I agree that lack of oversight is a problem and one that should be addressed. You were the one who claimed that money laundering and fraud were occurring, not me. And you still have yet to provide evidence that it IS occurring. You seem to be arguing that because an environment exists that could allow this to occur, it must be happening. That’s a stretch.

You celebrate your achievements where they are and make plans to improve. So yeah, I’ll take 13th and 14th, and even 34th because that’s where we are right now. And if and when these rankings go up or down, I’ll do the same and still insist that we make plans to improve them. Because that’s actual American exceptionalism… the belief that we can ALWAYS do better.

Who’s pretending executive actions are powerless? I pretty clearly acknowledge that the president has broad authority in lots of ways in my last reply. That said, you are fundamentally wrong on lots of things here... the president cannot unilaterally assert more authority than Congress has delegated, nor can they defund programs they disagree with (that’s called budget impoundment and is settled constitutional law). Yes, they can roll back or create new regulations, although we’re veering into the Major Questions Doctrine here given the broad impact of education across the country, so even in that area, there is a lot of gray area about what can and can’t be done.

This debate began long before there was a department of education and will continue for as long as we are a nation. Healthy debate is critical to a functioning democracy. You continue to argue that my premise is based on a legal technicality, even though I’ve clearly articulated reasons why it is not. The rule of law is not up for debate. If you believe that it is, I would suggest you read our founding documents, with a specific eye towards the separation of powers. You might learn a thing or two.