McMahon is committed to fulfilling the president’s campaign promise to close the department and put himself out of a job.
Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images
For Education Secretary Linda McMahon, outsourcing education-related grant programs to other federal departments is just a “proof of concept” for her larger goal of closing the 45-year-old institution.
“Let’s move the program away for a moment. Let’s see how the work is done. What are the results? What are the results?” she said at the department’s all-staff meeting Tuesday, shortly after the six interagency agreements were publicly announced. “If it works, and we’ve proven it’s the best approach, then we’ll ask Congress to codify it and make it permanent.” (The meeting was not open to the public. All quotes are from recordings obtained by: Inside higher education.)
For 20 minutes, the Secretary of State explained her plan and the framework within which she wanted her staff and the country to view it.
“We’re not talking about closing the Department of Education. We’re talking about returning education to the state where it belongs,” she said. “That’s the right message.”
McMahon cited a poll in which she said that while the public did not support closing ED, respondents became more supportive when they heard the plan still preserved ED’s projects by sending them to other institutions.
Reorganizations like the one announced Tuesday have been rumored for months, and the changes reflect recommendations outlined in Project 2025 — a conservative blueprint that calls for closing ED. (The education component of Plan 2025 is led by Lindsey Burke, now the department’s deputy chief of staff for policy and programs.)
McMahon had previously moved career and technical education programs to the Labor Department and laid off nearly half the staff in an effort to advance President Trump’s goal of closing the agency.
While the secretary of state said she understood the “turbulence” and “uncertainty” caused by troop reductions and stressed that the decisions were difficult ones made with “thoughtful consideration and caution,” she firmly believed they were necessary.
“I applaud and applaud everyone here for everything they’ve done over the years,” she said. “I’m not saying to any of you that your efforts aren’t good enough — I’m saying the policies behind those efforts aren’t good enough.”
McMahon then argued that the first deal struck with Labor earlier this year had paid off.
By co-managing, “we can become more efficient and economical,” she said. “For example, we have now taken advantage of Labour’s grant extraction system, we have drawn over 500 grants and they have worked very skillfully. It is a much better system than what we have here.”
While some conservatives have praised the administration’s actions, others have expressed doubts about their scale or believe they distract from issues that really matter. For Margaret Spellings, the former education secretary under President George W. Bush, it’s an “economic emergency” to improve student achievement.
“Moving programs from one department to another does not actually eliminate federal bureaucracy and may make it more difficult for students, teachers and families to navigate the system and get the support they need,” she said. “We need to keep the main thing first, which is how to improve education and outcomes for all students.”
McMahon, on the other hand, told employees that the move was key to achieving that goal.
“We want to make sure [students] “We know there are opportunities for them…whether they want to be an electrician, a doctor or an Indian chief, there are programs that can give them a good livelihood,” she said. “We are improving education.” “
