The Claim

Officially began the process of closing the Department of Education and returning education to the states after more than four decades and over $3 trillion spent on education, with virtually nothing to show for it.

The Claim, Unpacked

What is literally being asserted?

Three factual claims bundled together: (1) the administration officially began closing the Department of Education; (2) the department has spent over $3 trillion since its creation in 1980; and (3) that spending produced “virtually nothing” in improved education outcomes.

What is being implied but not asserted?

The claim implies the president has the authority to close a cabinet department, that federal education spending is pure waste, that education outcomes have not improved since 1980, and that “returning education to the states” is a simple, costless transfer rather than the elimination of programs serving tens of millions of students. It frames the department as a bureaucratic sinkhole rather than the administrator of Pell Grants, special education services, student loans, and civil rights enforcement.

What is conspicuously absent?

What the department actually does: administer $1.7 trillion in student loans, distribute $34.7 billion in Pell Grants annually, enforce IDEA protections for 7.5 million students with disabilities, fund Title I schools serving low-income students, and enforce civil rights laws in education. Also absent: the constitutional fact that only Congress can abolish a department it created, the measurable improvements in graduation rates and educational attainment since 1980, and the documented harms the dismantling has already caused — from a $38 million waste on improperly fired civil rights staff to 90% of civil rights complaints being dismissed without review.

Evidence Assessment

Established Facts

The administration signed an executive order directing the closure of the Department of Education. On March 20, 2025, President Trump signed “Improving Education Outcomes by Empowering Parents, States, and Communities,” directing Secretary Linda McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education.” The order also mandated that any program receiving Department of Education funds must end diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and cease “promoting gender ideology.” ¹

The president cannot unilaterally close a cabinet department created by Congress. The Department of Education was established by the Department of Education Organization Act of 1979 (Public Law 96-88). Legal scholars, the Brookings Institution, and the Congressional Research Service agree that eliminating the department requires a new act of Congress. An executive order purporting to “eliminate” a congressionally created department “would unambiguously violate the law.” Even if Congress attempted such legislation, it would require 60 Senate votes to overcome a filibuster — meaning at least seven Democrats would need to support it, which is politically implausible. ²

The department’s workforce was roughly halved through reductions in force. Before cuts began, the Department of Education had approximately 4,133 employees. By March 2026, this had been reduced to roughly 2,100-2,800 through RIFs, voluntary separations, and buyouts. The Office of Federal Student Aid, which oversees $1.7 trillion in student loans, lost over 320 unionized staffers — nearly half its workforce. ³

The cumulative spending figure of “$3 trillion” is plausible but requires significant context. Department of Education discretionary appropriations grew from approximately $14 billion in FY1980 to roughly $79 billion in FY2025, with total outlays (including mandatory programs like student loans) reaching $268 billion in FY2024. Adding up annual outlays from 1980 through 2025 — which averaged roughly $70-80 billion per year in nominal terms over the 45-year period — produces a nominal cumulative total in the range of $3-4 trillion. However, this figure conflates wildly different categories: roughly 71% of the department’s budget goes directly to students as Pell Grants and student loans, 25% goes to states for K-12 programs (primarily Title I for low-income schools and IDEA for special education), and less than 2% funds the department’s administrative operations. The “$3 trillion” framing implies bureaucratic waste, when the vast majority went directly to students and schools. ⁴

“Virtually nothing to show for it” is demonstrably false. NAEP long-term trend data shows that average reading scores for 9-year-olds rose 12 points and math scores rose 23 points between the late 1970s and 2020. The high school adjusted cohort graduation rate increased from approximately 71% in the early 1980s to 87% in 2021-22. The percentage of Americans age 25+ with a bachelor’s degree or higher rose from approximately 17% in 1980 to 37.7% in 2022. College enrollment among 18-19-year-olds increased 37.7% since 1980, and among 20-21-year-olds, 65.8%. The number of students with disabilities receiving services under IDEA more than doubled, from 4.1 million in 1980-81 to 7.5 million in 2022-23. Before IDEA’s predecessor law, schools educated only one in five children with disabilities. ⁵

The dismantling effort has produced documented waste and service degradation. A January 2026 GAO report (GAO-26-108320) found the department spent between $28.5 million and $38 million paying Office for Civil Rights employees who were placed on administrative leave after courts blocked their termination. During this period, OCR dismissed approximately 90% of civil rights complaints without review — compared to a historical range of 50-80%. Student loan borrowers face longer hold times, increased risk of billing errors, and delayed processing of FAFSA and forgiveness applications. ⁶

Congress rejected the proposed dismantling and increased the department’s funding. The FY2026 spending package increased Department of Education discretionary funding by over $200 million compared to FY2025, reaching $79 billion. The legislation explicitly included language barring covered agencies from using funds in any way that “relocates an office or employees” or “reorganizes programs or activities.” Despite this, the administration has continued reassigning employees and transferring functions to other agencies on what it calls a “temporary basis.” ⁷

Strong Inferences

The executive order functions as political theater rather than policy execution. The president cannot close the department, Congress has refused to close it, Congress has increased its funding, and yet the claim counts “beginning the process” as a win. What actually happened is that the administration gutted staffing to impair the department’s ability to carry out its statutory functions — enforcing civil rights, overseeing student loan servicers, monitoring special education compliance — without formally eliminating any program. This is not “closing” the department; it is sabotaging it from within while leaving the legal obligations intact. ⁸

Federal education spending represents 8-14% of total education expenditure, making “returning education to the states” misleading. The federal share of K-12 education funding is approximately 8-14%, with states providing roughly 45% and local governments another 45%. Federal funding is not “replacing” state education authority; it supplements state spending, primarily targeting the most vulnerable populations — low-income students (Title I), students with disabilities (IDEA), and college students from low-income families (Pell Grants). States already control the vast majority of education funding and decision-making. ⁹

What the Evidence Shows

The claim packages three distinct assertions — an executive order was signed, $3 trillion was spent, and nothing was achieved — into a narrative designed to justify eliminating one of the federal government’s primary mechanisms for serving disadvantaged students. Each assertion requires substantial qualification.

The executive order is real, but it directs something the president does not have the constitutional authority to accomplish. Only Congress can abolish a department Congress created, and Congress has not only declined to do so but has actively increased the department’s funding and prohibited reorganization. What the administration has actually done is slash the workforce and transfer functions to agencies with no expertise in education administration — creating the appearance of closure while leaving the legal obligations (and the students who depend on them) in limbo.

The “$3 trillion” figure, while potentially in the right ballpark as a nominal cumulative total over four decades, grossly mischaracterizes what the money funded. More than 96% of the department’s budget flows directly to students and schools: Pell Grants enabling college access for low-income students, Title I grants for disadvantaged K-12 schools, IDEA funding for children with disabilities, and the federal student loan system. Administrative overhead is less than 2% of the department’s budget. Framing this as “$3 trillion” wasted on “education bureaucracy” is like saying Medicare spent trillions “with nothing to show for it” because some seniors still get sick.

The “virtually nothing to show for it” claim is contradicted by the department’s own data. High school graduation rates are at historic highs. College enrollment and attainment have risen dramatically. The number of disabled students receiving legally guaranteed services has more than doubled. NAEP math scores for 9-year-olds rose 23 points between 1978 and 2020. These are not small gains. Recent declines — primarily attributable to COVID-19 disruptions — do not erase four decades of progress. And critically, the federal government provides only 8-14% of education funding; attributing all education outcomes to the Department of Education, whether positive or negative, reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of how American education is structured and funded.

Meanwhile, the actual dismantling effort has produced measurable harm: up to $38 million wasted on improperly fired civil rights staff, 90% of civil rights complaints dismissed without review, longer student loan service times, and growing backlogs across the department’s remaining functions.

The Bottom Line

The administration did sign an executive order directing the closure of the Department of Education — this is literally true. But the claim frames this as the successful beginning of a popular, common-sense reform, when it is more accurately described as an unconstitutional attempt to nullify congressional authority by attrition. The president cannot close a department Congress created and continues to fund. The “$3 trillion” figure obscures the fact that this money overwhelmingly went directly to students through Pell Grants, special education services, and student loans — not to bureaucrats. And “virtually nothing to show for it” is flatly contradicted by four decades of rising graduation rates, expanding college access, and the transformation of special education from a system that served one in five disabled children to one that serves 7.5 million.

What actually happened is not the closure of a department but the degradation of services to millions of students, borrowers, and families with disabilities — accompanied by documented waste, court battles, and a Congress that responded by increasing the department’s funding and prohibiting further reorganization. The claim confuses sabotage with reform.

Footnotes

1. White House, “Improving Education Outcomes by Empowering Parents, States, and Communities,” March 20, 2025. ↩

2. Brookings Institution, “FAQs: The US Department of Education and the Trump Administration,” March 2025; Just Security, “Can the President Dismantle the Department of Education by Executive Order?” February 2025. ↩

3. NPR, “U.S. Education Department says it is cutting nearly half of all staff,” March 11, 2025; Government Executive, “Education Department staff cuts have hurt service rather than streamlined bureaucracy,” March 11, 2026. ↩

4. SAN, “How the Department of Education spent $268 billion last year,” March 2025; PolitiFact, “Does less than 25% of Education Department spending go to students? No,” March 20, 2025. ↩

5. NCES, “Fast Facts: Long-term trends in reading and mathematics achievement”; NCES, “Condition of Education: High School Graduation Rates”; NCES, “Fast Facts: Students with disabilities”; Education Data Initiative, “College Enrollment Statistics 2026.” ↩

6. GAO, “Department of Education: Full Costs and Savings Estimate Needed for Reduction-in-Force and Restructuring of the Office for Civil Rights” (GAO-26-108320), January 29, 2026. ↩

7. Federal News Network, “Congress fully funded Education Dept, but it’s moving ahead with reassigning employees to other agencies,” February 18, 2026. ↩

8. Synthesis of ¹, ², ⁷. ↩

9. USAFacts, “What percentage of public school funding in the US comes from the federal government?”; Urban Institute, “Elementary and Secondary Education Expenditures.” ↩