Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Just The Facts: Impact of Department of Education Cuts

News

Just The Facts: Impact of Department of Education Cuts
The future of civic education
Getty Images

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

How many jobs are being cut from the Department of Education, and what percentage of the total workforce is that?


The department's staff will be reduced from 4,133 employees to about 2,183 employees. This significant downsizing aligns with broader efforts to restructure the department.

This significant downsizing aligns with broader efforts to restructure the department.

What are the broader efforts to restructure the Department of Education?

The broader efforts to restructure the U.S. Department of Education are part of a larger initiative to reduce federal oversight and shift control to states and local governments. Here are some key aspects of the restructuring:

  1. Shifting Control to States: The plan emphasizes giving states and local governments more authority over education policies and reducing federal mandates.
  2. Reducing Federal Bureaucracy: The department's workforce and budget are being significantly downsized, with some functions being transferred to other federal agencies or state governments.
  3. Restructuring Student Loan Programs: Oversight of federal student loans may be shifted to other agencies, focusing on privatizing loan servicing.
  4. Scaling Back Civil Rights Oversight: The Office for Civil Rights, which enforces policies on gender and racial equity in schools, is facing reductions in its role.
  5. Eliminating "Woke" Curriculum Policies: The administration aims to reduce federal influence over school curricula, particularly in critical race theory and social-emotional learning areas.
  6. Expanding School Choice Initiatives: Federal funding for low-income schools may be reallocated to support school choice programs.

These changes align with longstanding conservative goals to minimize federal involvement in education.

What are the specifics of the plan to restructure Student Loan Programs

The restructuring of student loan programs involves several significant changes:

  • Suspension of Income-Driven Repayment Plans: The Department of Education has halted enrollment in four popular income-driven repayments (IDR) plans, including Income-Based Repayment, Pay As You Earn, and the SAVE plan. These plans previously allowed borrowers to make payments based on their income and family size, with the promise of loan forgiveness after 20 or 25 years.
  • Privatization of Loan Servicing: Oversight of federal student loans is being shifted to private entities, aiming to streamline operations and reduce federal involvement.
  • Elimination of Loan Forgiveness Pathways: The suspension of IDR plans also impacts pathways to loan forgiveness, such as Public Service Loan Forgiveness, leaving borrowers with fewer affordable repayment options.
  • Focus on Simplification: The restructuring aims to simplify the repayment process, potentially consolidating multiple repayment plans into fewer options.

These changes are part of broader efforts to reduce federal oversight and align with the administration's goals of minimizing government involvement in education.

Why and how does the Trump Administration want to reduce the Department of Education's Civil Rights oversight?

The Trump administration's efforts to cut back the Department of Education's civil rights oversight are part of a broader initiative to reduce federal involvement in education and shift responsibilities to states. Here's the reasoning and approach behind these changes:

  • Reasoning: The administration argues that reducing federal oversight will streamline operations, eliminate what they see as "bureaucratic bloat," and allow states more control over education policies. They believe this approach will lead to more efficient and localized decision-making.
  • How It's Being Done:
  • Staff Reductions: The Office for Civil Rights, which enforces policies on gender, racial equity, and disability rights in schools, is facing significant staff cuts. This downsizing limits its capacity to investigate and address complaints.
  • Policy Changes: The administration has redefined what constitutes discrimination in schools, narrowing the scope of federal intervention. For example, they have rolled back policies related to racial and gender equity and reduced protections for transgender students.

How will changes in the Department of education specifically attempt to limit what they call "Woke Education"

The Department of Education's efforts to limit what they refer to as "woke education" focus on reducing federal funding and support for programs and initiatives tied to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), as well as critical race theory (CRT). Here are some specifics:

  • Elimination of DEI Initiatives: The department has dissolved councils and programs dedicated to DEI, such as the Diversity & Inclusion Council, and has removed related resources from its public platforms.
  • Cancellation of Grants and Contracts: Over $600 million in grants for teacher training programs that included DEI, CRT, and social justice topics have been terminated. Additionally, $350 million in contracts with organizations promoting equity audits and DEI training have been canceled.
  • Policy Revisions: The department has withdrawn its Equity Action Plan and archived guidance documents that promoted DEI or CRT in schools.
  • Focus on "Neutral" Education: The administration aims to reorient education policies toward what they describe as "meaningful learning" rather than "divisive ideologies."

These changes are part of a broader push to reduce federal influence over school curricula and align with the administration's priorities.

All data and information were obtained from Copilot, an AI-powered chatbot owned and operated by Microsoft Corporation.

David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund



Read More

New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) (L) and Rep. August Pfluger (R-TX) lead a group of fellow Republicans through Statuary Hall on the way to a news conference on the 28th day of the federal government shutdown at the U.S. Capitol on October 28, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

Every January 1st, many Americans face their failings and resolve to do better by making New Year’s Resolutions. Wouldn’t it be delightful if Congress would do the same? According to Gallup, half of all Americans currently have very little confidence in Congress. And while confidence in our government institutions is shrinking across the board, Congress is near rock bottom. With that in mind, here is a list of resolutions Congress could make and keep, which would help to rebuild public trust in Congress and our government institutions. Let’s start with:

1 – Working for the American people. We elect our senators and representatives to work on our behalf – not on their behalf or on behalf of the wealthiest donors, but on our behalf. There are many issues on which a large majority of Americans agree but Congress can’t. Congress should resolve to address those issues.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two groups of glass figures. One red, one blue.

Congressional paralysis is no longer accidental. Polarization has reshaped incentives, hollowed out Congress, and shifted power to the executive.

Getty Images, Andrii Yalanskyi

How Congress Lost Its Capacity to Act and How to Get It Back

In late 2025, Congress fumbled the Affordable Care Act, failing to move a modest stabilization bill through its own procedures and leaving insurers and families facing renewed uncertainty. As the Congressional Budget Office has warned in multiple analyses over the past decade, policy uncertainty increases premiums and reduces insurer participation (see, for example: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61734). I examined this episode in an earlier Fulcrum article, “Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis,” as a case study in congressional paralysis and leadership failure. The deeper problem, however, runs beyond any single deadline or decision and into the incentives and procedures that now structure congressional authority. Polarization has become so embedded in America’s governing institutions themselves that it shapes how power is exercised and why even routine governance now breaks down.

From Episode to System

The ACA episode wasn’t an anomaly but a symptom. Recent scholarship suggests it reflects a broader structural shift in how Congress operates. In a 2025 academic article available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), political scientist Dmitrii Lebedev reaches a stark conclusion about the current Congress, noting that the 118th Congress enacted fewer major laws than any in the modern era despite facing multiple time-sensitive policy deadlines (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5346916). Drawing on legislative data, he finds that dysfunction is no longer best understood as partisan gridlock alone. Instead, Congress increasingly exhibits a breakdown of institutional capacity within the governing majority itself. Leadership avoidance, procedural delay, and the erosion of governing norms have become routine features of legislative life rather than temporary responses to crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump’s ‘America First’ is now just imperialism

Donald Trump Jr.' s plane landed in Nuuk, Greenland, where he made a short private visit, weeks after his father, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, suggested Washington annex the autonomous Danish territory.

(Ritzau Scanpix/AFP via Getty Images)

Trump’s ‘America First’ is now just imperialism

In early 2025, before Donald Trump was even sworn into office, he sent a plane with his name in giant letters on it to Nuuk, Greenland, where his son, Don Jr., and other MAGA allies preened for cameras and stomped around the mineral-rich Danish territory that Trump had been casually threatening to invade or somehow acquire like stereotypical American tourists — like they owned it already.

“Don Jr. and my Reps landing in Greenland,” Trump wrote. “The reception has been great. They and the Free World need safety, security, strength, and PEACE! This is a deal that must happen. MAGA. MAKE GREENLAND GREAT AGAIN!”

Keep ReadingShow less
The Common Cause North Carolina, Not Trump, Triggered the Mid-Decade Redistricting Battle

Political Midterm Election Redistricting

Getty images

The Common Cause North Carolina, Not Trump, Triggered the Mid-Decade Redistricting Battle

“Gerrymander” was one of seven runners-up for Merriam-Webster’s 2025 word of the year, which was “slop,” although “gerrymandering” is often used. Both words are closely related and frequently used interchangeably, with the main difference being their function as nouns versus verbs or processes. Throughout 2025, as Republicans and Democrats used redistricting to boost their electoral advantages, “gerrymander” and “gerrymandering” surged in popularity as search terms, highlighting their ongoing relevance in current politics and public awareness. However, as an old Capitol Hill dog, I realized that 2025 made me less inclined to explain the definitions of these words to anyone who asked for more detail.

“Did the Democrats or Republicans Start the Gerrymandering Fight?” is the obvious question many people are asking: Who started it?

Keep ReadingShow less