To abolish the Department of Education and to provide funding directly to States for elementary and secondary education, and for other purposes.
- Sponsor
- Rep. Moore, Barry [R-AL-1]
- Committees
- Education and Workforce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 7, 2025
Bottom line
This bill seeks to dismantle the federal Department of Education, decentralize K-12 education funding to states based on tax contributions, and shift federal student aid administration to the Treasury.
What it actually does
This bill proposes to abolish the Department of Education and terminate most of its programs within 30 days of enactment. It transfers the administration of the Federal Pell Grant and William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan programs to the Secretary of the Treasury. Additionally, it establishes a new block grant program for states to support elementary and secondary education, with allocations distributed proportionally to the federal individual income taxes paid by residents of each state.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue this bill returns control of education to states and parents, reduces federal bureaucracy, and promotes competition and choice in education by empowering local decision-making. They believe it aligns funding with taxpayer contributions and streamlines federal student aid, fostering more effective and responsive educational systems.
Opponents contend
Opponents would likely argue that abolishing the Department of Education would dismantle critical federal oversight and support for vulnerable student populations, potentially exacerbating educational inequalities between states. They might also raise concerns about the proposed funding mechanism's fairness, the disruption of transferring major student aid programs, and the loss of federal leadership in setting national education priorities.
The bill is very short and easily digestible, allowing ample time for a thorough evaluation of its provisions.
Section 1(a)
Abolishment of Department of Education and Program Termination
This provision abolishes the Department of Education and terminates all programs for which the Secretary of Education or the Department of Education has administrative responsibility. This action is set to become effective 30 days after the date the bill is enacted into law, marking a significant restructuring of federal involvement in education.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that abolishing the Department of Education reduces federal bureaucracy, eliminates redundant programs, and returns control over education policy and funding to states and local communities, which are better equipped to address specific educational needs.
Critics contend
Opponents contend that eliminating the Department of Education would dismantle crucial federal oversight, reduce support for vulnerable student populations, and remove a vital voice for national education priorities, potentially leading to increased disparities and a fragmented educational landscape.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the desire for increased state autonomy and reduced federal bureaucracy against concerns about maintaining national standards, ensuring equity, and providing targeted support for diverse student populations.
Section 1(b), 1(c)
Transfer of Federal Student Aid Programs to Treasury
This provision specifically exempts the Federal Pell Grant program and the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program from the termination of Department of Education programs. Instead, the authority to carry out these two critical student financial aid programs is transferred to the Secretary of the Treasury, effective 30 days after the bill's enactment.
Section 2(b), 2(c), 2(d)
Elementary and Secondary Education Block Grant Program
This provision establishes a new program under the Secretary of the Treasury to provide block grants to states for elementary and secondary education. The allocations to each state will be proportional to the aggregate amount of federal individual income taxes paid by the residents of that state, relative to the total paid by residents of all states. States are required to use these funds specifically to support elementary and secondary education within their borders.
Section 2(a)
Sense of Congress on State Education Principles
This section expresses the sense of Congress that states should distribute non-Federal funds for elementary and secondary education in a manner that promotes competition and choices in education. It also affirms that it is the fundamental right of parents to determine the best education for their children, signaling a federal endorsement of specific educational philosophies.
The formula for allocating elementary and secondary education block grants to states is based on the aggregate amount of federal individual income taxes paid by the residents of each state, relative to the total paid by residents of all states.
Section 2(c)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for defining funding formulas, which are often technical and require careful reading to understand their full impact.
Case for: Proponents would argue this formula ensures states that contribute more to federal coffers receive a proportional return for education, aligning funding with taxpayer contributions and promoting fiscal responsibility.
Case against: Opponents would argue this formula inherently disadvantages states with lower average incomes or smaller populations, leading to significant disparities in education funding and potentially exacerbating existing inequalities, as federal education funding often aims to equalize resources across states.
Estimated impact: This formula would dramatically shift federal education funding distribution, likely increasing funds for wealthier states and decreasing for poorer states, potentially by billions of dollars annually.