How Trump’s Second Term Could Impact Pennsylvania School Districts
From Bucks County Beacon
When the Trump administration takes charge next year, what can Pennsylvanians expect when it comes to public education?
That’s a tough prediction to make. Unlike previous education secretary Betsy DeVos, Linda McMahon, the professional wrestling executive put in charge of the department of education, does not have much of a track record with education. And Trump’s stated policy objectives boil down to two goals which seemingly contradict each other: Reduce the amount of federal control over education while increasing the amount of federal control over education.
Ending the Department of Education
Conservatives have wanted to do away with the department since it was first formed. From Betsy DeVos to Project 2025, dismantling the department has been a stated—and unattained—goal. A bill to get rid of the department, proposed by Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD), has begun its journey through Congress.
What most of these plans have in common is the intent to disperse many of the functions of the department to other arms of the government. The Rounds bill puts many functions of the department in other departments. That’s far easier than ending those programs, some of which, like Title I, pre-date the Carter-era creation of the department itself. That was, in fact, part of the point of the department—to create a one-stop shop for managing the various federal education programs.
So in many cases, the program would continue, just administered by a different department.
But many of these plans also target the two huge programs run by the department—Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Title I. IDEA funding helps your school district afford mandated education for students with disabilities. Title I distributes funding for schools that serve students from low-income families. Together the programs amount to around $37 billion.
Proposals like Project 2025 call for those funds to be turned into block grants given to the states with no strings attached.
That means in our case that the money previously spent on students with special needs or schools with low-income populations could be spent on whatever whim is sweeping Harrisburg at the time. DeVos has argued that those block grants should be used to fund school voucher programs, turning money originally meant for students with special needs or few resources would instead be spent to subsidize private schools. The stringless block grants would mean total control of the federal funds would lie in the hands of legislators who are already under a court order to fix Pennsylvania’s inequitable and inadequate funding.