A bipartisan House bill introduced on Wednesday seeks to stop the transfer of four U.S. Department of Education offices to other federal agencies, aiming to keep oversight of special education, postsecondary education, Native American education, and elementary‑secondary education within the department.
Legislative sponsors and companion measure
The legislation was filed by Rep. John Mannion (D‑N.Y.), Rep. Bobby Scott (D‑Va.) and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R‑Pa.). It mirrors a Senate proposal that has cleared the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions but still awaits a full vote on the floor.
In a joint statement, the three lawmakers said the bill would block moves to agencies that “lack the staff, experience, and expertise needed to administer them.”
Background on interagency agreements
During the previous administration, the Education Department entered into 14 interagency agreements with six other federal agencies, shifting many K‑12 and higher‑education duties out of the department. Officials said the deals would reduce bureaucratic layers, but critics argue they create confusion and dilute program cohesion.
Under those agreements, the department keeps statutory responsibility for the offices while grant management, technical assistance and related services shift to partner agencies.
Observers note that the arrangement leaves the department overseeing policy while external entities handle day‑to‑day operations, a split that some analysts say can hinder swift response to emerging needs.
Lawmakers and advocacy groups react
Rep. Fitzpatrick told constituents that families should never wonder whether a reorganization will cost a child a service or opportunity. He said he took constituent concerns about moving the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services directly to the Administration, demanding answers on protecting the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), preserving resources and avoiding disruption.
Chad Rummel, chief executive of the Council for Exceptional Children, called the proposed transfer of special education to the Department of Health and Human Services “misguided,” saying it would separate special‑education programs from other education initiatives and endanger students’ rights.
Education Department press secretary Savannah Newhouse responded by calling the status quo “a failed status quo” and warned that the nation’s roughly 30 percent of students who are proficient in math and reading cannot afford further delays. She labeled the House bill “premature” and suggested it would sabotage efforts to cut red tape.
While the House and Senate measures focus on those four offices, they do not address the pending move of the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights to the Justice Department, a shift that has drawn criticism from civil‑rights advocates who doubt the Justice Department’s capacity to handle education‑specific complaints.
Many civil rights and special education advocacy organizations have expressed concerns about the weakening of student civil rights protections and the Justice Department’s capacity to handle K‑12 and higher‑education‑specific complaints.
Legislative outlook and related proposals
The House bill was referred to the Education and Workforce Committee for consideration. The companion Senate bill cleared its committee in July, positioning both chambers to potentially act in the coming months.
Separately, a Republican‑backed package of ten bills introduced in July and also sent to the Education and Workforce Committee proposes to codify several interagency agreements, permanently moving select legal responsibilities out of the Education Department.
This package aims to solidify the current split of duties, giving partner agencies statutory authority over certain grant functions while the department retains policy‑making power.
Compared with past attempts to reorganize education functions, this effort reflects a growing tension between streamlining federal operations and preserving program integrity—a balance that has long challenged policymakers.
The debate is ongoing.
As the House discussion proceeds, the fate of the four offices will hinge on committee votes and any further negotiations with the Senate, leaving the department’s structure in a state of uncertainty for now.
