Give me a break, "the freest state in a nation built on the principle of freedom, and we will advance the freedom of parents to choose the best educational path for their own kids.” In what fantasy world do you think the DOE chooses the educational path for South Dakota’s children? And let’s take a look at all the ways this Governor and the previous Governor inserted state government into the lives of South Dakotans—want to make your own health care choice? No, the state decides. Vote for medicaid expansion? No, the state decides. Vote for recreational marijuana? No, the state decides. If you think dismantling the DOE means that federal dollars will continue to flow to South Dakota in the same amount they currently do, you’re an idiot. It will simply be up to South Dakota to pay and to decide whether or not they’ll provide an education for students with disabilities. My guess would be we’ll get the same response we get when the question of school lunch comes up—feeding children is the responsibility of someone else and if your kid is disabled, tough. We can’t afford it. The assault on public education will continue until nothing’s left, but we’re free, we’re free, our teachers are among the most poorly paid in the country, but we’re free!
So short sighted—I know education is expensive and the results leave much to be desired, but some things are worth investing in, the education of our children being one of them. I just fear if left to our own devices, we’ll cut, cut, cut.
You're entitled to your ridiculous opinions but not your own facts. The DOE's 2024 budget was $241 billion. The DOE in 2024 spent $838 million in Department Management. That's less than 0.5% of its budget on internal management. https://www.usaspending.gov/agency/department-of-education?fy=2024
During the 2021-22 school year, 13.7% ($96.2B) of public school funding came from the federal government. Less than half of that $96.2B came from the Dept of Education. The rest came from USDA, HHS, Dept of Labor, Dept of Veterans Affairs, Dept of the Interior, Dept of Defense.
The Dept of Ed spent $18.2B on education for the disadvantaged, $14.5B on special education, $7.3B on school improvement programs, $2.1B on vocational and adult education, $1.6B impact aid program (whatever that is), and $0.8B on English Language acquisition.
The governor apparently has no clue as to what the Dept of Education is responsible for. Not only do they oversee funding from the federal government, but they also advocate and oversee educational rules for disadvantaged students. They are the rules keepers for things like IEP's and 504 plans.
And you think that's a good thing? That bureaucrats in D.C. are writing and keeping rules for school systems in the states? They keep 80% to 92% of the funding within the federal department, and only a tiny leftover slice in the form of grants with a lot of federal strings attached ever touches a school child.
I doubt very much that you or most other South Dakota Republicans could explain the history of Critical Race Theory and articulate what it actually means or give the history of DEI and honestly tally how much it has benefited South Dakotans -- especially women of all colors; or give a lucid definition of what "woke" means. You throw the words around as yet another way to manipulate the ignorant. Once again, the Republican Party's mission is to destroy rather than to build.
Note that there is an inverse correlation between education and voting republican. Rhodes is looking out for the party. The less education our kids get, the better for republicans.
Religion does not belong in our schools—keep it out! The money from the Federal Government is for public education—not for home schooling and private schools! Use the money for what it is earmarked for now—not private or religious purposes.
This editorial by the governor is misinformation while attempting to carry favor with an ideology that has no factual basis . This is what you should expect or accept if you eliminate DOE . Want block grants ? State taxpayers pay for it . Want students eligible for school loans ? Then establish your own state lending institution to provide those loans ? Want research dollars to go to universities? Be prepared for the state of SD to find its own research . Maybe “ Big Bird “ will share some of his dollars ? Ha ! Get real everyone for what Trump is proposing .
He’s off his rocker. I can’t believe a person in a responsible position would say anything so irresponsible. I may register republican to vote against him. Depends on whether Dusty and/or Jackley show any courage.
We're still in the middle (slightly above it) which is pretty good when you consider we pay our teachers less than just about anyone. We only moved out of the bottom slot on teacher pay--to #49 from 51--a few years ago.
Why not? We obviously have a problem. Lots of people are not ok with the ROI we are getting for our dollars. What we have been doing has got us into this situation of accepting average as good enough. Our children deserve better. Or is it because of who is doing it ? I like getting local control back.
It’s been 45 years of this experiment that is the DOE. Every year since it started we have slid farther down. I will ask again . Why not try it? It has obviously not improved things but the exact opposite. I think it’s the person who is doing it is your reason for opposing it.
"..., I know that what works in Sioux Falls doesn’t always work for Union Center."
This statement makes me cringe. Coming from an extremely rural SD school - under 20 students in each grade - I can attest that these small schools and their 'rural ways' often put their students at a disadvantage. Once I left my small town I was in for the shock of my life and was way behind my peers from larger districts. Yes, small schools have some advantages, but we need to hear and acknowledge their weaknesses too. It's okay to strive for things available in larger districts. I fear Governor Rhoden's philosophy and policy decisions will do a disservice to our rural youngsters.
Do you think Miguel Cardona from Connecticut or Linda McMahon from North Carolina and Maryland have a better handle on what Rural SD schools need than South Dakota’s Secretary of Education Dr. Joseph Graves?
Wrong! I am extremely disappointed with this commentary by the governor. He clearly does not understand public education and what is at stake if DOE goes away. Our legislature will do what it always does and rob the education federal dollars to support their pet projects. Once again South Dakota will be at the bottom in support for public education.
It would be eye-popping to see a breakdown of all the taxpayer-funded education lobbyists, their salaries, and the amount each private nonprofit extracts from public education each year. If these $150,000-$200,000 bureaucrats truly cared about education, our state’s teachers wouldn’t be the lowest-paid in the nation.
If this federal money actually reaches the states, it has significant potential. If it bypasses all the intermediaries—such as private nonprofits and their lobbyists—who have been exploiting public education, it could be truly transformative.
South Dakota ranks #2 in states that receive the most K-12 federal education funding. I notice he fails to mention how the state is going to make up for loss of the federal money. The ones who will be hurt by this will be the students and anyone who works in education.
Stripping out federal mandates unrelated to core education will help to lower the need for South Dakota's education to be funded by other states. Also, a reordering of city and state spending priorities is in order - a performing arts center in Tea schools, a new convention center built on the site of the existing men's prison, a $billion men's prison 5 times larger than our average men's prison population in the midst of an area with zero infrastructure, an extension of Veteran's Hwy to future-world, etc. seem like luxury projects siphoning off funds that might better pay for higher teacher salaries and curricula aimed at inculcating reading, writing, math, history, science, civics and basic manual skills.
Give me a break, "the freest state in a nation built on the principle of freedom, and we will advance the freedom of parents to choose the best educational path for their own kids.” In what fantasy world do you think the DOE chooses the educational path for South Dakota’s children? And let’s take a look at all the ways this Governor and the previous Governor inserted state government into the lives of South Dakotans—want to make your own health care choice? No, the state decides. Vote for medicaid expansion? No, the state decides. Vote for recreational marijuana? No, the state decides. If you think dismantling the DOE means that federal dollars will continue to flow to South Dakota in the same amount they currently do, you’re an idiot. It will simply be up to South Dakota to pay and to decide whether or not they’ll provide an education for students with disabilities. My guess would be we’ll get the same response we get when the question of school lunch comes up—feeding children is the responsibility of someone else and if your kid is disabled, tough. We can’t afford it. The assault on public education will continue until nothing’s left, but we’re free, we’re free, our teachers are among the most poorly paid in the country, but we’re free!
So short sighted—I know education is expensive and the results leave much to be desired, but some things are worth investing in, the education of our children being one of them. I just fear if left to our own devices, we’ll cut, cut, cut.
80% to 92% of the Federal Dept of Ed's budget is in a wash, rinse, repeat cycle that never reaches a single student in any state.
You're entitled to your ridiculous opinions but not your own facts. The DOE's 2024 budget was $241 billion. The DOE in 2024 spent $838 million in Department Management. That's less than 0.5% of its budget on internal management. https://www.usaspending.gov/agency/department-of-education?fy=2024
Nice chatting with you.
During the 2021-22 school year, 13.7% ($96.2B) of public school funding came from the federal government. Less than half of that $96.2B came from the Dept of Education. The rest came from USDA, HHS, Dept of Labor, Dept of Veterans Affairs, Dept of the Interior, Dept of Defense.
The Dept of Ed spent $18.2B on education for the disadvantaged, $14.5B on special education, $7.3B on school improvement programs, $2.1B on vocational and adult education, $1.6B impact aid program (whatever that is), and $0.8B on English Language acquisition.
$44.5B total from Dept of Ed to K-12 schools.
https://usafacts.org/answers/what-percentage-of-public-school-funding-comes-from-the-federal-government/country/united-states/
The FY summary of the Dept of Ed funding (put out by the gov't) was $637.7B.
The line graph is worth exploring.
https://www.usaspending.gov/agency/department-of-education?fy=2022§ion=status-of-funds
The governor apparently has no clue as to what the Dept of Education is responsible for. Not only do they oversee funding from the federal government, but they also advocate and oversee educational rules for disadvantaged students. They are the rules keepers for things like IEP's and 504 plans.
What does he know about?
Not much. He seems to be following very closely in Kristi Noem's footsteps.
And you think that's a good thing? That bureaucrats in D.C. are writing and keeping rules for school systems in the states? They keep 80% to 92% of the funding within the federal department, and only a tiny leftover slice in the form of grants with a lot of federal strings attached ever touches a school child.
I doubt very much that you or most other South Dakota Republicans could explain the history of Critical Race Theory and articulate what it actually means or give the history of DEI and honestly tally how much it has benefited South Dakotans -- especially women of all colors; or give a lucid definition of what "woke" means. You throw the words around as yet another way to manipulate the ignorant. Once again, the Republican Party's mission is to destroy rather than to build.
Note that there is an inverse correlation between education and voting republican. Rhodes is looking out for the party. The less education our kids get, the better for republicans.
Well said!
Religion does not belong in our schools—keep it out! The money from the Federal Government is for public education—not for home schooling and private schools! Use the money for what it is earmarked for now—not private or religious purposes.
So white washed curriculum and vouchers. Got it.
Exactly, so sad
This editorial by the governor is misinformation while attempting to carry favor with an ideology that has no factual basis . This is what you should expect or accept if you eliminate DOE . Want block grants ? State taxpayers pay for it . Want students eligible for school loans ? Then establish your own state lending institution to provide those loans ? Want research dollars to go to universities? Be prepared for the state of SD to find its own research . Maybe “ Big Bird “ will share some of his dollars ? Ha ! Get real everyone for what Trump is proposing .
He’s off his rocker. I can’t believe a person in a responsible position would say anything so irresponsible. I may register republican to vote against him. Depends on whether Dusty and/or Jackley show any courage.
Why would they start now?
Those two clowns are cut from the same cloth.
So if local schools choose to teach critical race theory on their own, you're going to complain about that and say that they need more oversight?
Great article Governor. I couldn't agree more.
Our education system is ranked last as a national in results but first in cost. Maybe that explains why so many people are made about this.
World rankings?
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2025/feb/13/donald-trump/us-education-system-doesnt-rank-worst-in-the-world/
State rankings?
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state
Yes our education ranking has been going down hill for years.Some just don’t want to acknowledge it and want to stay in the same path.
https://useducationnews.com/us-education-ranking-by-year/#us-education-ranking-by-year-1
We're still in the middle (slightly above it) which is pretty good when you consider we pay our teachers less than just about anyone. We only moved out of the bottom slot on teacher pay--to #49 from 51--a few years ago.
And dismantling the DoE won't catch us up to the rest of the world. I'm not sure anything could at this point.
Why not? We obviously have a problem. Lots of people are not ok with the ROI we are getting for our dollars. What we have been doing has got us into this situation of accepting average as good enough. Our children deserve better. Or is it because of who is doing it ? I like getting local control back.
Take a look at this very basic run down of a few other country’s approaches to the school year and school day
It’s been 45 years of this experiment that is the DOE. Every year since it started we have slid farther down. I will ask again . Why not try it? It has obviously not improved things but the exact opposite. I think it’s the person who is doing it is your reason for opposing it.
Thanks. I agree with what the Governor wrote.
"..., I know that what works in Sioux Falls doesn’t always work for Union Center."
This statement makes me cringe. Coming from an extremely rural SD school - under 20 students in each grade - I can attest that these small schools and their 'rural ways' often put their students at a disadvantage. Once I left my small town I was in for the shock of my life and was way behind my peers from larger districts. Yes, small schools have some advantages, but we need to hear and acknowledge their weaknesses too. It's okay to strive for things available in larger districts. I fear Governor Rhoden's philosophy and policy decisions will do a disservice to our rural youngsters.
Do you think Miguel Cardona from Connecticut or Linda McMahon from North Carolina and Maryland have a better handle on what Rural SD schools need than South Dakota’s Secretary of Education Dr. Joseph Graves?
Wrong! I am extremely disappointed with this commentary by the governor. He clearly does not understand public education and what is at stake if DOE goes away. Our legislature will do what it always does and rob the education federal dollars to support their pet projects. Once again South Dakota will be at the bottom in support for public education.
It would be eye-popping to see a breakdown of all the taxpayer-funded education lobbyists, their salaries, and the amount each private nonprofit extracts from public education each year. If these $150,000-$200,000 bureaucrats truly cared about education, our state’s teachers wouldn’t be the lowest-paid in the nation.
If this federal money actually reaches the states, it has significant potential. If it bypasses all the intermediaries—such as private nonprofits and their lobbyists—who have been exploiting public education, it could be truly transformative.
South Dakota ranks #2 in states that receive the most K-12 federal education funding. I notice he fails to mention how the state is going to make up for loss of the federal money. The ones who will be hurt by this will be the students and anyone who works in education.
Stripping out federal mandates unrelated to core education will help to lower the need for South Dakota's education to be funded by other states. Also, a reordering of city and state spending priorities is in order - a performing arts center in Tea schools, a new convention center built on the site of the existing men's prison, a $billion men's prison 5 times larger than our average men's prison population in the midst of an area with zero infrastructure, an extension of Veteran's Hwy to future-world, etc. seem like luxury projects siphoning off funds that might better pay for higher teacher salaries and curricula aimed at inculcating reading, writing, math, history, science, civics and basic manual skills.
Our governor is a self-serving fool supported by fools like you.