US lobbyist's observations about dismantling ED
Is it time to fade into the background?
Rick Hess, a US education policy wonk known for his advocacy of conservative positions, reported an interview with Victor Klatt, a lobbyist who previously worked in the US Department of Education and for US Congressional committees. Because Mr. Klatt has represented companies in the for-profit sector, I thought that Mr. Klatt and Mr. Hess1 might discuss topics relevant to the current upset in the US about special education (e.g., moving different parts of federal special education work to disparate agencies or revising how special education funds are spent), so I read the interview.
Ms. Hess did not ask questions about special education, so Mr. Klatt’s comments did not directly address matters of specific interest to we special educators. However, in one of his responses, Mr. Klatt said something that I think should be of importance to us.
Mr. Hess asked why, even though it has been discussed for many years, abolishing the Department of Education has been such a highly visible issue in 2025.
I’m honestly not sure why, other than that it has been a long-standing goal of some of President Donald Trump’s key administration appointees, particularly those from the Heritage Foundation. That said, without the necessary support from Congress and the public, the Education Department is likely here to stay. I’ve also never quite understood how transferring all the big education programs to other agencies accomplishes the goal of abolishing the department. However, the Trump administration is attempting to downsize the department, its staff, and some of its programs. If it’s the “end of the world as we know it,” like many opponents of eliminating the department claim, then these cuts should cause a lasting outcry which could, in theory, drive the administration to backtrack. However, if this whole effort meets with a big yawn after the initial clamor dies down, then a reduced federal role—with or without the Education Department—may be here to stay for some time.
Hmm…did I just hear a recommendation that advocates continue efforts to protect special education programs? It sounds to me like Mr. Klatt is saying, “Don’t let it go. Keep on speaking out in support of special education.”2 We better keep speaking publicly in support of special education.
Mr. Klatt has been a part of the Washington, DC, education establishment since the 1980s. He recently left his position in leadership of the lobbying firm, Penn Hill Group. According to a bio on Open Secrets, he has represented companies such as Edison School, Sylvan Learning, NewSchools Venture Fund, and others.
Mr. Hess is associated with the American Enterprise Institute. He regularly writes for Education Week. His interview with Mr. Klatt is available as “A D.C. Insider Explains What’s Changed in Education Policy” on both the AEI site and the Ed Week pages.
Footnotes
I refer to “Mr. Hess” here despite the fact that he has a Ph.D. and the fact that I’ve known him personally since the late 1990s. I could very well refer to him as “Dr. Hess” or “Rick,” but I’m sticking with SET’s usual use of generic names.
I check on the activities of an unnamed ad-hoc group of interested Washington-connected education advocates that is, as I understand the group’s work, continuing to discuss education matters. Special education is among them, so it seems to me that some people are not falling into a “big yawn.” Readers in SET land should take heart from this group’s work.