The Trump administration's proposal to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education has sparked significant debate across the nation. According to recent polls, 61% of likely voters oppose using an executive order to abolish the department. Despite this opposition, the administration continues to push forward with plans to close parts or all of the agency. However, any such move cannot occur without congressional approval, adding a layer of complexity to the administration's ambitions.
The Department of Education, established in 1979, plays a crucial role in the U.S. educational landscape. It underwrites student loans, disburses college aid, and ensures equal access to education for all students. With a student loan program valued at $1.6 trillion and more than 42 million borrowers holding federal student loan debt, the potential dissolution of the department raises questions about how these responsibilities would be managed in its absence.
The Treasury Department is a likely candidate to take over the task of distributing student financial aid funds if the Education Department were to be dismantled. However, this transition could cause significant disruptions to the nation's $1.6 trillion student loan program, as noted by education experts and policy analysts.
"It wouldn't be an easy process to make that transfer," said Karen McCarthy, highlighting the potential challenges of reallocating the department's functions.
In addition to managing student loans, the Department of Education funds various programs, including federal student aid for higher education, subsidies for elementary and secondary schools serving low-income families, and special education programs.
"Most of the Department's budget funds federal student aid for higher education, subsidies for elementary and secondary schools with large shares of students from low-income families, and special education programs for children with special needs," stated Brett House.
Critics of the department argue that its one-size-fits-all nature can be improved upon. They suggest that redistributing funding programs to state and local agencies could better address diverse educational needs.
"If such a redistribution takes place, this will likely improve, as opposed to hurt, learning as state and locals are better suited to address their heterogeneous needs," Philipson remarked.
Despite these arguments, concerns remain about the impact of scaling down or eliminating the department. The Institute of Education Sciences, the research arm of the department, has already experienced significant cutbacks under Elon Musk's DOGE team, with 169 contracts canceled.
"Sensible public policy for education depends on strong research and basic collection and availability of data on institutional performance and student outcomes," emphasized Sameer Gadkaree. "Without it, Americans will be in the dark on shifts in debt, student success, and how public dollars should be invested to increase effectiveness."
President Trump has made it clear that he envisions a future where his nominee for education secretary, Linda McMahon, would effectively dismantle the department.
"I want Linda to put herself out of a job," Trump stated, underscoring his commitment to reducing federal involvement in education.
However, experts warn that while some programs might be transferred to other agencies, there is no guarantee they would continue at the same scale or impact.
"While some of the Department's funding programs may be transferred to other agencies, there is no guarantee that they would be continued at the same scale or impact," Brett House cautioned.