U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon testifies at a hearing of the U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies on May 21, 2025. Screenshot from committee livestream
WASHINGTON — U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon took heat from U.S. House Democrats on Wednesday over the drastic cuts and proposed changes at her federal agency in the months since President Donald Trump took office.
Democrats on a panel within the U.S. House Committee on Appropriations expressed dissatisfaction with McMahon’s education initiatives so far, as well as Trump’s fiscal year 2026 budget request released earlier this month. The request calls for $12 billion in spending cuts at the department.
McMahon appeared before the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies to outline the budget request as part of the panel’s work to write the bill to fund the department for the coming fiscal year.
McMahon told the panel that the department aims to “shrink federal bureaucracy, save taxpayer money and empower states — who best know their local needs — to manage education in this country.”
“We’ve reduced a department that was overstaffed by thousands of positions, cut old contracts that were enriching private parties at taxpayer expense, suspended grants for illegal (diversity, equity and inclusion) programs and now are putting forward a budget request that reduces department funding by more than 15%,” she said.
Trump and his administration have sought to dramatically reshape the federal role in education, including an executive order calling on McMahon to facilitate the closure of her own department, the gutting of more than 1,300 employees at the agency, threats to revoke funds for schools that use DEI practices and a crackdown on “woke” higher education.
‘Disdain for public education’
Rep. Rosa DeLauro, ranking member of the full panel and the subcommittee, called McMahon’s actions at the department “lawless,” adding that they “reek of disdain for public education” and are “hurting the most vulnerable in our nation.”
“Under your leadership of the department, hundreds of millions of dollars have been frozen, and entire programs have been terminated,” the Connecticut Democrat said. “Funding for vital research, protection of students’ civil rights and programs that support the recruitment and professional development of effective educators have been terminated.”
DeLauro also lambasted the budget’s proposal to consolidate 18 grant programs for K-12 education and replace them with a $2 billion formula grant that would give states spending flexibility.
A White House document summarizing major changes in the budget request said the consolidation would cut spending by more than $4.5 billion, a point DeLauro emphasized.
“Yet at the same time, you propose that we provide $4.5 billion less to educate our nation’s children overall,” she said. “A block grant is a cut — all of my colleagues here know that the states cannot afford to pick up the slack.”
In another exchange in the lengthy hearing, McMahon pushed back against New Jersey Democratic Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman’s assertion that the department’s Office for Civil Rights is “being decimated.” The unit has seen significant staffing cuts as part of the department’s reduction in force effort along with the closure of several regional offices.
“Well, it isn’t being decimated,” McMahon said. “We have reduced the size of it, however, we are taking on a backlog of cases that were left over from the Biden administration and we’re working through those.”
Watson Coleman proceeded to press McMahon on why the department would reduce its resources if the agency has a backlog in addition to confronting cases that will come before it now.
“Because we are working more efficiently in the department,” McMahon replied.
Prioritizing school choice
Meanwhile, Republicans focused largely on school choice initiatives and how McMahon and the department are prioritizing those efforts.
The term “school choice” applies to alternative programs to a student’s assigned public school. Proponents say school choice programs are necessary for parents dissatisfied with their local public schools, though critics argue these efforts drain critical funds from school districts.
Rep. Robert Aderholt, chair of the subcommittee, said “too many schools, encouraged and facilitated by federal funding, have let things like social justice advocacy and divisive issues crowd out the focus on teaching students and the core subjects.”
“Thankfully, some states have pursued choice options for students whose traditional public schools have not served them well, including through charter schools,” the Alabama Republican said.
McMahon said increasing school choice was one of her priorities as secretary and highlighted the budget’s proposed increase of $60 million to expand the number of charter schools in the country, according to the budget request.
“The president absolutely believes, as do I, that the more choice that parents have, the better off the students are, and we’ve seen that repeatedly in different states,” she said.
This post was originally authored and published by Shauneen Miranda from AZ Mirror via RSS Feed. Join today to get your news feed on Nationwide Report®.
