US Education Secretary Linda McMahon has assured that federal funding for schools will remain intact even as the Trump administration moves forward with plans to dismantle the US Department of Education. In an interview with The Hill, McMahon pushed back against widespread fears that closing the department would mean ending federal support, framing the move instead as a “structural overhaul” designed to cut bureaucracy and empower states.
Trump’s directive: Ending a federal department
President Donald Trump announced his intention to wind down the Education Department following a recent Supreme Court ruling that cleared procedural hurdles. Calling the department “a layer of unnecessary bureaucracy,” Trump said his administration aims to redirect billions in compliance costs to classrooms, teacher salaries, and student support services.McMahon, appointed to lead the transition, told The Hill the change reflects what the administration considers a voter mandate. “This is about putting control back where it belongs—at the state and local level,” she said.
Funding will continue, but under new management
Addressing concerns over federal support, McMahon clarified that programs like Title I grants for low-income schools and Pell Grants for college students will continue. However, their administration may shift to other federal agencies or be distributed directly to state governments.“It’s a misconception that closing the department means cutting funding,” McMahon told The Hill. She argued that up to 50% of education funding is absorbed by regulatory compliance, and recapturing those funds for direct educational purposes is a priority.“The idea is simple—less red tape, more resources for teachers and students,” she said.
State control at the core
A central element of Trump’s plan is devolving power from Washington to the states. McMahon emphasized that this approach would allow governors, local school boards, and parents to make decisions on curriculum, assessments, and resource allocation without federal mandates.Proponents argue this model will foster innovation and flexibility, while critics fear it could lead to inconsistent standards and weaken protections for disadvantaged students.“This shift will empower local leaders to design education that fits their communities,” McMahon said.
Congressional reality and political pushback
Despite Trump’s executive order, dismantling a Cabinet-level agency requires an act of Congress. Lawmakers have signaled significant resistance, citing the department’s role in civil rights enforcement and oversight of federal funds.According to legislative analysts, the transition could involve complex negotiations over staff, programs, and budget allocations, possibly stretching over several years. Democratic leaders have already pledged to oppose any plan that could compromise equity protections or accountability mechanisms.
Criticism over oversight and equity
Education advocates and civil rights groups have raised alarms that decentralizing authority could erode protections for vulnerable groups, including students with disabilities and those in low-income districts. They argue that without federal oversight, resource disparities between wealthy and poor states could widen, undermining decades of progress on equal access to education.McMahon acknowledged these concerns but maintained that oversight can exist without heavy-handed federal control. “Our commitment to equity remains,” she said. “What changes is how we achieve it.”
Job loss and department’s “final mission”
The move has also raised concerns among the department’s workforce. Thousands of jobs could be affected, though McMahon described the process as the department’s “final mission” rather than an abrupt elimination. She assured that employees will play a role in facilitating the transition.
The road ahead
If implemented, Trump’s plan would mark the most significant restructuring of US education policy since the department’s creation in 1979. It could redefine the federal government’s role in education, leaving states with unprecedented control over standards and funding priorities.For now, the department remains operational as Congress prepares for what is expected to be an intense political and legal battle. The outcome will shape how—and by whom—American education is governed for decades to come.
