The Future of the Department of Education – What It Means for States and Schools

The U.S. Department of Education has long played a critical role in shaping national education policies, distributing federal funding, and ensuring equal access to quality education. However, President Donald Trump’s administration is now preparing an executive order that could lead to its elimination, fulfilling one of his key campaign promises. If successful, this move would shift education oversight entirely to state and local governments, a change that has sparked both strong support and concern across the country.

Supporters of the proposal, including Senator Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), argue that education decisions should be made closer to home, where state and local leaders better understand the needs of their communities. “There are lots of opportunities for us to streamline what the Department of Education does and really return that control to the states and school boards because that is really where it belongs,” said Ricketts. Proponents believe that reducing federal oversight could lead to more tailored, efficient education policies that align with state-specific needs.

However, opponents warn that dismantling the Department of Education could come at a steep cost—particularly for schools that rely on federal funding for essential programs. The Department of Education currently serves over 50 million students in 18,000 districts nationwide. Federal funds support initiatives like Title I reading and math programs, special education services, and resources for homeless students. Without these funds, districts may face financial shortfalls that could lead to cuts in critical services.

Brent Hoesing, Superintendent of the Lewis Central Community School District, expressed concerns about the financial burden states would inherit if federal education funding disappears. “A school our size, if you are going to cut a million dollars or a million plus out of our budget, then you will see services for kids significantly change unless the state steps in,” Hoesing explained. If states are forced to compensate for lost federal funding, local taxpayers may ultimately bear the cost through increased taxes.

The White House has not yet finalized the details of the executive order, and President Trump would still need congressional approval to formally dissolve the Department of Education. Past efforts to eliminate or restructure the agency have failed to gain the necessary legislative support. As the debate continues, schools, state governments, and communities across the nation are preparing for the potential impact—whether that means gaining more control over education policy or scrambling to replace vital funding.

While education has historically been a state and local responsibility, federal involvement has helped bridge gaps in resources and access. If the Department of Education is eliminated, the future of public education funding, civil rights enforcement, and national academic standards remains uncertain. The decision could redefine the role of government in education for generations to come.