Donald Trump’s DOE cuts swung at the Department of Education (DOE) hard this week—over 1,300 staffers, nearly half its workforce, got their pink slips on March 11, 2025. Education Secretary Linda McMahon hailed it as a “bold move” to axe “bureaucratic bloat,” shrinking the agency from 4,133 to 2,183 employees overnight. Trump’s camp says it’s the first step toward his campaign promise to kill the DOE entirely, handing education back to the states. But with panic swirling—claims of hungry kids, fired teachers, and crumbling schools—is this a leaner future or a reckless implosion?
Trump's DOE Cuts: What the DOE Actually Does
Let’s start with what the DOE doesn’t do. It doesn’t buy textbooks—those come from state and local budgets, often tied to property taxes. It doesn’t pay teachers, either; salaries are funded by districts, not D.C. desks. So, the viral X posts screaming about mass teacher layoffs? They’re off-base. The DOE’s role is narrower: it manages federal student loans ($1.6 trillion worth), oversees Pell Grants, funnels Title I funds to low-income districts, and enforces civil rights laws. Oh, and it tracks student performance—which we’ll dig into shortly. The 1,300 jobs cut? They’re agency staff—think data analysts, grant managers, and compliance officers—not classroom educators. Which raises the question: what’s this agency been doing with its budget—and our kids’ scores—anyway?
Trump's DOE Cuts: A Bloated Budget?
Rewind to 1979: the DOE was born under Jimmy Carter to “strengthen federal commitment” to equal education, targeting aid to the neediest schools. Its first budget? $14 billion. Fast forward to 2025, and it’s ballooned to $268 billion annually—adjusted for inflation, that’s a 400% leap. Critics say it’s gone wild, morphing from a focused aid hub into a sprawling overseer, with cash flowing to everything from research grants to diversity initiatives. Trump’s team, backed by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), argues states can handle this better—and cheaper. X users chime in: “Before the DOE, we topped global education rankings; now we’re sliding. What’s $268 billion buying us?”
Graphs: US Education Rankings
Graph showing the US ranks 28th in the world in Math
Graph showing the US ranks 28th in the world in Math Graph showing the US ranks 21st in the world in Science
Graph showing the US ranks 21st in the world in Science Graph demonstrating the US ranks 10th in the world in Reading
Graph demonstrating the US ranks 10th in the world in Reading
Despite dumping a colossal $1.3 trillion annually into education, the U.S. lags at 28th in Math, 21st in Science, and 10th in Reading among top nations, per PISA 2022. Money can’t buy a gold star here.
The Lunch Panic Debunked
Cue the panic over school lunches. Democrats warn of “hungry kids,” but the National School Lunch Program—run by the Department of Agriculture, not the DOE—keeps feeding 30 million kids, untouched by these cuts. The “starving students” line is loud, but it’s a myth built on shaky ground.
Who’s Out the Door?
So, who’s losing jobs? The 1,300 cuts hit administrative roles—folks processing student loan paperwork, auditing grants, or crunching numbers at the National Center for Education Statistics. Some 600 took voluntary exits, sweetened with incentives; the rest got “reduction in force” notices, shifting to paid leave by March 21. McMahon insists core programs—Title I, special ed under IDEA, Pell Grants—stay intact, just with fewer hands pushing the paper. Critics like the National Education Association’s Becky Pringle aren’t buying it, predicting “chaos” as oversight thins—though her $495,787 salary, 8.5 times the average teacher’s, spiked $64,000 since 2021, per NEA’s 2022–23 filings. Union dues or top-heavy optics? You decide.
Does Spending Equal Results?
Will this help the education system? Depends on what’s broken. U.S. students lag globally—28th in Math, 21st in Science, 10th in Reading, per PISA scores—despite a $1.3 trillion annual education spend, topping per-pupil spending among developed nations. Is that the DOE’s fault? It doesn’t set curricula or hire teachers, but it does steer billions that could hit classrooms harder if red tape eased up. States like Florida and Texas cheer the shift, eyeing flexibility to ditch federal strings. Yet rural red states leaning on Title I—think Mississippi, where it’s 15% of school funds—worry about gaps Congress might not fill. And with the DOE’s data arm gutted, we might lose the numbers that show why kids are slipping.
The Big Bet
The stakes are real. Streamline a bloated agency, and states could innovate—or flounder. Slash too deep, and vulnerable kids might feel it, even if teachers keep their chalk. Trump’s bet is that local control trumps federal sprawl. Will it lift us from the global education basement, or leave us scrambling in the dark?
Comentarios