OT: Dept of Ed and Title IX
- Thread starter baseball31ne
- Start date
Have half the football team identify as women.
Easy, have Trump kill the Department of Education on day 1
Actually this^^^^ needs to happen!!
I have no desire to waste time reading up on any of this so I'll choose to stay ignorant. I don't care how one sh*t show should work with other sh*t shows.
But my reaction to all of this is I thought NIL collectives are unconnected to universities? Second thing, if the Supreme Court which ultimately set this all in motion says athletes should get "their due", then surely those same corrupt jackasses aren't going to also rule that a female on the bowling team deserves her/his/their fair share from the NIL money faucet. Right? Every athlete gets the bonus salary that the market warrants. So Dylan Raiola gets seven figures and the female bowler gets some coupons to Great Clips.
In that analogy, the bowler gets to give great clips coupons to the school. Most collegiate sports "lose" money for the school.
Not going to happen anymore
last sentence made me spit out my coffee I laughed so hard, bravo.
I will take this a step further. My daughter is a junior at UNL with a double major in microbiology and biochemistry. She was smart enough to get a regents scholarship, but still has to pay for books and housing. Her emphasis is in biomedical research. Some of the work that she is doing could result in millions of dollars in the university's pocket. She will receive zero cut of that.
Last edited:
The House v. NCAA settlement provides for up to $22.5M in athletic revenue sharing per school. It's not NIL as it comes directly from the schools.
Killing the Department of Education doesn't do anything to Title IX. It's a law. Eliminating the Department of Education would shift enforcement to the Department of Justice, and it's likely Trump's DOJ wouldn't enforce much, so it sets up even more chaos. They might try to repeal the Civil Rights Act or Amendments but I doubt that happens.
Is that $22.5M pay for play or a share of broadcast revenue?
You, and whoever gave this opinion (that has no bearing), are assuming that it is the former. I think you can see a blanket assumption like that is not well thought out, is not consistent with how the courts are moving and framed by the preliminary settlement, nor has it faced any scrutiny or legal challenges.
At best, there is a long, legal process by a committed agency pushing the Title IX equal pay before it would have any bearing. Not an opinion from a lame-duck administration on it's way out the door in a week. And even if that happened, the conferences could just make these payments directly to players as they aren't subject to Title IX.
It's a share of athletic department revenue, which obviously has more than one source. I agree the latest opinion is from a DOE that is part of a lame duck administration and I don't think it has much bearing on how Title IX will be enforced for the next 4 years. Civil lawsuits pursued by individuals or groups of individuals (class actions) will be the driving force, as they have been since Sam Keller. Trump's DOJ can choose to not enforce, but that won't save schools from Title IX actions as long as the law exists.
I lol at people saying stuff like this without having any idea what the DOE does or how killing it would be detrimental to students across America. It goes way beyond test scores and supposed sex change operations happening in nurses' offices. LOL
Our nation operated fine without it for a long time. It’s a collection of bureaucratic waste.
Formerly, the US government guaranteed student loans that were lended to students by private banks. When Barack Obama was in office, he ended that program and had the DOE directly lend money to students. Do you know why so many students have loans for worthless degrees? It’s because the Government directly funds them. No private bank is going to finance a loan for a major that has no job prospects.
I know a decent amount about this subject, though I know not to claim myself as an expert. At the end of the day you are taking the DOE funding and giving it to states who will use those dollars more efficiently. The states would certainly have to hire overhead. No doubt about that
I have no problem replacing the DOE with something better but killing it on day 1 with no plan or process in place would be detrimental to american students. This goes way way beyond college funding.
The problem with states governing their own education is in the comparisons for scholarship dollars and funding from state to state. Many of the states, especially deep red states, lean heavily on federal funding and without it would fall even farther behind. The students who need it most would be the most hurt by its loss.
I guess you would have to explain to me what you mean by "operated just fine without it". Keep in mind that it was formed in 1979 as a transition from the HEW (health, education and welfare 1953) department, in and effort to streamline and make education a priority in our country.
Military budget is 4x the size of Dept. Of Ed. and 10x as inefficient, and represents the majority of the discretionary budget. If you want to do something about government efficiency, it starts and ends there.
Yes.
I've never understood the idea of pulling the rug out from those that need it most while ignoring where massive expenditures and waste occur that really would make a dent in true government spending.. I mean I get it from the standpoint of continuing to poor money into massive companies to pad their bottom line.... but it really doesn't make sense if you REALLY want to get the debt under control.
by the way...
In fiscal year 2022, the United States allocated approximately $877 billion to military expenditures, accounting for nearly 40% of global military spending.
Business Insider
In contrast, federal spending on education was about $76.4 billion in the same fiscal year.
Business Insider
This indicates that military spending was more than ten times higher than federal education spending.
New Title IX guidance from President Biden's administration threatens to upend school rev-share plans in college sports
The outgoing administration's Department of Education dropped an 11th-hour salvo saying any payments must be “proportionately” distributed to men and women athletes to satisfy Title IX.
www.yahoo.com
There needs to be a rational expectation that revenue is proportional to the amount of revenue that the sport generates for the athletic programs. Otherwise these schools will just drop the women's sports to avoid becoming uncompetitive in the revenue generating sports.
We're the world's protector while we're not the world's educator. Right or wrong, but that's a big reason why it's so much higher. Also, I don't know why people even compare the two? A fighter jet costs what, $75M while an elementary school book is $45-ish?
How many times higher should military spending be over federal education spending? What's a reasonable amount?
Trying to justify cutting military spending because it's 10 times higher than education spending is silly. Justify it it by other reasons that make more sense.
Education is funded at a local level. That 76 billion is largely junk that does nothing of actual value to improve actual education nationally (like DEI initiatives). Whether we like it or not, our military has such an outsized importance on the world's stage that it's very reasonable to see that 877 billion as necessary. Military spending needs to be audited to avoid waste, of course. We are also now over $1 trillion in interest payments on the debt and that absolutely must be made a priority. I don't know if the average citizen actually even cares about the precarious state of our country's debt and the likelihood of eventual default in the next two decades.
My hope is the Republicans will finally have the guts to cut spending across the board enough to make budget surpluses a realistic possibility again.
10% of education is funded at the federal level with target dollars going towards equality for all students in education as well as providing opportunities for less advantaged students to seek higher education. Certainly your not against these causes or needs?
The new admin has ran on the premise of no wars, no conflict, world peace and all that jazz. Certainly we can nip a few hundred billion from a budget that spends 3 times that of the next closest nation (China)
Maybe we cut bloated subsidies to giant corporations and farms.... although that might hurt that trickle down effect we've all be waiting for.
I agree what we are doing is sustainable. I don't agree that cutting from education and safety nets is the way to do it.
Im not really justifying cutting military spending. Although I think we are way beyond reason when it comes to that. Especially when you look at it through the lens of a nationalist perspective which this next admin definitely has.
What I'm saying is that we are beyond the 4 times that you mentioned.
Think about this. That one fighter jet could build 2 to 3 elementary buildings or a hell of a nice HS.
So not based on financial sense but again on quotas. Thank goodness they're gone in 3 days
New Title IX guidance from President Biden's administration threatens to upend school rev-share plans in college sports
The outgoing administration's Department of Education dropped an 11th-hour salvo saying any payments must be “proportionately” distributed to men and women athletes to satisfy Title IX.
if trump's doe sees it differently it will soon be in the courts. this is how many of us have felt all along that these $20 million plus annual payments to athletes by schools - not outside parties - under the house settlement can't be distributed willy-nilly without deference to existing law. whatever trump does, the scotus will likely have final say.
Similar threads
