Republican senators sponsor bill to abolish embattled Department of Education

WASHINGTON — Last month, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to begin dismantling the U.S. Department of Education.

But the president's long-established intention of shuttering the embattled federal agency includes a sizable caveat: The DOE won't go away without an act of Congress.

Congressional approval of the DOE's demise is now a step closer to reality.

On Wednesday, several Republican senators introduced the "Returning Education to Our States Act" which, if passed, would eliminate the 46-year-old agency. The legislation seeks to decentralize DOE responsibilities and grant more control of education to states and local districts.

Meanwhile, the bill proposes that funds and program oversight now managed by the DOE would be redistributed across several existing federal departments.

The bill is sponsored by a trio of GOP senators: Mike Rounds of South Dakota, Tim Sheehy of Montana and Jim Banks of Indiana.

Some members of Utah's Congressional delegation have voiced support for abolishing the DOE, along with Utah Gov. Spencer Cox.

The Senate's Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions will be the first congressional body to tackle the "scrap the DOE" bill.

The legislation, according to a Rounds' press release, doesn't "cut a dollar" of education funding. Instead, funds will flow directly to states in the form of block grants — with other critical programs funded through other federal agencies.

Scrapping the DOE, the report added, will save taxpayers over $2 billion per year.

"We all know that teachers, parents, local school boards and state Departments of Education know what's best for their students, not bureaucrats in Washington," said Rounds.

"The Department of Education was created to collect education data and advise state and local organizations on best practices. Since then, it has grown into an oversized bureaucracy that dictates one-size-fits-all policies, standards and practices for students across the nation."

The proposed education act, according to Rounds, would preserve important programs and federal funding "while eliminating the bureaucracy of the Department of Education."

Added Banks: "Congress has a golden opportunity to codify President Trump's executive actions. This bill does that. It's a win for American education."

Proposed redirection of DOE programs

Trump, recently confirmed Education Secretary Linda McMahon and the bill's sponsors all assure that key programs such as Pell Grants and financial resources for children with disabilities and special needs would be preserved following the DOE's elimination.

Wednesday's legislation would redirect "several important programs housed within the DOE" to other federal agencies.

For example, Special Programs for Indian Children would be directed by the Department of the Interior. The Treasury Department would manage the federal Pell Grant Program and the Federal Family Education Loan Program. And the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act would be under the purview of the Department of Health and Human Services.

The National School Lunch Program, which reimburses Utah schools and other states for students receiving free or reduced school meals, is already administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture — not the DOE.

The bill's sponsors add that the proposed act will also simplify financial management since schools will no longer have to comply with "complex Title I funding regulations, maintenance of efforts standards or provide equitable services for private school students."

Local concerns about the DOE's possible demise

While Utah politicians such as Cox and Utah Rep. Burgess Owens — who regards the DOE as a bloated bureaucracy — will likely applaud Wednesday's congressional bill, other local education leaders are uneasy with the DOE possibly going away.

Last week, the Utah State Board of Education denied, by a 10-4 margin, a call to send a letter to Trump, McMahon and others formally stating board support of state and local control over educational funding.

Proposed by several board members, the "Intent Letter" stated that Utah education leaders would be better at managing programs funded by DOE such as Title I and Special Education.

But board member Carol Barlow Lear, who opposed the letter, said she "has not been impressed" in recent years with how the state has managed education funds.

Lear referenced the Utah Fits All voucher program as an example of the state "not doing a good job" — and added she worried federal funding levels for DOE-supported education programs could be diminished for Utah students.

"There is no evidence, in my mind, to say the state can do this better," said Lear.

Related topics