How DOGE Could Take Down the Department of Education

Its initial strikes could be the start of a broader fight.

Since Franklin D. Roosevelt, one way of measuring the success of an American presidential administration is to tally its accomplishments in its first 100 days. By this standard, President Trump’s second administration is looking quite successful.

Since January 20, the president’s cabinet has pursued decisive action on virtually every political front. But the most high-risk, high-potential initiative has been Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. Established in the shell of former President Obama’s U.S. Digital Service, DOGE was charged with eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse in an effort to remake the federal government. For anyone else, such an initiative would have seemed quixotic. But for Musk, who has revolutionized multiple industries and thrives in high-conflict management scenarios, a cautious hope seemed appropriate.

Over the first 30 days, Musk’s DOGE method has come to resemble a seek-and-destroy mission. Musk dispatched small teams of lawyers, engineers, and human-resources specialists to government agencies, instructing them to cut wasteful spending and needless, ideological programs. Musk seems to have identified two switches—payments and personnel—that provide the greatest leverage. The DOGE teams have quickly organized a reduction in workforce and cancelled billions of dollars in government contracts, two steps that reduce spending and reverse the process of left-wing capture.

Last week, I had a front-row seat to this process. I released material from an ongoing investigation into ideological corruption at the Department of Education and its sprawling NGO network. This material painted a damning picture of the department’s reigning ideologies. In one video, a Department of Education-funded NGO argued that public-school educators should destigmatize child “sex work,” especially for “queer and trans people of color” and “LGBTQ+ youth.” In another, activists with a Department of Education-affiliated NGO claimed that babies develop racial biases and begin “attributing negative traits” to nonwhite races by age five. And finally, I published a clip from an NGO that had received an $8 million grant to promote the idea that America is a “racialized structure of power, privilege, [and] oppression.”

For close observers of the education world, none of this came as a surprise. But with President Trump in office, an opportunity now exists for reform. Hours after I posted this material, the Department of Education announced that it had canceled the grants, totaling $350 million, for the Equity Assistance Centers and Regional Education Laboratories that had been organizing such trainings. “So many situations like this,” pronounced Musk on X, adding, “funding for racist baby training is canceled.”

DOGE’s swift action reflects a number of important developments. First, national politics is now highly online, with Musk’s X shaping the discourse. Journalists circulate ideas on social media. Government officials then can put them into action, sometimes within hours. The process creates a virtuous circle, with journalists, policymakers, and technologists making information public and taking corrective action as necessary.

The other notable development is speed. Unlike many government bureaucrats, Musk and the DOGE team operate at a lightning-fast tempo. Their stated ambition is to cancel billions of dollars in government contracts each day, and they use their social-media feeds to identify waste in real time. They understand that the most visible elements of waste are not outright fraud but ideological programming that serves no constructive public purpose.

These initial strikes at the Department of Education could be the opening for a broader fight. The public can now see that the department functions, in part, as a patronage scheme for left-wing ideologies. It oversees a massive budget, which it then disperses to universities, schools, and NGOs that, for the most part, advance a monolithic left-wing line. The question is how far DOGE can go in dismantling it.

Though some of the department’s programs are almost certain to continue—such as federal student aid and specialized K-12 funding—DOGE could feasibly cut billions more in spending and set the stage for Congress to abolish the department altogether. These targeted missions will, in theory, create permission for larger actions in the future.

So far, the approach seems to be bearing fruit, but as with any initiative involving government, we should remain cautious. The bureaucracy has a remarkable ability to survive, in part because of its scale. Even with artificial intelligence and squads of talented engineers, the DOGE team is the underdog.

DOGE is winning for now. But the bureaucracy has barely begun to fight back.