🌊 America’s TikTok Billionaire

This was such a well executed piece! Thank you for your hard work. I think it’s clear that this agency needs, at minimum, to be restructured. Granville seemed to agree with that sentiment. Granville’s answers seemed more inclined to criticize the current administration than to defend the DOE. If congress is doing all the work, how hard could it be to make sure those folks get a check in the mail … does it really warrant an entire agency of 4,000+ people? I stand with Hess on this one but also agree with Granville that the current administration is not approaching the problem in a way that would lead to formidable and welcome change. Appreciate all y'all do!

Appreciate the transparent Q & A on both sides. 

I am leaning toward a solid plan to move the functions to other departments. I DO think it is rich that he repeatedly said that their main focus is on getting the money to those who need it. How is that decided? When I went to school at UTEP (granted that was many years ago) Pell grants were given strictly based on race. I was a very poor 'white' girl working full-time and trying to pay for school. I did not qualify, but my classmate from Jaurez driving a brand new Volvo and not working did.....

Very good job, as usual, interviewing both sides of the issue. I can understand the different arguments, but the information they presented didn't really make me change my mind. 

The biggest difference that I noticed between the interviewers was their attitude. Hess seemed arrogant and overconfident. Granted, I know I'm just reading this and I wasn't actually present to hear his words or see his mannerisms, but this was my biggest takeaway. Hess seemed to care more about being right than about discussing the wellbeing of students. Arguing about student loan debt compliance is not really effective right now, though it definitely is an issue.

Granville, on the other hand, appeared much more compassionate, thorough, and slow to anger. He addressed the concerns about the PROCESS of closing the department, and not just about closing the department itself. "Tomorrow" would certainly be noticeable to students. I don't trust the government, and definitely not the current government, to migrate functions to different departments and still give those functions the attention they require.

Overall, I think these two interviews do a great job at highlighting the differences between the left and right on a variety of subjects. So to Hess, well done (with sarcasm). And to Granville, well done (sincerely).

Great reporting and thank you for providing both sides of the argument.  Like most issues in politics, it sounds like this could be resolved by asking reasonable individuals to work together to build out the most effective program for the future.  If that was done without protecting sacred cows, or without trying to score a political win, then the department of education would have its key functions redistributed to other government departments already executing those tasks.  Both of their answers lead me to believe that streamlining government bureaucracy and improving the technology that functions the programs, that this could be done more efficiently and with less opportunity for future administrations to leverage the department for their own goals.  As an independent voter, who hates both parties equally, I wish we would see more efforts to streamline government functions and reduce the ability for any administration to leverage necessary government functions for short term political wins.

It sounds like this could be a deal between the two sides, they both want the same thing (children being functionally educated). Mr. Granville sounds like he'd be on board with closing the Department of Education if its duties are split between the DoJ and the Treasury so long as they're carried out in the proper manner. Since you guys have contact with both Mr. Granville and Dr. hess, I think it'd be wise thing to urge them to get together to discuss a plan of continuing the duties of the DoE (Mr. Granville's goal) through splitting it's duties to departments more suitable to actually carrying out those duties in a more efficient way (Dr. Hess' goal)? They both want the same thing. 

I’m a high school business teacher in New Jersey, and after reading both interviews - the critique of the Department of Education and the piece defending it - what stood out most is how little the federal department shapes actual classroom practice. State policy, local leadership, and instructional fundamentals determine whether students learn. That reality came through in both interviews.

The part I agree with most is the focus on fundamentals. States that have improved literacy and math did it through coherent, early, skill-focused instruction - work that happens close to kids, not in Washington.

To me, the important question is the one Hess suggested: What exactly would change tomorrow in a typical classroom if the department disappeared but its essential functions were reassigned? Most teachers I know would not notice a difference. That doesn’t inherently justify eliminating the department, but it does show how disconnected the current federal structure is from actual teaching and learning.

Ultimately, improving education is about instructional quality, family engagement, and consistent school-level execution. Those aren’t federal levers. They’re local ones. The interview captured that distinction clearly.

My biggest reservation about eliminating or downsizing the department is special education. Accommodations and compliance already involve complex legal and procedural responsibilities. If federal oversight were dissolved or scattered across multiple agencies, the risk is fragmentation: unclear guidance, slower enforcement, and inconsistent protections for students who depend on stability. Any structural change would have to ensure that IDEA, 504 accommodations, and related protections remain uniform, enforceable, and insulated from political swings.

Aside from that concern, the core point still holds: the quality of teaching, literacy instruction, and school culture is built locally. The federal department has almost no impact on those daily realities.