So Much for Abolishing the Department of Education
The Department of Education is getting a bigger budget, less than a year after President Donald Trump ordered the department's closure.
On the campaign trail in 2024, Donald Trump repeatedly pledged to close the Department of Education and return oversight of public schooling to the states.
Trump has a habit of throwing undercooked ideas around, but this wasn't one of them. Abolishing the Department of Education was part of the Republican Party's platform for the 2024 election, and was included in the goals of "Project 2025," the Heritage Foundation's blueprint for a conservative-controlled federal government in the wake of that election. That effort seemingly culminated with a March 2025 executive order signed by Trump that ordered Education Secretary Linda McMahon to take steps to close the department and return its functions to the states.
"I told Linda, 'Linda, I hope you do a great job in putting yourself out of a job.' I want her to put herself out of a job," Trump said at one point.
A year later, McMahon's job looks as secure as ever.
The omnibus appropriations bill that Trump signed on Tuesday to fund the federal government for the rest of the fiscal year directs $79 billion in taxpayer money to the Department of Education. That's a larger budget (by about $200 million) than the department had in fiscal year 2025, and it is $12 billion more than the Trump administration requested in its budget proposal for the year.
That's despite the fact that the department is in the process of offloading some of its programs to other parts of the federal government. In November, McMahon announced that the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education would be shifted to the Labor Department and the Indian Education Program would be moved to the Department of the Interior, among other things. Why does a smaller Department of Education require a bigger budget?
The bill Trump signed also includes language that prohibits parts of the department from being downsized or decentralized.
"None of the funds provided by this Act…may be used for any activity relating to implementing a reorganization that decentralizes, reduces the staffing level, or alters the responsibilities, structure, authority, or function" of the Education Department's budget office, the law reads.
The act also mandates that the department "shall support staffing levels necessary to fulfill its statutory responsibilities including carrying out programs, projects, and activities" funded by Congress.
Elsewhere, it also stipulates that "none of the funds made available in this Act may be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality" other than the ones indicated by the appropriations. That would seem to preempt the Trump administration's efforts to offload Education Department programs to other parts of the government.
None of that sounds like abolishing the Department of Education or returning its duties to the states. Indeed, even the attempt to shuffle the department's responsibilities to other parts of the federal government may now be stymied.
In one sense, this is a story about the obvious failure of Republicans in Congress and the Trump administration to follow through on a major promise made during and after the 2024 election.
It is also an illustration of the power of teachers' unions and other aspects of the educational bureaucratic complex, which were always going to fight to keep taxpayer dollars flowing.
And it is, ultimately, a lesson in the importance of making policy through Congress rather than relying on executive orders. Trump might have scored a temporary victory by signing that executive order in March of last year, but making serious changes in Washington will always require buy-in from lawmakers.
Several bills are floating around Congress that would significantly change or even abolish the Department of Education, but there seems to be limited support for those efforts. Rep. Thomas Massie's (R–Ky.) bill to terminate the department has 33 cosponsors, while Rep. David Rouzer's (R–N.C.) States' Education Reclamation Act has just a dozen cosponsors.
Without greater support in Congress, the effort to abolish the Department of Education was never very likely to succeed during Trump's term. Still, the department's bigger budget and the provisions restricting the already-limited efforts at diminishing the department's role are a disappointing reminder of the massive gap between the GOP's campaign trail rhetoric and the reality of what Republicans are delivering.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Classic Eric. Blame trump for the acts of congress if he signs. Blame Trump for a shut down of he doesnt. Ignore what trump said when he signed. Ignore what he is doing without congress.
Classic JessAss. Ignore the many things Trump has done without Congress that he wanted to do. Ignore the things he promised to do that he doesn't need Congress to do that he failed to carry through on because he doesn't really want to do them.
So he should have vetoed the bill?
Yes. So Eric and him can blame trump for the veto.
Im proud of you buddy. You didnt scream holocaust to make an argument. Still a retarded and pointless argument. But you've improved.
I mean you've proven time and time again you dont know how things work, especially our government. This post being more proof of it. You scream no kings while demanding he be a king and are too dumb to understand the contradiction.
Classic JesseAz. Ignore Trump's lies and failures and blame the messenger for pointing out said lies and failures.
You're no good at this rebuttal stuff, are you?
So Trump is in charge of the HoR? Are you fucking retarded...nvm, the answer is yes, yes you are. You idiots need to pick a fucking lane and decide if he's a dictator or not dictatoring enough.
He is still mad his ignorance on economics was proven to be legion and became like sarc screaming cultist instead of asking himself where his predictions went wrong. He wont get over it.
Reason gripes when Trump does thing that courts will not allow him to do. Now they are upset when he does NOT do things courts will not allow him to do.
I'm shocked! SHOCKED, I tell you, to discover that Trump tells lies and fails to carry through on his promises. To be fair, he got what he wanted by convincing enough voters to put him back into the White House by lying to them about his intentions. Now there's nothing whatever that those voters can do about it. Tough luck. There's a sucker born every minute.
Im actually shocked you didnt scream holocaust in a retarded argument.
He lied ?! *fainting couch*
Who, tell me, who could have seen this coming ? Surely no one could have known this would happen.
wow Eric you have so many fans lol ^^^ I love your it isn't happening fast enough!! attitude this time
So it's OK to hit the gas just before running off the end of a short pier, as long as you hit the brakes before hitting the water?
This is about trunk bears isn't it?
I applauded it isn't happening fast enough!!
Shall we recall Reason's opinion on the uselessness of DOGE early in the admin?
They disqualified themselves from the annals of competent argument.
Look. It didnt fix everything. He is acting as a king while not being a king. Ask congress for everything but at the same time ignore congress. The simpletons analysis of policy from TDS rage.
Being a TDS retard like above means having no consistency of argument.
I mean, there is consistency but unfortunately for them the consistency illustrates the lie.
Apparently, none of them ever heard of the fable of the boy who cried wolf.
yes I'm wondering more & more what I am doing here.
Comment section survives.
Trump does not have the authority to abolish any federal department.
Sadly china Tony has a more consistent argument than doc and stg. Pretty fucking sad.
Here's what I would do if I was paid to be a libertarian journalist: try to find out who in congress demanded that wording in the bill in order to vote for it.
What. You mean be a journalist? Look past more than irrational rage?
Man I'm so glad they rushed to get this passed, instead of shutting down the government. What a great deal.