Yesterday marked the end of an era, with President Donald Trump signing an executive order calling on the US Secretary of Education to shut her own department down. Of course, and like many of Trump’s previous proclamations, this one is questionable in its Constitutionality—only Congress, which created both the first Department of Education in 1867 and its modern incarnation in 1980, legally has the power to shutter the agency or cut off the funding it provides.
Secretary of Education—and former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment-turned-Trump-megadonor—Linda McMahon tried to soften the blow of Trump’s order, releasing a statement saying that, “Closing the Department does not mean cutting off funds from those who depend on them—we will continue to support K-12 students, students with special needs, college student borrowers, and others who rely on essential programs. We’re going to follow the law and eliminate the bureaucracy responsibly by working through Congress to ensure a lawful and orderly transition.”
McMahon’s message might seem reassuring, but it raises the question: If people are depending on the DOE for essential resources and services, what’s the point of shutting it down?
The point, I would argue, is to shrink and stymy what’s left of the federal role in education, even beyond what DOGE has already cut. Those cuts will make it easier to offer tax cuts to billionaires. But education accounts for only 4 percent of the federal budget. So, it’s important to consider what else is at stake with this change.
Part of this is likely about profit. Closing the DOE will make public education shittier, especially for students with disabilities and students from low-income families and families of color. As it gets harder to access federal funding and legal protections, more of these families will likely opt for private schools, charter schools, or homeschooling. All of which operate—particularly in the context of state voucher programs—to funnel more money into private companies' hands.
Part of this is also about propaganda. Shifting and shrinking the federal role in education will likely make it harder for students to get the financial support they need to go to college and pay off their student loans, to the point where fewer students may end up getting degrees. Of course, this administration—with its "merit" obsession—will likely imply that students don't "deserve" a college education if they can't figure out how to pay for it. But, given how this administration traffics in disinformation, their real goal is likely to keep more people from going to college and developing the critical thinking skills that make it easier to see through their lies.
Relatedly, part of this move is also about protecting privilege and power. Without the research arm of the Department of Education, it will be harder to see the harm the administration’s cuts are causing. It will be harder to show how their actions are increasing inequalities, making it easier for them to claim that we no longer need “DEI.”
To that end, part of this move is also about punishment. It’s about keeping at least some federal funding available as a cudgel to keep schools and colleges in line. That money, or whatever’s left of it after Congressional budget cuts, will likely shift to another government agency. But schools and universities—already reeling from cuts to medical research and other research funding—will be desperate to chase it wherever it lands. Even if that means sacrificing the people and the principles at the core of their missions and their essential work.
…
Of course, rolling over isn’t the only option, and it risks emboldening the administration to be even more reckless in wielding its power. Resistance remains another option. And on that front, one small step you can take is to join me in signing this open letter, which currently has more than 1,800 signatures, and which affirms the value of US higher education and the values on which it stands.