Staff Editorial

Since the inauguration of President Trump, the Department of Education has seen numerous changes. These include dismantling Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies (DEI), increasing funding for charter schools, addressing LGBTQIA+ issues in athletics and schools and canceling around $1 billion of grants used for educational research and teacher training.

These abrupt changes which have happened in less than a month of the Trump administration have caused communal paranoia about the future of the Department of Education (DOE). This fear comes directly from the words of Republicans, like Vivek Ramaswamy, who said, “Let’s shut down the head of the snake, the Department of Education…Take that $80 billion, put it in the hands of parents across this country.”

This idea of “shutting down” the DOE has been around since its creation in 1979 by Republicans, but the support for it has only recently grown. However, even with the full support of President Trump, it would take an act of Congress to dismantle it. Dismantle— but not completely get rid of.

The goal of eliminating the DOE is to move its responsibilities to other departments. For example, in the DOE there is the Office of Civil Rights that assures equal access to education and oversees discrimination concerns. This could be moved to the Department of Justice. However, that would only be the policies within that office deemed necessary by the government, which raises concerns about potential partisan bias in defining what is considered “necessary.”

Another area of confusion is the motivation behind the dismantling of the DOE. There is no clear-cut reason, some arguing that there are too many wasteful programs that taxpayer money is going into or that it has become too “woke”— a slang term used more frequently in politics without a clear definition. Others want education to go back to states and parents, but that creates a false picture.

Although the name Department of Education might suggest that the federal government has control over educational policies and curriculum, it does not. This confusion has widened support for the DOE’s closure despite it being false. During a campaign for his presidency, President Trump has continued this false rhetoric by saying “drain the education swamp and stop the abuse of your taxpayer dollars to indoctrinate America’s youth.” The DOE has simply no control over curriculum, so any problems with what is taught will not change.

The Constitution states that whatever power is not expressly given to the federal government will go to the states. With no specific mention of education, that means the states do have control over the curriculum, not the federal government.

That is why teacher license requirements, years of a mandatory course or funding is different in every state. Specific partisan issues would have to be argued over at the state level, as dismantling the DOE will not change any of this. 

Placing its duties in other departments also poses the risk of overburdening those departments. It would require more staffing and systems which goes against President Trump’s aims to cut down on staffing and costs of the federal government. It will require a lot of time and effort to establish new oversight policies and compliance with the new duties given to these departments. All of this can simply be avoided by keeping the DOE.

What these other departments will have to take over will be the DOE’s two main purposes: funding education and enforcing educational laws Congress has passed. These laws include Title I funding for impoverished schools and Title IX which deals with gender equality in sports. Within these laws, there are several funding grants that could be taken away if the department is broken into pieces. There is no guarantee what will be kept and what will be taken away.

However, acts of Congress can only be taken away by Congress. The $1 billion in grant cuts by the Trump administration was not specifically delegated by Congress for the DOE to do, allowing for the president to get rid of it. However, Title I funding for lower-income districts and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) funding for students with disabilities would be difficult to cut due to bipartisan support for it within Congress. 

The DOE manages college financial aid, federal student loans, collects data on colleges and students. All of these play a critical role in not only educators’ lives but also students. Seniors applying for college will likely also fill out the Free Application for Federal Student Aid or FAFSA which helps colleges determine the financial need of their students. 

The widely-known duties of the DOE are most likely not the ones to be cut. Those are the policies that have bipartisan support and are highly favorable to the American people. A good predictor of what is to come is to look at what has already changed in the DOE.

An issue less discussed is the current cut of funding to educational research which poses a lot of concerns. It does not only just affect research on student successes and demographics but also university-run research facilities. Researcher Rick Huganir discovered a gene called SYNGAP1. Around 1% of children with intellectual disabilities have a mutation of this gene and research on the development of drugs to treat these children is almost entirely reliant on the cut National Institute of Health grants. 

Funding cuts for grants like this point to the biggest and most real concern facing the DOE. It is easier for the government to cut programs that people aren’t aware of. These cuts are happening now and more frequently. Lack of funding is more likely to be the true end to the DOE without it being dismantled.

While legislation to ban the DOE is in Congress now, it would require a majority to pass and past similar legislation has failed every time. What is more concerning is the cuts that are happening currently and behind the scenes that could prevent advancement in education and medicine to help children. 

Being aware of these policy cuts and writing to your representatives is the best way to bring about awareness and action. While current spending cuts are harmful, the dismantling of the DOE remains a threat to American education.

Staff Editorial written by Lucy Kalkowski, after intense Network Staff discussion.