President Trump Moves to Abolish the Department of Education with New Executive Order

President Donald Trump is set to implement a significant shift in the federal government’s approach to education by issuing an executive order aimed at abolishing the Department of Education. According to The Wall Street Journal, this move could come as early as Thursday and is part of Trump’s broader effort to decentralize education and reduce federal oversight. The order reportedly directs newly appointed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to take immediate steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education, based on "the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law." This would mark a major restructuring of federal education policy and aligns with Trump’s long-standing criticism of the department as ineffective and overly bureaucratic.

The Department of Education Under Scrutiny: A Failed Experiment?

The draft of the executive order criticized the federal government’s role in controlling education through programs and funding, calling it an "experiment" that has failed students, teachers, and families. The order argues that the Department of Education has become a conduit for "unaccountable bureaucrats" and has not delivered on its promise to improve educational outcomes. This sentiment is echoed by President Trump, who recently described the department as "a big con job" during a November speech. He emphasized the disparity between the high cost of education in the U.S. and its relatively low ranking among developed nations, stating, "We’re ranked No. 40, but we’re ranked No. 1 in one department: cost per pupil."

The Department of Education has already taken steps to align with Trump’s vision. Just this week, it canceled $350 million in contracts and grants for programs deemed "woke," signaling a shift away from what the administration views as unnecessary or divisive expenditures. Secretary McMahon, who assumed her position recently, has been a vocal supporter of Trump’s plan to dismantle the department. In a letter to Democratic members of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, McMahon expressed her full agreement with the plan, stating that returning education to the states is where it "belongs." With approximately 4,500 employees, the Department of Education is the smallest cabinet-level agency, but its elimination would still have significant implications for federal education policy.

McMahon’s Vision for Education: Empowering Parents and Focusing on Core Subjects

Under McMahon’s leadership, the Department of Education is operating on three core convictions. First, she believes that parents should be the primary decision-makers in their children’s education. Second, she argues that taxpayer-funded education should focus on "meaningful learning in math, reading, science, and history" rather than "divisive DEI programs and gender ideology." Finally, she emphasizes the importance of aligning post-secondary education with workforce needs to ensure students are prepared for well-paying careers. These principles reflect a broader conservative critique of modern education, which Trump and McMahon argue has strayed from its core mission.

The department is already taking proactive steps to reduce its workforce ahead of potential cuts. Employees are being offered incentives of up to $25,000 to resign or retire by Monday evening, as part of a broader effort to downsize. This move suggests that the administration is preparing for a significant reduction in federal involvement in education, even before the executive order is officially issued. For supporters of Trump’s plan, this is a long-overdue step toward decentralizing education and returning control to states and local communities. Critics, however, worry that abolishing the Department of Education could lead to inconsistency in educational standards and reduced accountability for schools.

The Impact of Closing the Department of Education

The closure of the Department of Education would have far-reaching consequences, both practical and symbolic. Proponents argue that eliminating the department would reduce bureaucratic red tape and allow states to tailor education policies to their specific needs. This could lead to more innovative approaches to learning and a greater emphasis on local priorities. However, opponents warn that the loss of federal oversight could exacerbate inequality in education, particularly in underserved communities that rely on federal funding and support. For example, programs aimed at supporting low-income students, students with disabilities, and English-language learners could be at risk.

In addition to these practical concerns, the abolition of the Department of Education would send a powerful message about the role of the federal government in education. Trump and McMahon’s vision of education as a state and local issue reflects a broader ideological shift toward limited federal intervention. While this approach resonates with many conservatives, it has sparked fierce opposition from educators, lawmakers, and advocacy groups who believe that the federal government has a critical role to play in ensuring equitable access to quality education for all students.

The Future of Education in a Post-Federal Era

As the Department of Education moves closer to closure, the focus is shifting to what a post-federal education system might look like. Under McMahon’s leadership, the department is already prioritizing efforts to empower parents and refocus on core subjects. The cancellation of $350 million in "woke" spending and the launch of a new portal for reporting discrimination (dubbed "ENDDEI") are concrete steps toward achieving these goals. These actions suggest that the department is committed to advancing Trump’s vision, even as it prepares for its own eventual dissolution.

Despite the uncertainty surrounding the future of federal education policy, one thing is clear: the Trump administration is determined to make its mark on education. By abolishing the Department of Education and shifting control to the states, the administration is betting that a decentralized approach will lead to better outcomes for students and families. While this strategy has its champions, it also raises important questions about equity, accountability, and the role of the federal government in ensuring that all students have access to a quality education. As the executive order moves forward, these debates are likely to intensify, shaping the future of education in America for years to come.