio of no U.S. forces remaining in Venezuela and pledges for congressional involvement in major future operations. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Advertisement

What Does the Constitution Say?

The War Powers Resolution is rooted directly in the U.S. Constitution.

Article I, Section 8 gives Congress — not the president — the power “to declare War.”

Article II, Section 2 names the president as Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy.

In simple terms, Congress decides whether the country goes to war. The president directs the military once it is engaged.

Advertisement

The framers intentionally split that authority. Their goal was to avoid concentrating too much war-making power in one person — likely a reaction to the monarchy they had just broken away from.

But how that balance plays out in real time is often a legal and political fight. At times, disputes over war powers have reached the courts, though Congress and the executive branch frequently resolve them through political pressure rather than judicial rulings.

A Pattern of Stretching the War Powers Resolution

Essentially, every president since 1973 has pushed the boundaries of the War Powers Resolution rather than fully complying with its original intent. As the Council on Foreign Relations explains, the resolution was designed to “provide presidents with the leeway to respond to attacks or other emergencies” but also to **require termination of combat after 60 to 90 days unless Congress authorizes continuation.”

For example:

Advertisement
  • Ronald Reagan ordered the U.S. invasion of Grenada in 1983 without prior congressional authorization, later reporting to Congress in a manner “consistent with” the resolution.
  • Bill Clinton directed the 1999 NATO air campaign in Kosovo after congressional authorization efforts failed, continuing U.S. engagement beyond the WPR’s typical 60-day reporting window.
  • Barack Obama oversaw U.S. participation in the 2011 Libya campaign, arguing that limited strikes did not trigger the full force of the WPR’s time limits.

In more recent years, Donald Trump’s administration has once again brought these issues to the forefront.

War Powers Arguments from the White House

The Trump administration’s principal legal rationale has centered on two points:

Short-term strikes or limited military actions do not always trigger the full 60-day clock under the War Powers Resolution, especially when described as defensive, limited in scope, or tied to national security emergencies rather than prolonged hostilities. In some cases, the White House relies on prior Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMFs) or other statutory authorities rather than seeking new congressional approval.

Current Public Opinion on Iran Strikes

Public opinion reflects significant skepticism about the current U.S. military engagement with Iran. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found that just 27% of Americans support the recent U.S. and allied strikes on Iran, while 43% disapprove and 29% remain uncertain.

Advertisement

Another national poll conducted by SSRS for CNN found that nearly 60% of U.S. citizens disapprove of the military actions, and a similar share said that President Trump should seek Congressional authorization for further action.

Beyond polling, internal deliberations in Congress have already begun. Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers have pushed for votes on war powers resolutions that would seek to limit or require authorization for further military action against Iran. Past attempts to pass similar restraints have failed, reflecting deep partisan divisions and the complexities of enforcing the War Powers Resolution.



Source link

Continue Reading

Washington, D.C

Students at Southeast charter school outperformed 75% of DC on citywide math test – WTOP News

Published

on

Students at Southeast charter school outperformed 75% of DC on citywide math test – WTOP News


Two years ago, leaders at Center City Public Charter School’s Congress Heights campus made a decision to offer more advanced math classes to some of their oldest students.

This page contains a video which is being blocked by your ad blocker.
In order to view the video you must disable your ad blocker.

Students at Southeast charter school outperformed 75% of DC on citywide math test

Two years ago, leaders at Center City Public Charter School’s Congress Heights campus in D.C. decided to offer more advanced math classes to some of their oldest students.

Advertisement

The choice was complicated, and some educators wondered whether the kids would be ready.

To prepare for the possible change, Principal Niya White and her team visited high schools, both nearby and farther away, to see how algebra was being taught.

In some classrooms, White would see former students sleeping in the back. They were bored or had already finished their work.

For White, that made the choice clear — in order to set students up for success, they needed to expand their offerings so kids felt challenged and engaged by the time they reached high school.

“I’m born and raised here,” White said. “I was given the option of whether to leave Southeast D.C., leave D.C., go off to do things and come back. There are a lot of folks and a lot of students or a lot of families that don’t ever get that option. They’ve got to have it.”

Advertisement

Now, the Southeast D.C. campus is offering pre-algebra to seventh graders and algebra to eighth graders. In the 2024-25 school year, 70% of eighth graders at the school either met or exceeded expectations on the citywide standardized math test.

Education news outlet The 74 first reported that’s a stronger mark than the 64% of eighth graders who met or exceeded expectations in Ward 3. Only one-fourth of all D.C. students did the same.

Jessi Mericola, who teaches seventh and eighth grade math, was one of the educators who considered whether students were ready to make such a significant leap.

Initially, half of the rising eighth graders did an accelerated seventh grade curriculum, and then attended summer school to finish the curriculum so they could take algebra in eighth grade.

This year, for the first time, all of seventh grade is being accelerated so next year, “all of our students will be doing algebra,” Mericola said.

Advertisement

“We found that if we tell them they’re ready for it, they believe you, and they want to meet that expectation,” Mericola said.

Each class has about 20 students, with the largest in the school at 26, she said. Classes are divided into sections. There’s an individual review on a recently learned concept, a small group review on something from earlier in the year and then a full group lesson.

Mericola co-teaches with a colleague, and even if a student is struggling to grasp an idea, “we come back and reteach things from before that maybe you missed it the first time, but you catch it the second time; and if you miss it the second time, you catch it the third time.”

It’s an approach, White said, comes from avoiding the assumption that “we can’t move a child forward because of something or one of the things they haven’t mastered yet.”

Eighth grader Kennedy Morse said math was a struggle before she got to the Congress Heights campus, but now, it’s become one of her strongest subjects.

Advertisement

She’s gained confidence from tutoring help and being able to ask questions without judgment.

“It was really shocking for me to be on a higher level,” Morse said. “It was hard. It was hard at first.”

Leonard White had a similar experience.

“I’m actually glad that they can believe in me to do the harder work in these classes,” White said.

While getting access to more advanced math classes at a younger age could help students take more rigorous courses in high school and college, Principal White said with any change, the focus is helping “show them all the possibilities and help them make the choice for themselves, versus it being forced upon them.”

Advertisement

Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

© 2026 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Washington, D.C

Washington Commanders to pay DC $1M to resolve lawsuit over abusive workplace culture – WTOP News

Published

on

Washington Commanders to pay DC M to resolve lawsuit over abusive workplace culture – WTOP News


Brian Schwalb, the District’s attorney general praised the new ownership for rectifying the Commanders’ internal issues.

The former owners of the Washington Commanders will pay the District of Columbia $1 million to resolve a 2022 lawsuit that alleged the NFL franchise misled its fans regarding the team’s toxic and abusive workplace culture in order to protect the its brand.

Dan Snyder still owned the team at the time, and as D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb announced the settlement Monday, he praised the new owners for rectifying internal issues, including accusations of rampant sexual assault and harassment.

“The Commanders’ current owners have commendably opened a new chapter in the team’s history, committing to ensure all employees are protected from abuse and treated with dignity,” Schwalb said. “I want to thank the victims for coming forward to tell their stories — without their bravery, none of this would have come to light.”

Advertisement

A group led by Josh Harris purchased the Commanders in 2023 from Snyder, who had faced pressure to sell the team after a series of scandals and decades of perceivable mediocrity on the field.

Since then, new ownership has strengthened the team’s human resources department and implemented an anti-harassment policy and an investigation protocol for complaints of misconduct, Schwalb’s office said in a news release.

Under the agreement, the team will maintain those reforms, along with paying $1 million to D.C.

The NFL separately fined Snyder $60 million in 2023 after its own investigation concluded that he personally engaged in multiple forms of misconduct, including sexual harassment.

D.C.’s suit accused Snyder and the team of misleading the public about what they knew regarding the hostile work environment and Snyder’s role in creating it.

Advertisement

The Commanders and Snyder deny all the allegations and are not admitting wrongdoing by reaching a resolution, according to the terms of the settlement.

Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

© 2026 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending