Trump’s Push to Dismantle the Department of Education: A Necessary Reform or a Rash Decision?
In a bold and controversial move, former U.S. President Donald Trump has signed an executive order aiming to dismantle the Department of Education, fulfilling a long-standing promise to conservatives who view the agency as an inefficient bureaucratic entity. While critics argue that eliminating the department would be reckless and could harm disadvantaged students, proponents see it as an opportunity to remove ineffective federal oversight, cut wasted funds, and return control to states and local communities.
During the signing ceremony at the White House, Trump cited the Department of Education's "breath-taking failures," accusing it of wasting taxpayer dollars while failing to improve student outcomes. He argued that the United States spends more on education than most countries, yet its students continue to lag behind academically. According to the UNESCO Institute for Statistics, the U.S. allocates roughly 5.4% of its GDP to education, yet American students rank poorly in international academic assessments.
Trump's administration has also accused the Department of Education of promoting ideological agendas rather than focusing on core academic skills. White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Harrison Fields stated that "Democrats have allowed millions of illegal minors into the country, straining school resources and diverting focus from American students." Fields also blamed the rise of "anti-American CRT and DEI indoctrination" as further justification for dismantling the department.
Contrary to common misconceptions, the Department of Education does not operate U.S. schools or determine curricula. Instead, it administers student loans, manages programs for low-income students, and enforces federal education laws. Federal funding accounts for approximately 13% of K-12 school budgets, with the remaining funds coming from state and local taxes. Though its budget of $238 billion is less than 2% of federal spending, its influence is significant, especially for vulnerable students who rely on federal aid.
Since its creation in 1979 under President Jimmy Carter, the Department of Education has faced opposition from conservatives who see it as an unnecessary expansion of federal authority. President Ronald Reagan advocated for its abolition in the 1980s, though his efforts did not succeed. Today, Trump and his allies, including Republican Senator Bill Cassidy and Representative Thomas Massie, are reviving the push to eliminate the department, arguing that states and parents should have full control over education policy.
Although Trump has issued an executive order to facilitate the department's closure, completely abolishing it requires congressional approval. The U.S. Senate, where Republicans hold a slim 53-47 majority, would need 60 votes to pass such legislation—a significant challenge. Even if the department remains intact, Trump’s administration could severely reduce its funding and staff, mirroring efforts to downsize other federal agencies like the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
The plan has already sparked legal challenges from education advocates and civil rights organizations. The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) strongly opposes the move, arguing that dismantling the department would disproportionately harm low-income students, children with disabilities, and other vulnerable populations. "Trying to abolish it... sends a message that the president doesn’t care about opportunity for all kids," said AFT President Randi Weingarten. A February NPR/PBS News/Marist Poll found that over 60% of Americans strongly oppose eliminating the Department of Education.
Despite the political challenges, Trump remains committed to shifting education policy toward school choice. His administration supports expanding charter schools, private school vouchers, and faith-based education options. "I want every parent in America to be empowered to send their child to public, private, charter, or faith-based school of their choice," Trump stated, emphasizing his belief that universal school choice is the future of American education.
One potential consequence of closing the department is the redistribution of its responsibilities to other federal agencies. Programs like federal student loans and Pell Grants could be transferred to the Department of the Treasury, while special education funding might be managed by the Department of Health and Human Services. However, the executive order does not provide specifics on these transitions, leaving many unanswered questions about how students and schools will be affected.
Critics argue that dismantling the Department of Education would create chaos and widen existing educational disparities. Without federal oversight, they fear that states with lower funding and weaker education systems could struggle to maintain standards, potentially leaving marginalized students behind. Civil rights protections, such as Title IX enforcement and initiatives for disabled students, could also face uncertainty in the absence of federal oversight.
However, supporters of Trump's plan believe that removing federal bureaucracy will ultimately benefit students. They argue that local and state governments are better equipped to tailor education policies to meet the needs of their communities. Proponents also point to declining academic performance despite increased federal education spending. According to the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), eighth-grade math scores remain stagnant while reading scores have dropped. Former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has called for a "complete reset" of the system, arguing that the Department of Education has prioritized diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives over fundamental academic skills.
Trump's executive order to dismantle the Department of Education represents a significant shift in American education policy. While some see it as a necessary step toward eliminating wasteful spending and returning power to states, others warn that it could lead to greater inequality and disrupt essential programs for disadvantaged students. With legal battles and congressional opposition ahead, the future of federal education policy remains uncertain. Whether this move is remembered as a bold reform or a reckless gamble will ultimately depend on its long-term impact on America's students and schools.