GOP Rift Over Education Department’s Future

In a rebuke of President Trump’s efforts to shutter the Education Department, a Senate committee voted Thursday to block the White House from outsourcing the responsibilities of four key ED offices to other federal agencies.

The bill, which advanced to the Senate floor following the 13-to-9 vote, specifically protects programs within the offices of special education, elementary and secondary education, postsecondary education, and Indian education.

Those are fewer than half of the education offices affected by the 14 interagency agreements signed so far, and many education advocates hope to see them all blocked. But Sen. Tim Kaine, the Virginia Democrat who sponsored the bill, said that while he would love to reach a bipartisan consensus on the other offices, this is a strong step forward for now.

Kaine’s willingness to block some but not all of the interagency agreements was key to securing support from Republican co-sponsors Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, from Maine and Alaska, respectively, who crossed party lines to help the minority advance the bill.

“We ended up working with each other over the course of the last month and reached an accord,” Kaine said. “We quickly find areas of agreement, and when we’re not on the same page on things, we set those aside. But I think this particular bill would maintain core components within [the Education Department].”

Other offices not addressed in Thursday’s bill include the Office for Civil Rights, which transferred to the Department of Justice, and the Office of Career and Technical Education, which transferred to the Department of Labor. Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat, attempted to block all agreements and the OCR one specifically—but neither of those amendments passed. (The one Murray amendment that did pass with nearly unanimous support would require the Education Department to provide quarterly reports on the cost of each agreement compared to the previous cost of executing the same functions within ED.)

So while the legislation is unlikely to advance any more—as House Republicans and many in the Senate continue to back Trump’s plan—the committee vote demonstrates a growing rift among the congressional GOP over the president’s interagency agreements and the future of the federal government’s role in higher ed.

Trump loyalists like Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama argued that the Department of Education is failing to properly serve students and that moving offices to other agencies would change that.

“The definition of losing is doing the same thing over and over … and we’re losing—we’re losing badly,” he said. “So why are we defending this? I don’t understand it.”

Other Republicans filed amendments seeking to abolish the department, but those plans didn’t receive a vote Thursday. Similarly, Republicans in the House advanced legislation this month that would make the transfer of ED’s responsibilities permanent.

But Collins and Murkowski, both of whom have challenged the White House at times during Trump’s second term, argue that Congress placed these offices and grant programs under the Education Department for a reason and that moving them puts students at risk.

“This bill is straightforward. It keeps the administration of important, landmark education programs at the Department of Education, where Congress specifically put them and where they belong,” Collins said.

Murkowski added, “We cannot lose sight of the fact that at the end of the day we’re talking about children.”

The committee chair, Sen. Bill Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican, didn’t vote in favor of the bill, saying he’s “not in favor of stripping the administration’s authority to streamline efforts … carte blanche.” But he did voice support for a provision that would block the interagency agreement sending special education services to the Department of Health and Human Services.

“Moving [special education] to HHS would be a mistake. It shifts special education from an educational and civil rights model to a medical model, treating students with disabilities as patients to diagnose rather than learners to educate,” said Cassidy who worked as a doctor for decades before entering politics. “I’m a conservative. I think smaller government is better government, but I worry that many states are still struggling with [special education] requirements and need federal technical assistance, coordination and oversight.”

Cassidy introduced his own separate bill that would only block the special ed agreement but decided not to bring it to a vote because it would be “subsumed” by Kaine’s bill.

“I’ve not been able to use the word ‘subsumed’ during my entire chairmanship, so thank you for giving me the opportunity,” he said to Kaine as the room laughed.

​​​Emmanual Guillory, senior director of government relations at the American Council on Education, noted that as chairman, Cassidy could have blocked Kaine’s bill from even reaching a vote, especially since knew that it was likely to pass with support from Collins and Murkowski. Yet he let it happen—a move Guillory described as one of “integrity and character.”

“It’s him realizing that he is a part of the greater whole and wanting to have a democratic process in the fairest way possible,” Guillory said.

The Trump administration continued to defend the agreements after the committee meeting. In a letter sent to Congress, Education Secretary Linda McMahon stressed that the Trump administration has no plan of backing off in its attempt to “wind down” the Education Department. Rather, she’s asked lawmakers for “continued support.”

“Since these agreements were signed … they have demonstrated measurable results by driving stronger grant competitions, streamlining government operations, and producing better outcomes for Americans,” McMahon wrote. “The evidence is clear: these agreements are not expanding bureaucracy; they are correcting failures that too often put process ahead of performance, and ultimately, the American people.”