
Trump signs order aimed at dismantling Department of Education
On Friday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: President Donald Trump signed an order Thursday aimed at dismantling the Department of Education. Check out our special Deep Dive episode on what's next. USA TODAY White House Correspondent Francesca Chambers takes a look at what might be on the way in an expected travel ban. A U.S. judge blocked Elon Musk's DOGE from accessing Social Security records. USA TODAY Money and Personal Finance Reporter Medora Lee discusses why cash poor Americans often fail to get ahead. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@usatoday.com.
Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text.
Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here
Taylor Wilson:
Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson. And today is Friday, March 21st, 2025. This is The Excerpt.
Today, as expected, Trump ordered his administration to dismantle the education department. Plus, what might be on the way an expected travel ban. And we take a look at the challenges for cash-poor Americans.
President Donald Trump ordered his administration yesterday to dismantle the Department of Education looking to achieve a top campaign promise. Even though the White House acknowledged the agency can't and won't entirely be dissolved. Trump signed the long anticipated executive order at a ceremony in the White House's East Room, attended by several Republican governors and state education commissioners, along with students seated at school desks. Trump directed his education Secretary Linda McMahon to take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the department and return education authority to the states according to a White House summary of the order. But the order's immediate impact is unclear since only Congress can eliminate a federal agency, and the federal government does not set school curriculum. That's long been up to states and local school districts.
You can read more on usatoday.com and check out our special deep dive episode on What's Next for Education with education reporter Zach Schermele. We have a link in today's show notes.
♦
President Donald Trump is expected to ban or severely restrict travel to the United States by citizens of more than a dozen countries as soon as today. I caught up with USA TODAY White House correspondent Francesca Chambers for more.
Hello, Francesca. Thanks for hopping on.
Francesca Chambers:
Hey, Taylor. Thanks for having me.
Taylor Wilson:
So Francesca, what do we know about this travel ban as of now?
Francesca Chambers:
So the president on the campaign trail said that he would reinstate the travel ban that he put in place during his first administration. On his first day in office in January, the president signed an executive order telling his administration to put together a new set of recommendations as well as a list of countries that could have travel banned to the United States or partially suspended. But the Trump administration appears to be looking at doing things differently this time. Two separate memos that were leaked to reporters show that the list was much more expansive and could be up to 43 countries this time around as they look at all their potential measures and add visa restrictions on top of that outright ban for some countries.
Taylor Wilson:
So I know courts initially blocked his travel ban last time around before the Supreme Court then upheld a later version, Francesca. I mean, what's the expectation this time around in terms of maybe how this one differs from Trump 1.0?
Francesca Chambers:
So Taylor, this executive order explicitly says that the administration should identify countries throughout the world for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a partial or full suspension of the admission of nationals from those countries. Now, that is where the administration could draw on a larger list of countries than it did the first time.
Individuals, Taylor, who worked on the earlier version of the travel ban, so that they learned a few things from that experience and they would do things differently. Now, the administration appears to be looking at a three-tier list where there would be the group of red countries where travel would be totally banned to the United States, as well as an orange list in which travel would be restricted and visas would be restricted. And then a third tier, which essentially is the administration putting countries on notice if this goes into effect.
Now, those countries could get off the list by providing United States with the information it is seeking, or they could go up on the list because the administration deems them a national security threat.
Taylor Wilson:
So obviously a big question here is, who's going to be on the list? But another question is, when would this ban actually go into effect, Francesca. I know we've heard as soon as today, later today. What are you hearing, I guess, there on the ground.
Francesca Chambers:
Well, it wouldn't necessarily go into effect immediately. Even if the State Department as well as the other departments that the president tasked with putting together this report does submit its recommendations on Friday, the president wouldn't have to enact a travel ban immediately. Now Taylor, I do want to stress that the versions that have been floating around were not finalized. It's not clear if the administration had completely approved of the list of countries that have been publicized. Those were made by staff, I was told by someone who worked on an earlier version of a travel ban. And they may not have even cleared the administration yet. So there could be countries that appeared on that list that might not be on the final one.
Taylor Wilson:
All right. Lots to still keep an eye out for. Francesca Chambers covers the White House for USA TODAY. Thank you, Francesca.
Francesca Chambers:
Thank you so much. Taylor.
♦
Taylor Wilson:
A federal judge has said the Social Security Administration likely violated privacy laws by giving Elon Musk's aides unbridled access to millions of Americans' private data. US District Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander of Maryland ordered a stop to any further record sharing and said that Musk's department of government efficiency was intruding into the personal affairs of millions of Americans as part of its hunt for fraud and waste. A White House spokesperson criticized the decision in a statement and said Trump will continue to seek all legal remedies available to ensure the will of the American people goes into effect.
♦
It's often difficult for cash-poor Americans to get ahead. I spoke with USA TODAY Money and Personal Finance Reporter Medora Lee for a look at some of the factors at play. Hello, Medora.
Medora Lee:
Hi, how are you?
Taylor Wilson:
Good. Thanks for hoping on today, Medora. So just starting here, I want to ask you just kind of point-blank, we're talking about cash-poor Americans. How many Americans are, Medora? Do we have numbers there? And what does it mean really to be cash-poor?
Medora Lee:
So cash-poor means that you don't have enough liquid cash on hand to cover any sort of emergency expenses, like if your car breaks down or you have to get to the doctor and things like that. These are people who are living paycheck to paycheck basically. And there are more of these Americans than you would even realize. A lot of people think that that's something that's limited to the working class, but really a lot of middle class Americans now are falling into this category, including people with college degrees, who own homes, people who invest money, even people who have six-figure incomes. And most of them are women. More than half of them are women. Two-thirds generally tend to be millennials or Gen X, and 14% are generally Black. So there are a lot of people who fall into this category that you may not even realize.
Taylor Wilson:
You outlined bad financial products in this story, Medora? Can you just help us understand what those are and how they fit into this conversation?
Medora Lee:
When most people, when they're down and out, they don't expect someone to kick them in the knees again, right? But that's basically what happens when your back is to the wall for a lot of these people. They will need to borrow some short-term money and they'll discover that these bad financial products, that these companies that are willing to give them that loan really are going to charge them a lot of money. And so there was a report, a study done by SoLo. They did what they called a cash-poor report, and they said, because of people who had to take out these types of loans, Americans paid more than $39 billion in fees to borrow money to help pay for these unexpected expenses last year. And those fees were on top of the advertised APRs, which were already really high. I mean, when you think about high credit card rates, you're thinking in that 20% and higher range. Some of these would maybe even get into the 600% range. So that's a lot of money.
Taylor Wilson:
So Medora, for the folks you spoke with, what's been their experience with some of these "bad financial products"?
Medora Lee:
It's kind of interesting. So for example, one woman I spoke to in Mesa, Arizona, I mean she's kind of like that middle class American. She had everything going for her. She graduated with a degree in advertising, in public relations with honors. She worked 20 years as a healthcare executive, earning as much as a six-figure salary for half of that time. And she, like a lot of people do, she hits a rough patch. She had three years where she changed careers. She had a flooding of her home and property that she had to pay for. She got into a legal battle and she had a falling out with some family members. And during those three years, just three years of her whole life, she's 44, things were rough and she ended up having to deplete her savings. And as she said, she had an 806 credit score, which is pretty high and nearly $150,000 saved before this all happened. And she went through every penny of it. She ended up having her cars repossessed and she lost her home to foreclosure. She became homeless for about five years.
So during those five years, she ran into all sorts of crazy things. When her pickup truck broke down, she said that was her first introduction to bad financial products. She said she didn't want to be stuck somewhere, so she called someplace and they were willing to pay her $2,200 bill to get her truck fixed, but she had to pay it back full within three months or else the interest would go to. And then here we go from 0% to 169%. They needed it back three months of interest due immediately. And so she felt she had no choice because would you want to be stuck out nowhere? So she did it. Things like that keep setting these people back because they can never catch up because they can't ever dig themselves out of the hole.
Another single mom in Connecticut, she's always had a full-time job her whole life, at least a full-time job, if not more jobs. And she... Because of the way the paychecks structure is, it's very rigid, you get paid every two weeks or once a month, her bills would come due and she wouldn't have enough money to cover it, and then she would end up having to pay all these late fees and then interest on top of it. And the late fees alone are sometimes $50 each. And so she said that ended up eating up a lot of her money, so she couldn't really catch up just because of that. A lot of people, they're not necessarily poor and they're not spending their money unwisely, but it's just kind of the way things go. She tried shuffling credit cards and going through the credit card cycle, but that didn't really work. She considered payday loans. But those are outrageous interest rates and really hard to pay back so people get stuck.
Taylor Wilson:
I mean, you can see how just a little bit of bad luck and really spiral out of control. Medora Lee covers money and personal finance for USA TODAY. Listeners can find this full piece with a link in today's show notes.
Medora, I think folks will really appreciate the spotlight you're bringing to this issue. Thanks for hopping on.
Medora Lee:
Thank you so much.
♦
Taylor Wilson:
Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. We're produced by Shannon Rae Green and Kaely Monahan, and our executive producer is Laura Beatty. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio. And if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. I'm Taylor Wilson, and I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
West Virginia sends hundreds of National Guard members to Washington at Trump team's request
West Virginia sends hundreds of National Guard members to Washington at Trump team's request WASHINGTON (AP) — Hundreds of West Virginia National Guard members will deploy across the nation's capital as part of the Trump administration's effort to overhaul policing in the District of Columbia through a federal crackdown on crime and homelessness. Gov. Patrick Morrisey, announced Saturday that he was sending a contingent of 300 to 400 to nearby Washington at the Republican administration's request. They will arrive in the district along with equipment and specialized training services, his office said in a statement. 'West Virginia is proud to stand with President Trump in his effort to restore pride and beauty to our nation's capital,' Morrisey said. 'The men and women of our National Guard represent the best of our state, and this mission reflects our shared commitment to a strong and secure America.' The move comes as federal agents and National Guard troops have begun to appear across the heavily Democratic city after Trump's executive order Monday federalizing local police forces and activating about 800 D.C. National Guard troops. By adding outside troops to join the existing National Guard deployment and federal law enforcement officers temporarily assigned to Washington, the administration is exercising even tighter control over the city. It's a power play that the president has justified as an emergency response to crime and homelessness, even though district officials have noted that violent crime is lower than it was during Trump's first term in office. The West Virginia activation also suggests the administration sees the need for additional manpower, after the president personally played down the need for Washington to hire more police officers. Maj. Gen. James Seward, West Virginia's adjutant general, said in a statement that members of the state's National Guard 'stand ready to support our partners in the National Capital Region' and that the Guard's 'unique capabilities and preparedness make it an invaluable partner in this important undertaking.' Federal agents have appeared in some of the city's most highly trafficked neighborhoods, garnering a mix of praise, pushback and alarm from local residents and leaders across the country. City leaders, who are obliged to cooperate with the president's order under the federal laws that direct the district's local governance, have sought to work with the administration though have bristled at the scope of the president's takeover. On Friday the administration reversed course on an order that aimed to place the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration as an 'emergency police commissioner' after the district's top lawyer sued to contest. After a court hearing, Trump's attorney general, Pam Bond, issued a memo that directed the Metropolitan Police Department to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement regardless of any city law. District officials say they are evaluating how to best comply. In his order Monday, Trump declared an emergency due to the 'city government's failure to maintain public order.' He said that impeded the 'federal government's ability to operate efficiently to address the nation's broader interests without fear of our workers being subjected to rampant violence.' In a letter to city residents, Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, wrote that 'our limited self-government has never faced the type of test we are facing right now." She added that if Washingtonians stick together, 'we will show the entire nation what it looks like to fight for American democracy -– even when we don't have full access to it.' ___ Associated Press writer Josh Boak contributed to this report. Matt Brown And Mike Pesoli, The Associated Press


Time Magazine
16 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
White House Backs Off 'Hostile Takeover' of D.C. Police
The White House has backed off plans for a full takeover of the D.C. police force and will allow for the city's police chief to remain in charge after a judge indicated they would block the move. President Donald Trump this week invoked emergency powers to take control of the D.C. police department and call in the National Guard to a city that he claimed is overrun by "bloodshed, bedlam and squalor"—a claim that is disputed by experts. Read More: Trump Paints a Picture of D.C. as a Crime-Ridden Hell-Hole. Here Are the Facts As part of the federal takeover, Attorney General Pam Bondi appointed Drug and Enforcement Administration (DEA) Administrator Terrance C. Cole as 'Emergency Police Commissioner,' a move that would have given the White House extraordinary powers over policing. The city's Attorney General Brian Schwalb filed a lawsuit calling for an emergency restraining order to block the move, accusing the Trump Administration of implementing a 'hostile takeover' of the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) that would lead to 'imminent, irreparable harm'. 'In my nearly three decades in law enforcement, I have never seen a single government action that would cause a greater threat to law and order than this dangerous directive,' Smith wrote in the lawsuit Judge Ana Reyes said in a Friday hearing that, according to the Home Rule Act, the Department of Justice needed to rewrite the section of the executive order that placed Cole in charge, and that he needed to go through the city's mayor. Reyes stopped short of issuing a restraining order, but indicated that if the DOJ did not rewrite the section, she would. Read More: Trump Took Over the D.C. Police. He Can't Do It In Other Cities, Legal Experts Say 'The statute [The Home Rule Act] would have no meaning at all if the president could just say 'we're taking over your police department,'' Reyes said. In a press conference after the hearing, Schwalb touted the result as a 'very important win for Home Rule today.' A new directive by Bondi following the lawsuit allowed for Chief Pamela Smith to remain in charge of the force, though the city will still be under the Administration's control, and orders will be sent through the city's Mayor Muriel Bowser. The Trump Administration will still essentially have control over the city, but Smith will maintain control of the day-to-day operations of the MPD. In Bondi's new directive, though, she also required MPD to comply with the Trump Administration's aggressive immigration tactics, rescinding two police practices that limited MPD's immigration enforcement—also known as 'sanctuary policies.' D.C's At-Large Councilmember Christina Henderson reacted on X that, 'Respectfully, the Attorney General does not have the authority to revoke laws.' In the first week alone of the Trump Administration's federal takeover, nearly 200 arrests have been reported in the city, including many undocumented immigrants, which has alarmed civil rights groups.


Chicago Tribune
22 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Trump administration to keep DC police chief in place, but under immigration enforcement order
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration on Friday reversed course and agreed to leave the Washington, D.C., police chief in control of the department, while Attorney General Pam Bondi, in a new memo, directed the District's police to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement regardless of any city law. The order from Bondi came after officials in the nation's capital sued Friday to block President Donald Trump's takeover of the Washington police. The night before, his administration had escalated its intervention into the city's law enforcement by naming a federal official as the new emergency head of the department, essentially placing the police force under the full control of the federal government. The attorney general's new order represents a partial retreat for the Trump administration in the face of intense skepticism from a judge over the legality of Bondi's earlier directive. But Bondi also signaled the administration would continue to pressure D.C. leaders to help federal authorities aggressively pursue immigrants in the country illegally, despite city laws on the books that limit cooperation between police and immigration authorities. In a social media post Friday evening, Bondi criticized D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb, saying he 'continues to oppose our efforts to improve public safety.' But she added, 'We remain committed to working closely with Mayor Bowser.' Mayor Muriel Bowser's office said late Friday that it was still evaluating how it can comply with the new Bondi order on immigration enforcement operations. The police department already eased some restrictions on cooperating with federal officials facilitating Trump's mass-deportation campaign but reaffirmed that it would follow the district's sanctuary city laws. In a letter sent Friday night to D.C. citizens, Bowser wrote: 'It has been an unsettling and unprecedented week in our city. Over the course of a week, the surge in federal law enforcement across D.C. has created waves of anxiety.' She added that 'our limited self-government has never faced the type of test we are facing right now,' but added that if Washingtonians stick together, 'we will show the entire nation what it looks like to fight for American democracy – even when we don't have full access to it.' The legal battle was the latest evidence of the escalating tensions in a mostly Democratic city that now has its police department largely under the control of the Republican president's administration. Trump's takeover is historic, yet it had played out with a slow ramp-up in federal law enforcement officials and National Guard troops to start the week. As the weekend approached, though, signs across the city — from the streets to the legal system — suggested a deepening crisis over who controls the city's immigration and policing policies, the district's right to govern itself and daily life for the millions of people who live and work in the metro area. The two sides sparred in court for hours Friday before U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, who is overseeing the district's lawsuit. She indicated the law likely doesn't grant the Trump administration power to fully take over city police, but it probably does give the president more power than the city might like. 'The way I read the statute, the president can ask, the mayor must provide, but the president can't control,' said Reyes, who was nominated to the bench by Democratic President Joe Biden. The judge pushed the two sides to make a compromise. An attorney for the Trump administration, Yaakov Roth, said the move to sideline Metropolitan Police Department Chief Pamela Smith came after an immigration order that still held back some aid to federal authorities. He argued that the president has broad authority to determine what kind of help police in Washington must provide. The police takeover is the latest move by Trump to test the limits of his legal authorities to carry out his agenda, relying on obscure statutes and a supposed state of emergency to bolster his tough-on-crime message and his plans to speed up the mass deportation of people in the United States illegally. It also marks one of the most sweeping assertions of federal authority over a local government in modern times. While Washington has grappled with spikes in violence and visible homelessness, the city's homicide rate ranks below those of several other major U.S. cities, and the capital is not in the throes of the public safety collapse the Trump administration has portrayed. The president has more power over the nation's capital than other cities, but D.C. has elected its own mayor and city council since the Home Rule Act was signed in 1973. Trump is the first president to exert control over the city's police force since it was passed. The law limits that control to 30 days without congressional approval, though Trump has suggested he'd seek to extend it. Bondi's Thursday night directive to place the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Terry Cole, in charge of the police department came even after Smith had told MPD officers hours earlier to share information with immigration agencies regarding people not in custody, such as someone involved in a traffic stop or checkpoint. The Justice Department said Bondi disagreed with the police chief's instructions because they allowed for continued practice of 'sanctuary policies,' which generally limit cooperation by local law enforcement with federal immigration officers. Meanwhile, advocates in Washington were trying to advise immigrants on how to respond. Anusce Sanai, associate legal director for the Washington-based immigrant nonprofit Ayuda, said they're still parsing the legal aspects of the policies. 'Even with the most anti-immigrant administration, we would always tell our clients that they must call the police, that they should call the police,' Sanai said. 'But now we find ourselves that we have to be very careful on what we advise.' Amy Fischer, an organizer with Migrant Solidarity Mutual Aid, said that before the federal takeover, most of what they had seen in the nation's capital was Immigration and Customs Enforcement targeting specific individuals. But since last Friday night they've seen a 'really significant change,' she said, with ICE and federal officers doing roving patrols around the city. She said a hotline set up by immigration advocates to report ICE activity 'is receiving calls almost off the hook.' ICE said in a post on X that their teams had arrested 'several' people in Washington Friday. A video posted on X showed two uniformed personnel putting handcuffs on someone while standing outside a white transport van. A population already tense from days of ramp-up has begun seeing more significant shows of force across the city. National Guard troops watched over some of the world's most renowned landmarks, and Humvees took position in front of the busy main train station. Volunteers helped homeless people leave long-standing encampments — to where was often unclear. Friday night along the district's U Street, a popular nightlife corridor, an Associated Press photographer saw officers from the FBI, the DEA, the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Park Police, U.S. Marshals and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. As the District challenged the Trump administration in court Friday, more than 100 protesters gathered less than a block away in front of police headquarters, chanting 'Protect home rule!' and waving signs saying 'Resist!'