McMahon spars with Democrats over request to cut Education Department funding
McMahon at times had contentious moments with members as she emphasized the request for a $12 billion cut as President Trump wants her to carry out the federal agency's 'final mission.'
'Madam Secretary, the legacy you will be leaving is that 'I shut down the Department of Education.' How we educate our children determines not just their future, but our own. But I think it's a sad legacy you will leave,' said Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.)
At the beginning of the hearing, McMahon said her three priorities for the department are school choice, literacy rates and returning education to the states.
'The fiscal year '26 budget will take a significant step toward that goal. We seek to shrink federal bureaucracy, save taxpayer money and empower states who best know their local needs to manage education in this country,' McMahon said.
In his budget request, the president is looking to cut most education areas including preschool grants and the Office of Civil Rights.
The only area the Trump administration looked to increase funding was for charter schools, by $60 million.
The proposed cuts led to multiple discussions between the secretary and Democrats.
'I'm asking you, do you realize that to send authority back to the states, to eliminate your oversight, to eliminate your accountability, to eliminate your determination as to resources going to schools that are teaching public schools that are teaching underserved communities, this will result in the very reason that we had to get the involvement of our government in this, and that's a yes or no,' said Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.)
'It isn't a yes or no, but I will not respond to any questions based on the theory that this administration doesn't care anything about the law and operates outside it,' McMahon responded.
'From the president of the United States conducting himself in a corrupt manner to his family enriching him and himself corruptly … I'm telling you, the Department of Education is one of the most important departments in this country and you should feel shameful [to] be engaged with an administration that doesn't give a damn,' Watson Coleman retorted.
McMahon pushed back on statements that she is trying to get rid of the 8 to 10 percent of federal funding that goes to states, emphasizing she is looking to move the programs to other departments.
Trump has previously floated, for example, moving student loans to the Department of Treasury and programs for students with disabilities to the Department of Health and Human Services.
'You don't want to come up with the 8 percent to help our kids succeed, to help their mental health, to help kids with disabilities,' said Dean.
'I've already said Title I funding, IDEA funding is still going to come out' through other departments, McMahon responded.
Republicans largely praised McMahon for the work she has done so far to slash the Department of Education, an agency the party has tried to get rid of since its creation.
But the end of the department is not possible without an act of Congress, a high bar the Trump administration is unlikely to clear.
'Secretary McMahon has wasted no time implementing President Trump's bold agenda to restore education to the states, and I want to commend her for efforts on hitting the ground running,' said Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), chair of the House Appropriation Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies.
'Students need reading, writing, math, critical thinking for everyday activities to succeed in their jobs and to make life's big decisions,' he added. 'Federal funding has let things like social justice advocacy, divisive issues' overtake a 'focus on teaching students' core subjects.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a minute ago
- Yahoo
U.S., EU reach historic trade deal
U.S., EU reach historic trade deal originally appeared on TheStreet. The U.S. and the European Union reached a historic trade deal on July 27. President Donald Trump said the EU is going to purchase energy worth $750 billion and military equipment worth hundreds of billions of dollars from the U.S. The EU has also agreed to invest $600 billion in the U.S. Tariffs for automobiles and everything else will be 15%, he added and continued that the EU has agreed to open up their countries at "zero tariff." "That basically concludes a deal." European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the EU agreed to 15% "across the board" tariffs and said the trade deal with the U.S. will bring stability. Bitcoin reflected a rebound following the announcement of the historical trade deal and was trading at $119,063.02 at the time of writing. China, US to reportedly extend tariff pause by 90 more days Earlier also, Bitcoin witnessed a similar but sharper rebound — from around $118,500 to around $119,500 before it retreated to around $118,900 — following the news report by the South China Morning Post that the U.S. and China are expected to extend their tariff truce by another 90 days when both superpowers meet to resume trade talks in Stockholm on July tariff war has led to an enormous impact on the crypto markets so far. When the president hiked tariffs on Apr. 2, the total crypto market cap dipped from $2.74 trillion to $2.42 trillion on Apr. 8. Next, when he paused tariffs for all countries for 90 days on Apr. 9, China remained the main exception as the U.S.'s tariff hikes against it continued. Nonetheless, the market sighed a breath of relief and began quickly recovering to reach $2.71 trillion on Apr. 12. As trade talks between the two countries took place, they agreed to remove most high tariffs imposed since Apr. 2, but the deadline of this pause is set to expire on August 12. The total crypto market cap stood at $3.94 trillion at the time of writing. Meanwhile, Bitcoin hit a record high of $123,091.61 on July 14 as uncertainty around the tariffs continued — reflecting the king coin's resilience. U.S., EU reach historic trade deal first appeared on TheStreet on Jul 27, 2025 This story was originally reported by TheStreet on Jul 27, 2025, where it first appeared. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Axios
2 minutes ago
- Axios
GOP leans into Trump administration's Obama accusations
Some Republican lawmakers on Sunday platformed the administration's recent claims that Obama-era officials waged a Russia-related conspiracy against President Trump — but stopped short of endorsing the president's allegations of "treason." The big picture: Trump is again bemoaning a years-long grudge against the widely held conclusion that Russia interfered in the 2016 election, following new accusations from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard of a " treasonous conspiracy" from former President Barack Obama to sabotage Trump's first term. The initial accusations centered around findings from the Obama-era intelligence community that Russia didn't alter vote tallies by hacking election infrastructure. But as Axios' Zachary Basu and Tal Axelrod note, no serious investigation ever claimed Russia changed them. Last week, Gabbard declassified a report from 2020 that she alleges proves the Obama administration "conspired to subvert the will of the American people" and engaged in a "years-long coup against" Trump. In a rare rebuke, a spokesperson for Obama slammed the administration's claims as "a weak attempt at distraction." Driving the news: Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) called for an investigation into the matter Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press." "If there is evidence of a crime being committed or suspected evidence of a crime being committed, create a special counsel to look at it," he said. "I think that's the best way to go." Asked by NBC's Kristen Welker whether the new controversy was an attempt to distract from the ongoing fallout from the administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, Graham argued he was trying to shed light on "something we didn't know before." The other side: Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, slammed Gabbard as a "weapon of mass distraction" on "Fox News Sunday," arguing there was "no new information" released. "It's new to you, but all of this information has been available to the House Intelligence Committee, including in 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, when all these investigations and reviews were done under the first Trump administration," Crow said, later adding that no information had been "purposefully hidden." In 2020, a Republican-led Senate panel affirmed the intelligence committee's conclusion that Russia meddled in the election and preferred Trump over Hillary Clinton. Zoom in: But Rep. Rick Crawford (R-Ark.), the chair of the House Intel Committee, slammed what he called the "Russia collusion hoax" in a "Fox News Sunday" interview, describing it as "a fraud perpetrated on the American people at the expense of President Trump." But "with regard to the claims of treason, I'll leave that to the courts to make that determination," he noted. The bottom line: As Trump launches fresh attacks against his predecessors, questions about his administration's handling of the disgraced financier's case are still rippling through Washington. The competing narratives of the ongoing Epstein fallout, over which the president has cried "hoax," and the reinvigorated anger over the Russia investigation are in many ways both rooted in Trump's vision of a "witch hunt" that's plagued his political career, Axios' Basu notes. Trump quickly seized on the Obama storyline, sharing a seemingly AI-generated video of the former president being arrested earlier this month, and more recently, an edited photo of himself pursuing Obama in a car chase.
The Hill
2 minutes ago
- The Hill
Democrats hear some criticism as redistricting talk picks up
Outside groups are raising concerns that Democrats risk violating the Voting Rights Act with redistricting plans, creating a new problem for the party as it seeks to answer GOP efforts to redistrict its way to more power. Democrats say they have to take action to draw new House districts in states they control in response to power plays by a Trump-driven GOP in Texas and other states. But the tit-for-tat has left groups leaving the door open to litigation. They also are making a moral case, arguing Democrats are thwarting the democratic process. 'This is dead wrong from a democracy perspective, I think it's very problematic for Democrats from a political strategic perspective,' explained Dan Vicuna, director of voting and fair representation at Common Cause. California Gov. Gavin Newsom is the only Democratic governor so far to signal he's considering several ways to counter the GOP's efforts in Texas. Speaking to reporters on Friday, Newsom said any move by California 'is predicated on Texas moving forward' with its own redistricting plan, which some have seen as a way for the Lone Star State to make it more likely to hold on to five House seats. Several other Democratic governors, including Govs. Kathy Hochul of New York, Phil Murphy of New Jersey and JB Pritzker of Illinois have left the door open to possibly changing their maps. The GOP may also not be done. The White House is reportedly pushing Missouri to consider redrawing its map. Civil rights and voting groups are worried actions by both parties could undermine or weaken the political power of historically marginalized minority communities. The issue is a thorny one for Democrats, who have positioned themselves as the prodemocracy party and championed racial justice initiatives. At the same time, Democratic states just like Republican states have been sued by civil rights groups over Voting Rights Act violations. Both Democrats and Republicans have also been found guilty of creating gerrymandered maps. 'We have sued both Democrats and Republicans on these issues,' said Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel of Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. 'So yes, we are concerned that when leaders of either party seek to take maximum advantage, partisan advantage of redistricting, they often neglect, if not ignore, the imperatives of the Voting Rights Act with respect to reliably Democratic voting groups.' Some groups are also frustrated given efforts by blue states to move beyond gerrymandering. 'Independent commissions like the gold standard in California were created specifically to avoid what's being considered here, which is voting maps drawn for the sole purpose of protecting incumbent politicians and political party interests to the exclusion of community needs and community feedback,' Vicuna said. California Common Cause was intimately involved in the creation of California's independent commission. It could be difficult for some Democratic-held states to answer Texas. Several would likely need to change their state constitution and work around their respective redistricting commissions. Should the Lone Star State craft new House lines, John Bisognano, president of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee and its affiliates, in a statement said they would be met 'with a wall of resistance and a wave of legal challenges.' His statement did not address Democratic-led states mulling their own midcycle redistricting. Democrats argue that if Republicans are headed down that road, nothing should be off the table for them as well. 'Republicans should be careful what they ask for,' Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.), chair of the House Democrats' campaign arm, told The Hill in a statement. 'And if they go down this path? Absolutely folks are going to respond across the country. We're not going to be sitting back with one hand tied behind our back while Republicans try to undermine the voices of the American people.' Democrats are also leaning into the issue of democracy, saying the longevity of the country is at stake if the party does not respond. Newsom painted the situation in grim terms, saying on Friday, 'I believe that the people of the state of California understand what's at stake. If we don't put a stake into the heart of this administration, there may not be an election in 2028.' 'We can sit back and act as if we have some moral superiority and watch this 249, almost 250-year experiment be washed away,' Newsom said. 'We are not going to allow that to happen. We have agency, we can shape the future.' Civil rights and voting-focused groups, however, are concerned about the ramifications midcycle redistricting could have moving forward, including the possibility of what was once considered a decennial process after each U.S. census turning into a cyclical issue. 'One of the concerns that we have is, even if blue states have power and have a majority in their legislature to redraw maps, our concern is that this could set a bad precedent, because those states could, at the same time, flip in the future,' said Jose Barrera Novoa, vice president of the far west for the League of United Latin American Citizens. 'And the same thing is going to happen where … other parties are going to look to redraw the map midcycle or even quarterly. Who knows?' he asked. 'It's all hypothetical, yet it's still very possible.' Not only could a potential redistricting tit-for-tat raise questions over whether this could be repeated in the future, experts also worry about the financial toll it could take on their resources and voters themselves. 'These are judges managing these cases, hearing these cases. Many of these people are paid out by state funds, and federal cases, of course, are also paid by voters directly,' explained Celina Stewart, CEO of the League of Women Voters, noting cases that use taxpayer funds. 'Do we really want to spend this time doing this highly unusual activity when we're all going to have to pay for it?'
