Trump is unlikely to actually eliminate the Education Department, experts say • New Jersey Monitor

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump’s promise to abolish the U.S. Department of Education is far easier said than done.

As Trump seeks to redefine U.S. education policy, complex logistics, bipartisan congressional approval and realignment of federal programs make dismantling the department a challenging — not impossible — task.

It’s an initiative that experts say is unlikely to gain traction in Congress and, if implemented, would create obstacles to how Trump plans to implement the rest of his sweeping education agenda.

“It’s hard for me to imagine how you can get a bill like this through Congress that would sort of defund the agency or dismantle it,” said Derek Black, an education law and policy expert and law professor at the University of South Carolina Joseph F. Rice School of Law, said States Newsroom.

“What’s easier to see is that maybe you give the agency less money, maybe you shrink their footprint, maybe we have a (civil rights office) that still enforces all of these laws, but not as many employees as they have.” Now they have fewer employees,” added Black, who directs the school’s Constitutional Law Center.

What does the department do?

Education in the United States is decentralized and the federal Department of Education has no influence over public school curricula. Much of the funding and oversight of schools occurs at the state and local levels.

Still, the department has influence through funding a variety of programs, such as those for low-income school districts and special education, as well as through the administration of federal student aid.

According to Rachel Perera, a fellow in governance studies at the Brown Center on Education Policy at the Brookings Institution, the department’s shutdown would have to result in these programs being dismantled or assigned to other federal agencies to manage.

Perera, who studies inequality in K-12 education, expressed concern about whether other departments would receive additional resources and staff to take on significantly more portfolios of work if the Education Department’s current programs were transferred to them.

Senator Mike Rounds introduced a bill last week that would seek to abolish the department and transfer existing programs to other federal agencies.

In a statement, the South Dakota Republican said, “The federal Department of Education has never educated a single student, and it is long past time to end this bureaucratic department that does more harm than good.”

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 proposed a detailed plan for dissolving the department by restructuring existing programs to other agencies and eliminating those programs the project deemed “ineffective or duplicative.”

Although Trump has repeatedly disavowed the conservative draft, some former members of his administration helped shape it.

The agenda also calls for restoring state and local control over education funding, noting that “as Washington begins to limit its interventions in education, existing funds should be directed to states as grants over which they have full control, so that states “May provide federal funds toward a legitimate educational purpose under state law.”

Title I, one of the department’s most important funding programs, provides billions of dollars to school districts with high proportions of students from low-income families.

Black pointed to an entire “regulatory regime” revolving around these funds.

“This regime can’t just disappear unless the Title I funds disappear too, which could happen, but if you think about the Title I funds – our rural states, our red states – are just as much if “Not even more dependent on this money than other states,” he said. “The idea that we would take money away from these schools — I don’t think there’s actually any political will for that.”

“Inherent logical inconsistencies”

Trump recently nominated Linda McMahon — a co-chair of his transition team, head of the Small Business Administration during his first term and former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment — as his nominee for education secretary.

If confirmed, she will play a critical role in implementing his education plans, which include promoting universal school choice and parental rights, moving education “back to the states,” and ending “wokeness” in education .

Trump is threatening to cut federal funding for schools that teach “critical race theory,” “gender ideology” or “other inappropriate racial, sexual or political content about our children,” according to his plan.

On the other hand, he wants to increase funding for states and school districts that adhere to certain policies.

This list includes districts that: Adopt a Parental Bill of Rights that includes full curriculum transparency and some form of universal school choice; Abolish “teacher tenure” for grades K-12 and introduce “performance pay”; Let parents directly elect school principals. and dramatically reduce the number of school administrators.

But basing funding decisions on district-level policy decisions would require the kind of federal commitment to education that Trump advocates against.

Perera described seeing “inherent logical inconsistencies” in Trump’s education plan.

While he talks about dismantling the department and sending education “back to the states,” he “also talks about using the department’s powers to punish school districts for ‘political indoctrination,'” she said.

“He can’t do that if you eliminate the federal role in K-12 schools,” she said.

Last updated on November 25, 2024, 11:23 am