COVID Recovery or Mismanagement? The Truth Behind Education Funding Cuts

California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s latest courtroom stunt is a head-scratcher. He’s suing the U.S. Department of Education, claiming its decision to pull back hundreds of millions in federal funding threatens kids’ futures. The move reeks of desperation, a last-ditch effort to prop up a system that’s been bleeding inefficiency for years. Bonta’s coalition of 15 other attorneys general argues the cuts are ‘arbitrary’ and will gut programs like afterschool tutoring and mental health services. But let’s be honest: this isn’t about saving schools. It’s about clinging to federal strings that have tangled local districts in red tape for far too long.

The Department’s decision, announced March 28, 2025, by Education Secretary Linda McMahon, isn’t a reckless hack-and-slash. It’s a calculated step to untangle schools from funds that were obligated but poorly managed, often propping up bloated initiatives that sound good on paper but deliver little. Bonta’s lawsuit paints a grim picture of shuttered programs and abandoned kids. Yet the real story is about empowering communities to prioritize what actually works, not begging for scraps from a federal piggy bank that’s long overdue for a reckoning.

Bonta’s camp insists that $200 million in California alone is at stake, money supposedly fueling critical recovery efforts post-COVID. The numbers sound scary, but dig deeper, and the narrative crumbles. Federal relief funds, like those from the American Rescue Plan Act, poured $122 billion into K-12 schools nationwide. Sounds generous, right? Except much of it went to pet projects, overstaffing, or tech purchases that gathered dust in closets. Studies show districts often misallocated these funds, with some spending less than 20% on direct student recovery like tutoring or summer programs. The idea that every dollar was a lifeline for kids doesn’t hold water.

Meanwhile, the fiscal reality bites. States like Colorado are already tweaking funding formulas to cope with expiring federal aid, proving locals can adapt without D.C.’s handouts. The 2025 Continuing Resolution keeps education funding steady at 2024 levels but scraps earmarks, giving the Education Department flexibility to prioritize what delivers results. Bonta’s lawsuit ignores this, pretending schools can’t function without every penny of federal cash. It’s a tired argument, one that assumes bureaucrats in Washington know better than teachers and parents on the ground.

No one disputes that COVID hit kids hard. Students are still half a grade behind in math and reading, and mental health struggles linger. But throwing money at the problem hasn’t fixed it. High-dosage tutoring and targeted summer programs, when done right, show promise. Yet too many districts, flush with federal dollars, opted for flashy fixes over practical ones. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 set a precedent for federal support, but it was meant to empower, not dictate. Today’s bloated programs stray far from that vision, often burdening schools with compliance costs that outweigh benefits.

Bonta’s allies argue the cuts will hit disadvantaged kids hardest, citing programs for low-income students or those in foster care. Fair point, but federal funds like Title I, which grew to $18.6 billion in 2025, already target these groups. Private initiatives, like Dollar General’s literacy grants, prove communities can step up without federal oversight. The lawsuit’s fearmongering sidesteps a hard truth: centralized control often fails the very kids it claims to help. Local districts, freed from federal shackles, can innovate and deliver where it counts.

This isn’t Bonta’s first rodeo. He’s sued the Trump administration 13 times, by his own count, often wielding the Administrative Procedures Act as a club to block change. His coalition, including attorneys general from New York to Hawaii, echoes a familiar playbook: cry foul, file a lawsuit, and stall progress. They claim the Education Department’s move lacks legal grounding, but history tells a different story. States have long pushed back against federal overreach, from challenging Obama-era policies to Betsy DeVos’ regulatory rollbacks. The courts often side with local control when the feds overstep, and Bonta’s case looks shaky against that backdrop.

The Education Department’s decision isn’t perfect, but it’s a step toward sanity. Schools don’t need more federal dollars; they need freedom to use what they have wisely. Parents and teachers know their kids better than any D.C. desk jockey. Programs like GEAR UP, which helps low-income students aim for college, thrive when locals drive the bus. Bonta’s lawsuit, by contrast, doubles down on a system that’s failed to close gaps despite decades of spending. It’s time to trust communities, not bureaucrats, to chart the path forward.

Kids deserve schools that work, not political tug-of-wars that leave them stranded. Bonta’s legal crusade might grab headlines, but it won’t fix what’s broken. The real fight is for accountability, innovation, and local control, principles that have guided American education at its best. Let’s cut the strings, not the opportunities, and build a future where every student gets a fair shot.