Feb 7, 2025 Story by: Editor
President Donald Trump reaffirmed his intention on Tuesday to scale back the U.S. Department of Education, indicating that he has urged Secretary-Designate Linda McMahon to “put herself out of a job.” Trump emphasized his commitment to shifting educational oversight to the states and stated that he would collaborate with Congress and teachers’ unions to accomplish this goal.
“I believe strongly in school choice, but in addition to that, I want the states to run schools, and I want Linda to put herself out of a job,” Trump stated during an Oval Office press briefing.
While he has not yet issued an executive order to eliminate the department, a move he pledged during his campaign, he suggested that the process would require Congressional involvement. When asked about the possibility of an executive order, Trump responded, “I think I’d work with Congress … We’d have to work with the teachers union because the teachers union is the only one that is opposed to it.”
McMahon, a former professional wrestling executive and small-business advocate, is still awaiting confirmation for her role.
Concerns Over Federal Funding and Responsibilities
The proposal to dismantle the Department of Education has raised concerns about the fate of critical federal programs and billions of dollars in funding. The department oversees financial aid programs, grants for disadvantaged students, and civil rights protections that impact millions of students.
Currently, the department supports K-12 education for more than 50 million students across 130,000 public and private schools. Additionally, over 13 million post-secondary students rely on federal grants, loans, and work-study assistance.
Student loan programs are also under the department’s purview. Critics, particularly conservatives, have expressed dissatisfaction with the student loan system, and Republican-led states have successfully challenged the Biden administration’s attempts to cancel substantial portions of federal student debt. According to the Education Department, the federal government is owed over $1.5 trillion in student loans by more than 43 million borrowers.
California’s Dependence on Federal Education Funds
California, as the state receiving the most Title I grants, has a significant stake in the Department of Education’s future. According to the California Department of Education, the state receives over $2.1 billion in Title I grants to support students in poverty, with $417 million allocated to Los Angeles Unified, the country’s second-largest school district.
Furthermore, more than 200,000 low-income students in the California State University system depend on $1 billion in federal Pell Grants annually to afford tuition. At the University of California, over 80,000 undergraduate students received approximately $454 million in Pell Grants during the 2023-24 academic year.
Despite this reliance, Trump and many Republicans argue that the federal department is inefficient and believe education should be managed at the state and local levels.
Opposition to Eliminating the Department
Critics have vowed to resist any executive order aimed at dismantling the Department of Education.
“If it became a reality, Trump’s power grab would steal resources for our most vulnerable students, explode class sizes, cut job training programs, make higher education more expensive and out of reach for middle-class families, take away special education services for students with disabilities, and gut student civil rights protections,” National Education Association President Becky Pringle stated Monday. “Americans did not vote for, and do not support, ending the federal government’s commitment to ensuring equal educational opportunities for every child.”
Congressional Authority and Legislative Challenges
The effort to dissolve the department would require Congressional approval, making the process highly complex. The department’s functions impact every school district, college, and university that receives federal funding.
Questions remain about whether Trump has the legal authority to unilaterally eliminate a department created by Congress or withhold funding approved by lawmakers. Additionally, transferring the department’s functions to another branch of government could present legal hurdles. Given that Republicans hold only narrow majorities in Congress and could face a Democratic filibuster in the Senate, passing such legislation would be challenging.
Michael Petrilli, president of the right-leaning Thomas B. Fordham Institute, described the idea of dismantling the department as “pretty hypothetical.”
“It would take an act of Congress to dismantle the department, and Republicans simply do not have the votes, let alone the fact that it would be an unpopular move in many Republican districts,” Petrilli noted.
In 2023, 60 Republicans—including five of 11 from California—joined 205 Democrats in voting against an amendment that would have signaled Congressional support for eliminating the department’s authority over K-12 programs. The amendment, which was seen as a potential step toward dismantling the department, ultimately failed.
A Longstanding Debate Over Federal Education Policy
The debate over the federal government’s role in education is not new. The Department of Education was originally established in 1867 under President Andrew Johnson but was dissolved a year later, with its responsibilities absorbed by other federal agencies. In 1979, Democratic President Jimmy Carter successfully pushed Congress to reestablish the department as a standalone entity. However, his Republican successor, Ronald Reagan, attempted to abolish it, though he was unsuccessful.
Efforts to eliminate the department have persisted over the years, including a bill introduced last month by Rep. David Rouzer (R-N.C.).
Rick Hess, a senior fellow and director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, argued that eliminating or downsizing the department would be “perfectly reasonable” due to concerns over wasteful spending, political favoritism toward teachers’ unions, and misplaced responsibilities. Hess and Petrilli have questioned whether educational bureaucrats should oversee a trillion-dollar student loan portfolio instead of financial experts at the Treasury Department, an idea supported by Project 2025, a conservative policy framework developed in part by members of Trump’s first administration.
However, Liz Sanders, a spokesperson for the California Department of Education, voiced concerns about the potential impact of eliminating the department.
“We are incredibly concerned about what seems to be a thoughtless approach to changing essential federal programs that support our kids every day—and support our most vulnerable kids every day. We’re talking about essential academic support services,” Sanders said. “We want to make sure that these services are able to have a level of continuity for our educators and our families and our students. Simply a one-sentence hatchet job is not how we should make changes that impact our kids.”
Awaiting Clarity on Trump’s Plans
Education leaders are awaiting more concrete details on Trump’s strategy.
“If this is all about cutting costs and programs, then the move would have a huge impact,” said Pedro Noguera, dean of the USC Rossier School of Education. “If it’s about moving tasks and the people carrying them out into other agencies, then it’s hard to see costs being reduced.
“It’s hard to know exactly what’s going to happen or why it’s happening because they haven’t really been real clear about the strategy, if there is one.” Source: Yahoo News
