It’s the political debate that never actually dies. Every few years, usually right around a major election cycle, the "Abolish the DOE" slogan starts trending again. People get fired up. They post on X. They argue at Thanksgiving. But honestly, most of the chatter misses the mark on how the process would actually work—or what would happen to your local school district if it did.
Getting rid of the Department of Education isn't just about deleting a building in D.C. It’s a massive bureaucratic uncoupling.
Most people think the Department of Education (ED) runs their kid's third-grade classroom. It doesn't. In the United States, education is primarily a state and local responsibility. Only about 8% to 10% of K-12 funding actually comes from the federal level. That’s a tiny slice of the pie, but it’s a slice with a lot of strings attached. When politicians talk about shuttering the agency, they aren't talking about firing your local principal. They're talking about a fundamental shift in how civil rights are enforced and how trillions of dollars in student loans are managed.
It's complicated. It's messy. And it’s way more than just a campaign talking point.
Why the "Abolish" Movement Exists in 2026
The argument for getting rid of the Department of Education usually boils down to two things: money and the Constitution. Constitutionalists will tell you—and they have a point—that the word "education" appears nowhere in the U.S. Constitution. Under the 10th Amendment, any power not specifically given to the feds belongs to the states.
For decades, critics like Thomas Sowell or politicians like Rand Paul have argued that the federal government has slowly "bribed" states into following federal mandates by dangling Title I funds in front of them. You want the money? You follow our rules on testing. You follow our rules on curriculum standards.
It feels like overreach to some. To others, it feels like a necessary safety net.
Then there's the spending. The Department’s budget is massive, but the lion's share doesn't go to "education" in the way we think. It goes to Pell Grants and the federal student loan portfolio. If you "get rid" of the department, who collects the $1.6 trillion in outstanding student debt? You can’t just set that on fire. Well, you could, but the economic ripple effects would be catastrophic.
The Block Grant Reality
If the agency were abolished tomorrow, the most likely outcome wouldn't be the total disappearance of federal funds. Instead, we’d likely see a shift to block grants.
Imagine the federal government just writing a check to Texas or Vermont and saying, "Here is your $2 billion. Use it for schools. We don't care how."
Advocates love this idea. They say it allows for "laboratories of democracy." Vermont might use the money for outdoor-based early childhood programs. Texas might use it for vocational training and charter school expansion. The "one size fits all" model of D.C. would effectively end.
But there’s a catch. Or several.
✨ Don't miss: Why Every Tornado Warning MN Now Live Alert Demands Your Immediate Attention
Without federal oversight, what happens to students with disabilities? The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a federal law. It ensures that a child with autism or Down syndrome gets a "Free Appropriate Public Education." If the ED is gone, the enforcement mechanism for those rights becomes a giant question mark.
The Civil Rights Quagmire
This is where the debate gets heated. The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) sits inside the Department of Education. It’s the group that investigates whether schools are discriminating based on race, sex, or disability.
If you're getting rid of the Department of Education, you're effectively moving or dissolving the OCR.
Critics of the department, like those involved with the Heritage Foundation’s "Project 2025" or similar conservative blueprints, argue that these functions could simply be moved to the Department of Justice. They argue it’s more efficient.
But civil rights advocates, like the ACLU or the NAACP, argue that a dedicated education office is the only way to ensure equity. They point to the history of the South before the 1960s as proof that states can’t always be trusted to protect every student.
It’s a tug-of-war between "local control" and "national standards of decency."
What Happens to Your Student Loans?
Let’s talk about the elephant in the room. The Department of Education is essentially one of the largest banks in the world.
If we're getting rid of the Department of Education, the Office of Federal Student Aid (FSA) has to go somewhere. You have millions of people currently enrolled in Income-Driven Repayment (IDR) plans or seeking Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF).
- Scenario A: The portfolio is sold to private banks. (Highly unlikely and would cause a political riot).
- Scenario B: The portfolio is moved to the Treasury Department. (Most logical, but Treasury isn't set up to manage the customer service aspect of 43 million borrowers).
- Scenario C: The debt is forgiven. (Extremely expensive and legally contested).
Most serious proposals for ending the ED suggest moving the loan portfolio to the Treasury. But think about the bureaucracy. Moving that much data and that many contracts would take years. It wouldn't be a "Day One" fix. It would be a "Decade One" project.
The History Nobody Remembers
The Department of Education is actually a relatively new "thing." It was created in 1979 under Jimmy Carter. Before that, it was part of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW).
When Ronald Reagan ran for president in 1980, he promised to abolish it. He even appointed Terrel Bell as Secretary with the implicit goal of shutting the place down.
🔗 Read more: Brian Walshe Trial Date: What Really Happened with the Verdict
It didn't happen.
Why? Because Congress likes having a say in education. And states, even the red ones, grew addicted to the federal funding. When Bell’s department released the famous report "A Nation at Risk" in 1983, it actually created a demand for more federal involvement, not less. The report warned of a "rising tide of mediocrity" in schools. Suddenly, everyone wanted the feds to "fix" it.
We’ve been in that cycle ever since.
The Logistics of a Shutdown
Closing a federal agency isn't like closing a retail store. You don't just lock the doors and walk away.
First, you need an Act of Congress. A President cannot unilaterally abolish a cabinet-level department created by statute. You’d need 60 votes in the Senate to overcome a filibuster—unless you use budget reconciliation, which is a whole other legislative headache.
Then you have the employees. There are roughly 4,400 career civil servants at the ED. While that's the smallest staff of any cabinet department, they handle thousands of grants and compliance audits.
If the goal is getting rid of the Department of Education to save money, the savings might be smaller than you think. Most of the ED's budget is "pass-through" money. It goes straight to states or students. The actual "overhead" or administrative cost of the department is relatively small in the grand scheme of the multi-trillion dollar federal budget.
The real "saving" would come from cutting the programs themselves—like Title I for low-income schools or Pell Grants—which is a much harder sell to voters.
Surprising Details: The Statistics That Matter
Let's look at some cold hard numbers.
The Department manages over $200 billion in annual appropriations.
The vast majority of this—about $19 billion—goes to Title I. This money is designed to help schools with high concentrations of poverty. If you're a parent in a rural district or a struggling inner-city school, Title I often pays for the extra reading specialists or the free lunch programs.
Without the ED, who ensures that money actually reaches the kids?
💡 You might also like: How Old is CHRR? What People Get Wrong About the Ohio State Research Giant
Some argue that state auditors could do it. Others fear the money would be diverted to "general funds" by state legislatures to plug budget holes in other areas, like road repair or police pensions.
Then there's the research. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is part of the ED. They’re the ones who produce the "Nation's Report Card" (NAEP). Without this, we’d have no objective way to compare how a 4th grader in Florida is doing compared to a 4th grader in Oregon.
We’d be flying blind.
Nuance: Is There a Middle Ground?
It’s not always "Keep it exactly as is" vs. "Burn it down."
Many policy experts, including some at the Brookings Institution, have suggested a "downsizing" or "streamlining" rather than total abolition.
- Consolidating Programs: There are dozens of small, niche grant programs that could be combined to reduce paperwork.
- Devolving Authority: Keeping the funding but removing the federal "mandates" on how schools have to test.
- The "Post Office" Model: Making the student loan arm a separate, semi-independent government corporation.
These options don't make for great campaign slogans. "Let's incrementally restructure the administrative oversight of Title I!" doesn't fit on a hat. But it's where the actual work would likely happen.
Actionable Insights: What This Means For You
If the conversation about getting rid of the Department of Education continues to gain steam, here is what you actually need to do to prepare:
Watch your state legislature. If the feds step back, your state capital becomes the most important place in your life. State laws would suddenly dictate everything from special education rights to how much your college tuition costs. Start following your local state representative now.
Understand your "Title" rights. If you have a child with an IEP (Individualized Education Program), your rights currently come from federal law. If the department is abolished, those rights may stay on the books, but the "enforcement" will likely shift to the courts. This means you might need a lawyer more than a school board advocate.
Diversify your college savings. Federal Pell Grants and subsidized loans are the bedrock of college affordability for millions. If the ED is shuttered, the "subsidized" part of those loans might vanish, or interest rates might shift to market levels. If you have kids, start looking at 529 plans earlier. Don't rely on the federal government being your primary lender 10 years from now.
Demand transparency in "Block Grants." If your state starts receiving education money as a lump sum, ask for a public accounting of where it goes. Without federal "strings," it’s much easier for that money to disappear into a state's general fund rather than reaching the classroom.
The Department of Education isn't a monolith. It's a collection of programs, laws, and debts. Getting rid of it is a radical act of decentralization. Whether that's a "return to freedom" or a "disaster for the vulnerable" depends entirely on which state you live in and how much money you have in the bank.
The reality is that "abolishing" it would likely just mean moving the furniture to different rooms in the same D.C. house. But the policy shifts that come with it? Those would be very real. Keep your eyes on the "enforcement" and the "funding" mechanisms—that's where the real story lives.