Last March, there was considerable excitement about eliminating the US Department of Education. As well there should have been. Since the department was born in 1980, it has taken taxpayer money, burned a bunch of it in bureaucracy, and sent the remains back to states, districts, and schools with strings attached. It has had no clear, sustained, positive effect on educational outcomes, and it has long bungled running student loans. It is also unconstitutional: the Constitution gives the federal government only specific, enumerated powers, and authority to govern in education is not among them.
Despite the worthiness of the cause, the energy behind it eventually subsided. Budget impasses, war, and immigration policy dominated headlines, and downsizing efforts got bogged down in court battles. Also, the Trump administration has said that ultimately, Congress, which created the department, would have to eliminate it. The administration has greatly downsized department staffing and is moving daily operations of several parts to other agencies, but the department and the programs it runs remain.
With national attention on ending the department waning and developments around the effort proliferating, it is easy to lose track of what is happening. I have written occasional updates on the status of department elimination, but it seems like the topic could use regular status reports. That is what “End Fed Ed Watch” will provide. On the second Tuesday of each month, if anything new has happened in Congress, the administration, or courts over the previous month, I will update the sections below. If nothing new has occurred, I will indicate no change. I will also include new Cato analyses on the subject.
Congress
There are currently six bills to eliminate the department:
The appropriations bill passed last week ignored the Trump administration’s proposal to cut the Education Department’s budget by $12 billion, instead increasing it by $217 million. It also contains language that could be interpreted as prohibiting interagency agreements (IAAs) to move daily responsibility for programs out of Education into departments such as Health and Human Services. Such an interpretation appears to be incorrect. Sec. 512 seems to prohibit simply transferring money from Education to other agencies but not moving money to another agency to handle the daily administration of programs, with Education ultimately in charge. Sec. 514 suggests that Education need only consult with the House and Senate appropriations committees within 15 days of executing IAAs and provide written notice within 10 days.
The Administration
The Trump administration continues to promote eliminating the Education Department and returning control of education to the states, and is moving responsibilities via IAA. It has also encouraged states to seek greater flexibility in the use of federal funds and accountability mechanisms under existing law. So far, Iowa has been granted greater funding flexibility, and several other states have applied for various waivers.
On the flip side, the department is heavily involved in civil rights actions against colleges and school districts and is promoting conservative-leaning history and civics teaching. The administration has also hailed increases in federal funding for charter schools and created a “compact” to get colleges to trade autonomy for federal funding.
Importantly, civil rights enforcement is a constitutional responsibility of the federal government, but the administration has appeared to exceed that with such demands as ideological balance on college faculties.
Courts
The following are cases directly related to the Trump administration’s efforts to downsize or eliminate the Department of Education:
Cato Work
Cato Center for Educational Freedom scholars continually make the case for ending the Department of Education and most federal involvement in education. What follows is work from the previous month:
- “Cutting Federal Aid for K‑12 Education”: A major update of the K‑12 education page at Cato’s Downsizing Government. It includes the latest developments in federal K‑12 policy, a lot of history, spending data, and lays out mediocre, corresponding academic performance. It also explains the value of federalism in education.
- “The Trans Athlete Question Requires Subsidiarity. The Trump Administration Just Did the Opposite”: This Cato@Liberty post examines a way in which the Trump administration is moving away from devolving power: transgender athlete rules.
Going Forward
While the goal of End Fed Ed Watch is to capture all the latest developments on eliminating the Department of Education, we may miss some. If you are aware of anything missing or incorrect, please contact Center for Educational Freedom Director Neal McCluskey at nmccluskey@cato.org.