Jan. 20 marked Inauguration Day, when President Donald Trump officially took office after defeating Kamala Harris in the election, winning 312 electoral votes to 226. With this change in leadership, students across the U.S. should start looking into how this could impact college funding and financial aid policies moving forward.
Throughout his first term, Trump took strong action to shrink the federal government’s involvement in education, consistently pushing for large budget cuts to the Department of Education. In 2021, marking the fourth consecutive year of such proposals, the administration suggested cutting the DOE’s budget by $5.6 billion, which would represent an 8% reduction compared to the prior year.
At the same time, the administration allocated $5 billion in tax credits for its private school voucher program. Trump’s focus was on slashing funding for federal student aid, after-school programs and other key initiatives that support millions of students. Democrats in Congress were quick to oppose Trump’s plan. Sen. Edward Markey of Massachusetts, a member of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, stated on his website that it is an “attack on educators, families, and students.” He vowed to fight it.
“If you take out any federal aid that is coming to them, they’re going to be in even worse financial straits,” Gregory W. Streich, a professor of political science at the University of Central Missouri said. “[Removing federal funding] would shift the cost immensely onto the students.”
Trump appointed Betsy DeVos, an advocate for school choice and a critic of the DOE, as his Secretary of Education. DeVos consistently pushed for reducing the department’s influence, even arguing it should be eliminated. At an event in Tampa, Florida, Devos stood in front of a crowd and said, “I personally think the Department of Education should not exist,” according to Florida Phoenix.
Despite having a supportive cabinet, Trump’s efforts to dismantle or shrink the DOE fell short in his first term. But with his track record, a second term could bring these ideas back to the forefront. As Trump said in an interview in Oct. 2023, “We spend more money per pupil by three times than any other nation. And yet we are absolutely at the bottom – we are one of the worst – you can’t do worse.” His opinion towards the current state of U.S. education continues to drive his belief that reform is necessary, even if it means reducing federal involvement.
How has the FAFSA helped students over the years? The FAFSA has been a lifeline for millions of students, unlocking access to federal grants, loans, and work-study opportunities that make college more affordable. Federal Student Aid directly manages or oversees a loan portfolio of more than $1.6 trillion, representing approximately 219.9 million student loans to more than 45.5 million borrowers. By filling it out, students can qualify for Pell Grants, which don’t have to be repaid, as well as income-driven repayment plans that ease the burden of student loans after graduation. It also opens the door to scholarships and state or school-specific aid, further cutting down costs. Additionally, it’s free to apply, ensuring that financial barriers don’t stand in the way of a college education.
What Could Happen if the DOE is Dismissed?
If the DOE were eliminated, states and local governments would be left to manage federal education programs, including student financial aid. However, many simply don’t have the resources to handle this responsibility. “In FY 2024, FSA provided approximately $120.8 billion in federal grants, loans and work-study funds to more than 9.9 million students at 5,378 colleges and career schools,” read page six of the 2024 FSA annual report. This withdrawal of funding can directly impact schools that are providing for students from low-income families.
The result could be a highly uneven education system, where wealthier states are able to provide better resources while poorer states fall behind. “The current funding approach across most of the nation leaves schools serving low-income and minority students at an inherent disadvantage,” an article by SOE, American University read. Local governments, already struggling to meet their own budget needs, would face even more pressure, leading to cuts in crucial programs like special education and support for low-income schools.
