Trump’s Education Revolution: Returning Power to Parents and the States

Right, Department of Education. It's one of those things that's long been on the hit list for Republican presidents going back to Reagan, but nobody's moved to transform it the way that the Trump administration has, and I think it's good to do a stop, look, and listen to see where we stand there. I've got lots of questions, so let's get some answers. Julie Hartman is the chief spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Education, and she joins us now. Julie, thanks for being with us. Appreciate it. Dan, thanks so much for having me.

So let's, you know, in the initial months of the Trump administration, sort of the heady days of Doge, there was talk under the direction of Linda McMahon of a reduction in headcount, like at other agencies, and starting to ferret out the waste, fraud, and abuse, and starting to sort of realign and redistribute some of how the money flows and who was in charge of making spending decisions. And the Department of Education, as well as beneficiaries down the line at the state and local level. So can you just sort of give us an overview of what was inherited and what the Department of Education looks like today?

Absolutely. Well, I think it's really important, you know, for your listeners to understand why Secretary McMahon and President Trump want to sunset this department and return education to the state. Dan, we've spent $3 trillion on this federal education bureaucracy in D.C., and what do we have to show for it? We have 3 in 10 of our nation's students, only 3 in 10 that are proficient in reading and math. And, you know, if you think about the future of our country, our children are the future. And if we expect to keep up economically, to maintain our national security, even preserve our freedom, we cannot fall down on this most basic responsibility to educate our children.

And so really that's why Secretary McMahon is returning education to the states. And what this means is moving key decisions out of the hands of bureaucrats here in D.C. Because really, what do bureaucrats know about the individual needs and the individual talents, too, of our children across the country? It's about moving those decisions into the hands of the people who are closest to the children, and that's state leaders, local leaders, and crucially, parents. Who knows a child better than their own parents? And so really over the past year and a half, there's been momentous progress toward achieving that.

And I'll just give you a few examples here that, you know, state and local leaders and parents can expect this school year. One of them is that now a record number of 25 states are exercising what's called EdFlex authority, and Illinois is actually one of those states. And what this allows state leaders to do is actually free local school districts from mountains of red tape and paperwork that really do pull them away from focusing on what they're supposed to be focusing on, which is the students there in their district.

Another great thing that's happening is, you were talking about the education dollars. You know, under the previous administration, there were billions of dollars in federal funding that were going toward radical and discriminatory DEI programs, which, by the way, had no measurable connection to student success. And Secretary McMahon has redirected those dollars toward things like evidence-based literacy. That's instruction rooted in the science of reading, which has produced fantastic gains in literacy across the country. So really, it's just about restoring common sense in American education, because if we do not initiate this hard reset, Dan, again, we cannot keep up the way that we've been going and continue to fail our students.

Some of the concern, I know, initially, when there was some restructuring going on and moving around money and devolving the dollars to the state and local level, as you were describing, was, for example, idea monies. Are those being cut by the Trump administration? And I remember having to talk through with some families who have a kid with learning disabilities, and it has an IEP, and they were worried about federal support at the local level for executing the IEP at the local level. And, you know, as I understood it at the time, we were just moving some of those dollars to sort of a different, through a different funnel.

But can you describe some of that? You know, some of the, I'm sure you heard those same concerns and what the department has done to ensure that, for example, students with disabilities get everything that they're entitled to under the law. Absolutely, Dan. I am so glad that you brought this up, because this is a huge misconception. IEP, which is, as you said, a federal law, guaranteeing protections and education for individuals with disabilities, that predates the Department of Education. And those federal protections will continue to exist long after.

And, you know, Secretary McMahon has said that as she scales back federal micromanagement in the many ways that it hurts student success, she is equally committed to strengthening federal oversight in the areas where it remains essential. And that is certainly the case for these federal protections for individuals with disabilities. And I'll tell you, you know, again, you were talking about funding. For this year's fiscal year 2027 budget request, the Trump administration actually included a request to Congress for a record increase in funding for IDEA programs.

This is more than half a billion dollars over the previous year's appropriation. Another thing that happened this year is that Secretary McMahon announced a $144 million boost for IDEA programs. And that money already went out the door to states on July 1st. So that critical money is still absolutely flowing to states. In fact, more of it is flowing to states. And, again, these federal protections are enshrined in law, and nothing is going to change that. Secretary McMahon has met with hundreds of parents of individuals with disabilities and educators, and she is committed to them that these federal protections will remain in place, and indeed they are.

The school choice program, the tax credit, as part of the BBB, 30 states have opted in, and including states that have DEM governors like Colorado, North Carolina, Kentucky, and Kansas, not Illinois, of course. But sort of progress and prognosis on how that will reshape the education landscape. This education freedom tax credit, as you said, 30 states, both red and blue, have raced into this program. And what it is is actually the largest national expansion of education freedom in our nation's history. And what it allows parents to do is access critical funds.

This could look like sending their kid to a private school. But what's great about it, too, is it could also look like getting extra support in an existing public school. So if a child needs tutoring program, or if they need after-school programs, or if a student with a disability needs some extra support, this education freedom tax credit allows them to obtain those critical services. And you were talking about, you know, all the states that have opted in. There are still some governors, including Governor Pritzker in Illinois, who has expressed hesitation about this.

And, you know, it really is a no-brainer, because this education freedom tax credit, it doesn't take a single dollar from public schools. It puts additional funding into the education system, and it puts the power back in parents' hands to direct the education and choose the interventions for their child's needs. So, really, this is not a left-versus-right issue, Dan, and that's why we have seen Democrat governors opt-in. This is about, you know, unleashing every opportunity possible for our children. Well, that's what Jared Polis, the governor of Colorado, said.

It's like, it's free money. Why wouldn't I take it? Exactly. A question somebody should ask J.B. Pritzker, but we know why he wouldn't take it, because he's a teachers' union toady, and that's a problem. But higher education. I know the administration is very aggressive with universities that were fomenting anti-Semitism on campus, and that's great. But we still have this sort of starve-the-beast conundrum. Let me give you an example of what I'm talking about. Last year, the federal government provided $581 million in federal funding to Oregon State University.

That's a campus where all undergraduate students have to complete two difference, power, and oppression courses as part of its curriculum, which are all sort of neo-Marxist, DEI-type courses, or, as somebody has described them, Antifa 101. You know, what can be done through the Department of Education to either, well, to deal with a state of higher education as intolerant and anti-intellectual as so many of these universities are, and they're still getting subsidized through federal student loan programs and through federal funding, like the Oregon State example, just to make it concrete?

Is there anything on the docket to address this? In fact, just about a week or two ago, Secretary McMahon issued a letter, which all of your listeners should read, to university leaders and governing boards, the call-to-action letter. And it's really encouraging them to recommit to the fundamental principles of higher education. And that is, you know, allowing the free exchange of ideas. It's through the class. and debate in classrooms that really the truth emerges. But I'm sorry to interrupt, but I mean, they can be encouraged, but I suspect most of them will need to be rhetorically beaten about the head and neck area, and that means removing funding or providing something.

I mean, the only thing that they really respond to, it seems to me, is funding or the lack thereof. I'll point you to this seven university deal that were achieved here under the Trump administration with Columbia, for example, the University of Pennsylvania, which agreed to not only restore to women the titles that were misappropriated by males competing in their sports, but they actually apologized to those women for allowing sex discrimination under Title IX. You know, Columbia agreed to protect Jewish students, and there are these other great university deals with Brown and Cornell about getting rid of radical and discriminatory DEI programs and restoring merit.

So there's been a huge, you know, culture change in higher education because of the Trump administration shining a spotlight on these issues. And certainly where there are civil rights violations, the Trump administration will always, always hold schools accountable to ensure that they do not discriminate against students. But really also on these campuses, you know, university leaders have to recommit to changing their own culture and cleaning up their own campuses. And that's really what this call to action letter is calling upon them to do. And already there's been amazing response.

You know, the Florida University system has responded to Secretary McMahon recommitting to those principles. So there's a lot of change that's happened and a lot of really good culture change that's already underway. So at the end of the term, what is the Department of Education going to look like in terms of its headcount footprint? You know, what does the end of this transformation at the end of the Trump term look like? Well, I can tell you that, you know, the American people reelected President Trump with a mandate to sunset this Department of Education and return authority to state and local leaders.

And Secretary McMahon is committed, you know, to seeing that through. And really, again, it's just about restoring common sense in education and breaking up the bureaucracy, making sure that education dollars are going back to the basics and doing everything possible to empower people closest to the child, especially parents, to direct their child's education. So there's going to be a lot more progress to that end over the next few years. So at the end of the day, it turns into, I mean, I know you can't just eliminate the agency without congressional authorization, but it turns into essentially a grant-making agency.

And so it should have much smaller headcount and a much smaller administrative budget as compared to the money that's being sent for the states and the locals, the people closest to the people to administer. Well, again, as you said, you know, the Department of Education is a pass-through entity. And as we talked about, you know, in this segment, the critical protections at the federal level are going to remain in place. The critical dollars are still going to flow to states to help students. But, you know, again, it's just about breaking up this education bureaucracy in D.C.

And we've partnered with other agencies to do that. I'll give you a quick example. We've partnered with the Department of Labor to streamline career and technical education and align CTE with the nation's workforce strategy. There's a partnership, too, with Treasury to restore responsibility and sanity to the federal student loan portfolio. So, you know, there's a lot of great stuff happening, and that's really going to continue as we work to carry out this final mission. Julie Hartman, Chief Spokesman, U.S. Department of Education. Julie, thanks so much.

Appreciate your time. Thanks so much, Jan.