In San Diego, Education Secretary Insists Cuts Target Bureaucracy, Not Funding

On Tuesday, Education Secretary Linda McMahon took the stage at the ASU+GSV Summit, one of the nation’s premier education technology conferences. 

Behind her, in the grand ballroom of San Diego’s Grand Hyatt Hotel, a fireplace was displayed on one of the three gaudy screens lining the back wall. In front of her, hundreds of educators, investors and technologists sat bathed in blue-light, picking at plates of croissants and green shakshuka eggs. 

Throughout much of the conference, attendees eagerly buzzed with utopic talk of AI-enabled productivity gains, AI agents and scalable stacks. But McMahon’s presence forced another, less welcome, consideration: political realities. 

In recent months, President Donald Trump’s directive to eliminate the Department of Education has sparked outrage among many in the education sphere. That opposition was evident even at the conference. Just outside, where the Grand Hyatt abuts Seaport Village, a couple dozen protesters waved signs. Some chanted, “Ho, ho, hee, hee, go back to the WWE,” referring to the wrestling company McMahon started with her ex-husband. 

The Department of Education serves important oversight functions, like policing Title IX infractions. For example, just last year, the feds slammed San Diego Unified’s handling of reports of sexual misconduct. And though the department only provides around 10 percent of funding for schools across the country, that funding is directed toward the most in need, like economically disadvantaged students and those with special needs. The department also distributes more than $100 billion in financial aid, loans and work-study payments to college students each year. 

During the half-hour chat, McMahon said that cuts were targeting bureaucracy, not funding. She insisted that federal education funding would continue to flow to states despite the potential elimination of the Department of Education itself. Some experts, however, have cast doubt on the feasibility of that assertion. In any case, the reinvention was necessary because American schools “are not addressing the needs,” of children, McMahon argued.  

“We’ve just gotten to a point that we just can’t keep going along doing what we’re doing. Let’s shake it up. Let’s do something different. And it’s not through bureaucracy in Washington, that is not where it happens,” McMahon said.  

That wasn’t all McMahon covered.  

The Nation’s Report Card: Despite fears it would be eliminated, McMahon said she wanted to keep the National Assessment of Educational Progress, otherwise known as NAEP or the Nation’s Report Card. NAEP is a test that students in all states take in order to be able to measure educational progress nationwide.  

McMahon told the crowd that she had said this directly to the president.  

“I said, ‘Look, this is what keeps us honest, because it’s comparing apples to apples.’”  

Getting rid of the NAEP would allow states to be “manipulative” with their testing results, McMahon said. 

Privatization: McMahon also said something that may have been music to the ears of some in the crowd.  

While some of the work of the Department of Education is the work of a bloated bureaucracy engaged in mission creep, she said, other functions may be more essential. That’s where the companies attending the ASU+GSU Summit could come in.  

“So many of you sitting in this room, who are investing in innovation and in technology and helping develop it and wondering whether or not [you] should continue to invest in education, this is the time. This is the moment to do that, because as we pull down that bureaucracy, there could be gaps and holes that we need you to fill,” she said.  

While the crowd remained quiet through much of the talk, the comments elicited scattered applause.