Donald Trump announced a bold campaign promise to voters. It would abolish the U.S. Department of Education and give states full control over education.
He did not say how he would abolish cabinet-level bodies, but he cannot do it alone and would be an extremely difficult task to accomplish. Congress is asked to approve the creation or abolishment of government agencies.
However, the incoming Trump administration, encouraged by the right-wing backlash against public schools that has intensified in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, is planning to change department budgets and policies in a way that will be felt in schools across the country, even if it does not abolish departments themselves. It is possible to change important parts of . The conservative manifesto Project 2025 also proposed abolishing the department, suggesting it is one area where much of the conservative movement aligns.
The Department of Education, which has about 4,000 employees, distributes federal funds to schools for specific programs that primarily serve low-income students and students with disabilities, and some policy directives. We manage the country’s student loan profile. It oversees several civil rights policies related to education, including Title IX.
Much of education in the United States is locally managed. Most funding comes from state and local sources, and state legislatures, education agencies, and school boards set most standards and policies for local schools.
Nevertheless, dismantling the faculty has been a topic for conservatives for years, signaling a desire to overhaul public education and, for some, deprioritize public schools.
“On one level, this is a flawed argument,” said Rick Hess, director of education policy research. “Even if we abolish the Department of Education, unless Congress acts to reduce or eliminate funding for various programs, In reality, very little has changed.” at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank.
But this is more than just symbolic. Achieving this would result in major changes in K-12 and higher education across the country.
Kelly Rosinger, an associate professor at Penn State’s School of Educational Policy, said the removal would send a “clear signal that we don’t value education in a democratic society.” But beyond mere signaling, “there can be very real harm, whether the Department of Education is present or not, and especially when it’s not,” she said.
Can it be done?
Dismantling the Department of Education has been a rallying cry among conservatives since it was created in 1979 by Democratic President Jimmy Carter, who disbanded what was then known as the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Carter’s successor, Ronald Reagan, called for the new department to be dismantled, but it was left in place.
Removing it has been a mainstay of conservative platforms ever since. Efforts to eliminate it usually don’t result in a vote.
Hess said that for Republicans, the department is an example of federal overreach and unnecessary bureaucracy. Teachers unions and education advocacy groups are also seen lobbying and creating a “VIP lane” to have a back channel to the federal government, he said.
“They consider this a serious violation of the constitutional framework,” Hess said. “They think they’re taking too much power away from communities and transferring it to bureaucrats in Washington.”
Rosinger pointed out that education is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution as a federal government power. But she said the federal government now has an established role to ensure students, regardless of their background, “have access to excellent educational opportunities.” It also plays a clear role in maintaining civil rights in schools.
Although conservatives who want to dismantle the Department of Education remain strong, it is unlikely that the agency will be abolished under the Trump administration unless the filibuster is abolished.
Senators can use the filibuster to delay bills indefinitely, effectively requiring 60 senators to vote in favor of a bill for it to pass in the U.S. Senate. Republicans will have 53 senators in 2025, not enough to pass the filibuster threshold.
Hess said some of the department’s programs are widely popular on both sides, including funding for low-income schools and students with disabilities. If the department were abolished but its components remained largely intact, the program could revert to other agencies and return to the structure it had before Carter created the department.
“The question of whether to abolish the ministry or not is interesting as a symbolic debate. It’s important because you can see what people think, but it doesn’t change the role of the federation in any significant way,” Hess said. . “What will change the role of the federal government is whether these programs themselves are cut or changed, or whether the rules are rewritten.”
If departments are cut and programs are moved elsewhere, Rosinger argues, institutional knowledge of how these programs operate will be lost. “This moves us away from a professional bureaucracy, a group of education experts who implement policies related to education,” she said.
Change happens beyond the sector itself.
Instead of a federal program, Republicans are proposing sending large amounts of money to states in the form of block grants with no strings attached, Hess said.
“Republicans want to significantly reduce the number of federal positions involved, and they want to significantly reduce the number of bureaucrats,” he said.
Criticisms of block grants include that they have minimal restrictions on how they can be used, so money doesn’t go where it’s needed, and that block grants don’t fully meet funding needs, so funding can be reduced and phased out. It is often said that it is a way to abolish it. They are intended to provide funding.
Hess said programs that don’t directly fund students, such as teacher training, may struggle.
Higher education may also be affected by changes. Biden’s student loan forgiveness and forgiveness plan could be scrapped under the Trump administration.
Policies aimed at promoting racial equity and eliminating sex discrimination seek to eliminate federal policies and policies regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion that it deems promote LGBTQ+ ideology. likely to be targeted by Republicans. For example, the Biden administration sought to expand Title IX to cover gender identity, but President Trump is likely to reverse it.
Project 2025 proposes a variety of ways to expand vouchers and parental oversight of their children’s education, which may be considered.
Rosinger said the project’s proposed policies would force the public to “make public education more capable of doing the job that federal, state, and local governments are supporting to justify further funding cuts to public schools and universities.” “This would lead to a loss of trust,” he said. .
