How Trump’s Proposal to Dissolve the Education Department Could Transform California’s Schools

California’s state superintendent of schools, Tony Thurmond, recently shared his thoughts on the potential elimination of the U.S. Department of Education. He described it as a threat to the well-being of students and families, emphasizing the need for protections in education.

However, some argue that there’s a misunderstanding among progressives about the department’s role. Thurmond’s response highlights his reliance on state-level power rather than addressing the actual proposal. It’s important to recognize that most education funding comes from local and state sources, while federal funds often don’t reach classrooms due to bureaucratic layers.

Critics also point out that it seems strange for Democrats to defend a federal program that doesn’t serve their local teachers and schools well. Why not let states manage their own education budgets more directly? Many argue that federal staffers, numbering around 4,400, are mostly based in Washington, far removed from where the real educational needs lie.

With Trump’s announcement of Linda McMahon as the new education secretary, discussions about dissolving the department are likely to heat up. Many believe that the federal bureaucracy does not effectively improve education. Test scores have not notably improved since the department started in 1980, raising questions about its effectiveness.

If the goal is better academic performance, it might be more logical for states and local leaders to directly manage funding. Instead of routing a large budget through Washington, states could receive block grants, allowing funds to go directly to teachers and schools.

Furthermore, blue states like California and New York contribute billions in federal taxes but receive back only a fraction for education. This means they effectively subsidize the education systems of red states. This unfair balance should prompt California Democrats to rethink the necessity of a federal education department.

While some experts voice concerns about the loss of federal accountability in areas like student privacy, it’s argued that states are more in touch with local needs. By 2025, will the Department of Education still serve a crucial purpose that state departments can’t fulfill better?

Instead of just reacting to Trump’s moves, Democrats should explore how they can secure better educational outcomes without relying on federal resources. It’s possible to meet students’ needs more effectively without a distant bureaucracy in charge.