VARYING PERSPECTIVES ON TRUMP’S ORDER TO SHUT FEDERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

The American school education system is in the midst of a major crisis. On March 20, President Donald Trump ordered the closure of the Federal Department of Education saying that education is a devolved State subject and that there is no reason why Washington should spend so much on it and maintain an army of staff to administer it.

- By P.K.Balachandran

He called the department “a big con job” and said he told Linda McMahon, a former wrestling executive he tapped to be Education Secretary, that he wanted her to carry out closing the department.

“Linda, I hope you do a great job and put yourself out of a job,” Trump said to McMahon. Before signing the Executive Order, he had ordered the pruning of its staff by half.

Reagan's Idea

As a matter of fact, Trump is not the author of the idea of dismantling the Federal Education Department. President Ronald Reagan had wanted it way back in 1982. Reagan told the Congress that the Department of Education was a costly “bureaucratic boondoggle” (an expensive, wasteful and fraudulent project). “We must cut out non-essential government spending,” Reagan demanded from Congress. But the Department remained.

Forty three years later, President Trump pulled the issue from cold storage and is attempting to stamp out what he thinks is a White Elephant.

However, Congressional approval is necessary for a complete closure, and that is not easy. The Congress is almost evenly divided. In the House of Representatives, the Republicans have 218 seats, Democrats 215 seats and there are two vacancies. Total: 435 seats. In the Senate, Republicans hold 53 seats and the Democrats hold 45 seats. There are two Independent senators, both of whom caucus with the Democrats.

However, even without Congressional approval, Trump can cut the staff of the Education Department drastically and make it anaemic by blocking funds.

Support Groups

Trump’s Executive Order cites a number of reasons for dismantling the Department, including the US$ 3 trillion spent “without improving student achievement”. He cited plummeting test scores, excessive “ideological initiatives” and a return of control over education to the States “where it belongs”.