Posted on 03/20/2025 12:12:17 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
The U.S. Department of Education will be "much smaller" but not eliminated by the executive order President Donald Trump is signing, according to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt.
The department will continue to administer college student loans and Pell grants, enforce civil rights laws, and provide funding for low-income students and special education, Leavitt told reporters, The Guardian reported.
"The Department of Education will be much smaller than it is today," Leavitt commented, adding that "any critical functions" will remain after Trump signs the order at an event planned for 4 p.m. ET.
"When it comes to student loans and Pell grants, those will still be run out of the Department of Education. But we don't need to be spending more than $3 trillion over the course of a few decades on a department that's clearly failing in its initial intention to educate our students."
Trump and his allies have often called to dismantle the department, but doing so would require an act of Congress. It has not been made clear if the votes would be there to get rid of the department altogether.
Trump has also suggested that he could get enough votes in Congress to close the department but claimed teachers' unions are blocking the plan.
The White House said in a fact sheet on Wednesday that Trump would be signing an executive order directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to "take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure (of) the Department of Education and return education authority to the States, while continuing to ensure the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely."
The order will also mandate that programs or activities that receive remaining funding through the Department of Education are not to "advance DEI or gender ideology."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
"I think it's important to note what the Department of Education does not do," she said. "The Department of Education doesn't educate anyone. It doesn't hire teachers. It doesn't establish curriculum. It doesn't hire school boards or superintendents. It really is to help provide funding so that the states themselves can help with their own programs. But that creativity and innovation has to come from the state level."
That’s a shame. It should not exist.
They can’t shut it down completely without an act of both houses of Congress and that won’t happen. Wise up.
That is why we need the porta-potty plan.
We need hundreds of porta-potties that say “Department of Education” on them.
Some can sit at the bottom of the steps of Congress.
Some can be delivered to leftist judges.
Some can be delivered to teacher’s union officials.
That is a Department of Education that serves a critical function—preserving precious bodily fluids!
agreed there should be some federal oversight, but not centralized indoctrination...
reward education systems doing well, support those that need help to improve, dismantle those that refuse to change.
Since World War II the United States has erected a vast centrally planned government and economy bloated with a myriad of layers of government dependency thinking that it was all okay since it was run by true blue Americans. Then the marxists took over and discovered to their amazement that the infrastructure of control was already in place thanks to people like Saint Jimmy Carter, Saint Lyndon Johnson and many others.
That was the original plan.
It failed.
They should not get a do-over.
I just wrote on Facebook (mostly to irk my liberal friends) that abolishing it completely can wait until 2029 when President Vance gets both the House and Senate to work on it.
“and provide funding for low-income students”
Why? My family was low income; no way they could pay a penny toward college. I worked. So can these folks — or don’t go to college and find another line of work.
“Lie, lie, lie
It does all that...”
No, it does none of that. Do you know who Leavitt is?
It takes an act of congress-literally-to completely shut/get rid of it, and congress will need to be convinced to do that, which takes time-and a tuneup or two. Instant gratification is not possible after 30+ years of corruption...
“agreed there should be some federal oversight”
This.
This, right here. This is why we can never get rid of progressivism.
It’s because we have progressives in our ranks, propping up for the deep state.
Trump might as well have not even bothered to do the executive order at all. Complete waste of time. The next President, with support from people such as yourself, will reconstitute this beast as if nothing ever happened at all today.
It’s heartbreaking.
i know state responsibility in education is preferable, but who makes sure the standards of learning are adequately met. perhaps oversight was not the right word… state run education systems can be corrupted too.
I like your “education” plan, cgbg!
They treat us taxpayers like excrement.
Fair is fair!
The idea of “standards” in this particular category (education) is a smokescreen fostered and promoted by centralized planners who have absolutely no concept of humanity.
These are real life human beings, albeit children, not some chess pieces on a chess board that can be moved around and allocated. It is horrendous to look at humans this way.
Realistically speaking, the Department of Education at the federal level is not the only one that needs to be abolished. All 50 of the Departments of Education in each and every state should also be abolished.
The problem is this: If government controls education, then government gets the luxury of deciding its own future representatives, not the people.
It is the ultimate conflict of interest. I’ll repeat that. If government controls education, then government gets the luxury of deciding its own future representatives, not the people.
Government controlled education is an affront to everything the U.S. stands for and an affront to our Founding Fathers.
As to corruption, if there is only one education system, as the Department of Education establishes, then if one system is corrupted then the entire U.S. is corrupt.
If the 50 states control education, and it turns out at some point 5 are corrupt but 45 are not corrupt, then 90% of the children are learning in non-corrupt environments.
Ideally education would be county-level and no higher. The U.S. has 3043 counties/parrishes. You could have hundreds of the corrupted, which would leave the vast majority intact. And this is so close to the parents in each individual area, the parents actually then have some chance of having a parental say and parental guidance.
The smaller the better is resoundingly the better option in this scenario. It benefits local parents and prevents widespread corruption. But the fact remains: If government controls education, then government gets the luxury of deciding its own future representatives, not the people. They can indoctrinate whom they want in whatever way they want. That is not freedom.
well said, and with no personal attacks... i can abide by this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.