茄子视频

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

The White House took giant steps Tuesday toward breaking up the U.S. Department of Education and spreading key K-12 functions across other agencies, moves that many consider a violation of federal law.

The Department of Labor will 鈥渃o-manage鈥� the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education by administering roughly $28 billion in grant funds through an interagency agreement. The Interior Department will take responsibility for Indian education. 

Decisions are still pending on whether to move the offices overseeing civil rights, special education and student loans, but additional agreements move the Office of Postsecondary Education to the Department of Labor and a campus-based child care program to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Federal education officials celebrated the announcement as a key milestone toward fulfilling President Donald Trump鈥檚 March executive order to dismantle the department and said state leaders could still expect 鈥渃oncierge-level service.鈥� 

鈥淎t the end of the day, it means more dollars to the classroom, to the grantees, that does not get siphoned off through bureaucracy,鈥� a senior department official said during a background call with reporters. 鈥淲e think that this really does give states more power to 鈥� determine how those dollars are spent and to best best manage them.鈥�

In a subsequent online presentation involving the White House, some education advocates sent thumbs down and sad face emojis as the call concluded.

Rebecca Sibilia, executive director of EdFund, a think tank, said she was concerned that they made no mention of what will happen to the Institute for Education Sciences. The department鈥檚 research arm was one of the Department of Government Efficiency鈥檚 first targets. It canceled roughly $900 million in grants, and McMahon laid off most of the staff in March.

鈥淚f there is any fundamental role for the government to play, it is the collection and reporting of data,鈥� she said. 鈥淎s for the rest of the plan, it sounds like they have spread these programs so far and wide it will be difficult to put Humpty Dumpty back together again鈥�. 

The administration has plowed ahead with dismantling the department despite McMahon鈥檚 frequent acknowledgement that only Congress, which established the agency in 1979, has the power to completely eliminate it. She has the agency鈥檚 role, describing it as a 鈥減ass-through鈥� for federal funds and used social media to minimize the department鈥檚 work. 鈥淢akes you wonder…do we really need at all?,鈥� she after the government re-opened.

In October, she finished career and technical programs, adult education and family literacy to the Department of Labor. During the government shutdown, officials said they were 鈥渆xploring partnerships鈥� with the Department of Health and Human Services to take over special education. In higher education, the department is considering whether to its $1.77 trillion student loan portfolio to private companies. Like other aspects of the president鈥檚 plan, it鈥檚 unclear whether such moves would be legal.

鈥楽udden, chaotic decisions鈥�

Under that created the agency, the secretary can reorganize the department and enter into interagency agreements. 

Speaking to reporters, the department official cited the , a 1933 law that she said gives the agency the right to 鈥渃ontract with other federal agencies to procure services.鈥� 

鈥淚nteragency agreements are a frequently used tool of the federal government,鈥� the official said, adding that because the Labor Department already oversees workforce development programs, it鈥檚 best positioned to manage funding focused on helping students prepare for the workforce. 

But Emily Merolli, a partner with the Sligo Law Group, and a former member of the department鈥檚 general counsel鈥檚 office, said the administration鈥檚 actions 鈥渁re not legally supportable.鈥�

The law 鈥渁bsolutely does not grant the secretary the authority to just transfer those actual functions 鈥� let alone entire offices 鈥� to another agency,鈥� she said. 鈥淒ressing this up as a 鈥榗o-management or 鈥榩artnership鈥� agreement doesn’t make it legal. They’re trying to dress up the pig, but it’s still an illegal pig.鈥�

In a statement, the Council of Chief State School Officers said they seek assurances that the department won鈥檛聽miss deadlines and that funding 鈥渇lows without interruption to support students.鈥澛�

But individually, some state education leaders condemned the day鈥檚 events.

鈥淭his decision is the latest in a long pattern of sudden, chaotic decisions at the federal level that have created widespread anxiety and confusion,鈥� Rhode Island education Commissioner Ang茅lica Infante Green said in a statement.

California state Superintendent Tony Thurmond said, 鈥淚t is clearly less efficient for state departments of education and local school districts to work with four different federal agencies instead of one.鈥�

Opponents say eliminating the department leaves the most vulnerable students without important protections because other agencies lack expertise to administer complex laws like the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.  

Multiple surveys, including one from and another from PDK International, show the public is largely opposed to the idea. But from Yes. Every Kid. Foundation, a school choice advocacy group, found that respondents were more positive when they were told that K-12 funding, like Title I for high-poverty schools, would be preserved. 

Some conservatives say the government should phase out the Title I program along with the department and hand the $18 billion annually over to states for private school choice. 

鈥淭he money has been spent for more than 50 years and it hasn’t accomplished much,鈥� said Ray Domanico, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. 鈥淥ne of the things we’ve learned is that Washington is not the place to dictate policy.鈥�

A showed that Black students in high-poverty, high-minority schools made greater gains in reading when their schools used Title I to reduce class sizes. When schools used the funds for teacher training, Black and Latino students made greater gains in math. But and are getting larger between high- and low-achieving students.

But Domanico is skeptical that the Republicans will be able to finish the job of eliminating the department. A lot depends on whether the Democrats take control of the House in next year鈥檚 midterm elections, and 鈥榠n two years,鈥� he said, 鈥淭rump is going to be a lame duck.鈥澛�

Others think that advocates are overreacting to the news. Michael Petrilli, president of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute, and a former department official during the second Bush administration, dismissed the announcement as 鈥渁 nothing burger.鈥�

鈥淭hey will move some boxes (and people) around,鈥� , 鈥渁nd, if a Democrat wins in 2028, it will be swiftly undone.鈥�

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how The 74鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.