America Just Gave Up on Its Most Vulnerable Kids
Trump’s move to dismantle the Department of Education isn’t about efficiency—it’s about leaving millions of kids behind.
Imagine if your boss, fed up with customer complaints, solved the problem by eliminating customer service altogether. That’s essentially what Donald Trump is proposing for America’s education system. In a move straight out of the “If it ain’t broke, break it anyway” school of governance, Trump has signed an executive order to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education (DOE)—a campaign promise rooted in ideology, not evidence.
Sure, the department’s closure still needs congressional approval, and yes, the House already rejected a similar attempt last year. But the symbolic weight of this executive order shouldn’t be dismissed. Because this isn’t just about bureaucracy. It’s about belief—specifically, the belief that the federal government should stop trying to make education more equal.
This is not a debate over red tape. It’s a battle over who deserves opportunity.
What Happens When You Defund the Umpire?
Let’s be honest: most Americans don’t wake up thinking about the Department of Education.
It doesn’t set your kid’s math curriculum. It doesn’t decide whether Mrs. Thompson assigns homework. But it does one very important thing: it makes sure someone is watching the scoreboard.
The DOE manages $1.6 trillion in student loans and distributes billions in federal aid through programs like Title I (for low-income students) and IDEA (for students with disabilities).
It enforces civil rights in education. It stops states from quietly rationing special ed slots like they’re backstage passes. It ensures that kids who don’t speak English—or don’t have access to clean clothes or regular meals—still have a shot.
So what happens when you take that away? States don’t suddenly become more efficient or innovative. They become unaccountable.
This isn’t about federal overreach—it’s about preventing underhandedness. When Texas illegally capped special ed enrollment in 2018, it wasn’t the state that admitted wrongdoing. It was the DOE that spent 15 months investigating and forcing reform. Without a federal watchdog, how many more states will quietly shove the most vulnerable kids to the back of the line?
The Players and Their Incentives: Follow the Money (or the Lack Thereof)
Let’s not kid ourselves: Trump’s education play isn’t about policy outcomes, it’s about political branding.
The Department of Education has long been a target for conservatives who see it as a symbol of federal intrusion—never mind that it’s only about 7% of the total K-12 education budget.
But Trump doesn’t want to trim the agency. He wants to erase it. Why? Because the idea of a federal entity redistributing resources based on need goes against the very gospel of Trumpism: that winners deserve to win, and if you’re losing, it’s your fault.
Education Secretary Linda McMahon (yes, of WWE fame) echoed this ethos, calling the DOE’s dismantling a “final mission” to eliminate bureaucracy and restore “greatness.” That’s a nice way of saying: we’re done trying to make things fair.
But here’s the quiet part being said out loud: stripping away the DOE means stripping away funding, enforcement, and data—three things that disproportionately benefit kids who weren’t born into wealthy zip codes.
If you don’t collect national test scores (NAEP), you don’t know who’s falling behind. If you slash federal funding, states don’t have to explain why certain schools can’t afford counselors or AP classes. If you eliminate enforcement, there’s no cop on the beat when school budgets mysteriously divert special ed funding to football stadiums.
The Contradictions: Bureaucracy for Billionaires, Bootstraps for Everyone Else
There’s something almost poetic about the same administration that handed billionaires trillions in tax cuts now claiming the moral high ground of “fiscal responsibility” when it comes to feeding poor children.
Yes, the DOE funds school meals, too.
So in Trump’s America, we can’t afford a sandwich for a second-grader, but we can afford another tax loophole for yachts?
If you believe that “government should run like a business,” consider this: No functioning business fires its accounting department and expects better bookkeeping. Yet somehow, Trump wants to cut the agency that tracks whether states are following federal law—and expects compliance to improve.
The logic is circular: Public schools are failing, so let’s defund the agency that supports them, and when they fail more, we’ll use that as proof they can’t be helped.
This isn’t reform. It’s sabotage in a three-piece suit.
What Is the Role of the Federal Government?
There’s a deeper truth underneath all this. The debate over the Department of Education isn’t just about schools—it’s about what kind of country we want to be.
Do we believe that a kid in rural Mississippi deserves the same chance as one in suburban Connecticut? Or do we believe in an educational caste system—where your fate is sealed by your ZIP code and your parents’ tax bracket?
Because let’s not pretend decentralization is neutral. When the federal government pulls back, power doesn’t flow to “the people.” It flows to the powerful. To state legislatures, school boards, and administrators—many of whom have a long track record of ignoring the students who need the most help.
Federal involvement in education was never about perfection. It was about protection.
And without that protection, inequality becomes policy. Disadvantage becomes destiny. And the so-called land of opportunity becomes little more than a real estate ad.
The Real Agenda: Starve the System, Then Blame It
Let’s call this what it is: an ideological assault dressed up as cost-cutting. The goal isn’t to improve education. It’s to make sure the federal government stops leveling the playing field.
It’s the same playbook used against the IRS, the EPA, and public transit: starve the agency, cry inefficiency, then privatize the solution. The only difference is this time, it’s kids on the line—not carbon emissions or uncollected taxes.
As Randi Weingarten of the AFT put it, a gutted DOE means more crowded classrooms, fewer teachers, and higher drop-out rates. But it also means something more corrosive: the normalization of a two-tier system, where rich kids get counselors and coding classes, and poor kids get security guards and test prep.
If Education Is a Ladder, Trump Just Took Away the Bottom Rungs
Dismantling the Department of Education won’t magically improve test scores or spark innovation. But it will make sure fewer poor, disabled, immigrant, or non-English-speaking kids reach their potential.
And maybe that’s the point.
Because in the story Trump wants to tell, greatness is something you’re born into—or fight for without help. But in the story America should be telling, greatness is something we build together.
And that story starts in the classroom.
Not with a budget cut.
Not with a press release.
But with a promise.
That’s the point.