Surrounded by school children, Republican governors and others, President Trump signed a brief executive order (EO) on Thursday directing Secretary of Education Linda McMahon “to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law, take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education (ED) and return authority over education to the States and local communities.” Entitled “Improving Education Outcomes by Empowering Parents, States and communities,” the order is largely focused on K-12 education, stating that ED’s “main functions can, and should, be returned to the States.”
The order states that “closure of the Department of Education would drastically improve program implementation in higher education.” It goes on to note that the $1.6 trillion federal student loan portfolio is “roughly the size of” Wells Fargo bank, which has 200,000 employees versus the Office of Federal Student Aid’s fewer than 1,550 employees. Close to 55% of all student aid is awarded by the federal government.
The order states that “the Department of Education is not a bank, and it must return bank functions to an entity equipped to serve America’s students,” without specifying what that entity might be.
In a seeming contradiction, the president’s spokesperson said earlier in the day that ED would continue to administer the student aid programs, as well as special education and other programs, and enforce civil rights laws. McMahon also made similar remarks. The order reiterates the directive of a previous order that no funds should go to recipients engaged in “illegal” DEI activities.
The department is established in law
The Trump administration’s more concrete focus on eliminating ED distinguishes it from the positions of other Republican presidents (starting with Ronald Reagan), who also believed in limiting the federal role in education policy. Standing in the way of all these efforts has been the fact that the Education Department is created in law and eliminating it would require enactment of another law.
Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Bill Cassidy said in a statement released after the order was signed that he would soon introduce legislation to eliminate ED. But since Senate Democrats could block any elimination legislation, it seems highly unlikely that a such a bill could clear Congress. Another complicating factor is that many education laws refer specifically to the “Secretary of Education,” and so those laws would also need to be changed to complete any proposed elimination.
The program’s the thing
The American Association of Community Colleges (AACC) has long advised its members that the bureaucratic structure administering education programs is far less important than the programs themselves.
On this key issue of which agency might administer student aid and higher education programs if ED were to be eliminated or substantially restructured, the executive order is silent. While many conversative voices have outlined specific steps that could be taken to eliminate ED, including in the “Project 2025” document, similar details were not reflected in the executive order. In any case, the proposed elimination of the Department of Education should not be conflated with the elimination of the programs that it currently administers.
For the time being, with certain exceptions, community college leaders and other stakeholders can assume that all the programs that Congress has provided authorization for and funded will remain in place and provide designated resources — regardless of who is administering them. The Trump administration has signaled that it may decide unilaterally not to spend funds appropriated by Congress (this issue is partially responsible for delayed action on finalizing FY 2025 spending), but this action would trigger a colossal confrontation between the Executive and Legislative branches, or at least Congressional Democrats. For now, this is only a potential development.
Agency placement considerations
Although the Title IV student aid programs are extremely complicated, they are fundamentally about delivering cash to individuals based on an eligibility formula (the Student Aid Index). These types of financial transactions and benefit distribution systems are managed across numerous government agencies. However, surrounding this basic financial delivery system lies a number of offices that interact closely with campus operations through regulatory processes — for example, accreditation and institutional eligibility and certification. Here, specific knowledge of both institutions and program rules and policies is essential. Any attempt to move the delivery of student aid programs outside of ED (if ED were to cease to exist) would have to take this into account.
Furthermore, effective administration of a number of the HEA’s non-Title IV programs, such as TRIO, GEAR UP, institutional aid (HSIs, Title III-A, PBIs, and other programs), childcare (CCAMPIS), international education, and others clearly rely upon Executive Branch officials who understand these programs, as well as campuses. Individuals with relevant expertise would be needed regardless of where the program was administered.
ED staffing
Along with other federal agencies, ED has absorbed substantial staffing reductions in the first weeks of this administration. More appear to be coming. The reduction in capacity and possible reduction in services are arguably far more important and impactful than the bureaucratic location of various offices.
The administrative efficiency and effectiveness of ED has been a concern of community college officials for many years, long before the present administration took office. The last administration sought greater resources for ED administration and did not receive them from Congress.
Next
AACC works as closely as it can with all administrations to ensure fair, transparent and less burdensome policies are applied to colleges as they administer the complex Title IV program and others. It is AACC’s sincere hope that – irrespective of any administrative changes that may ensue under McMahon’s leadership – the association can work closely with the Trump administration to improve the delivery of services to community colleges and their students.