Education reform bonus for LA with Trump win

Republican former and Pres.-elect Donald Trump’s stated intentions concerning the federal government’s role in education, if at least partially pursued, would give a huge shot in the arm to Louisiana’s education reform efforts.

In recent decades, Louisiana hasn’t provided much in the way of policy leadership among the states, with the notable exception of education. First under GOP former Gov. Mike Foster, then under one of his implementers (at the level of higher education) then eventual successor Republican former Gov. Bobby Jindal, the state was at the forefront of expanding educational accountability and choice, acting as a pioneer with such things as charter schools, state intervention with failing schools, evaluations of schools and teachers, beefing up curricula, and increasing student expectations. Even as the momentum slowed considerably under Democrat former Gov. John Bel Edwards, who backed the government monopoly model of education with as little accountability as possible, Board of Elementary and Secondary Education narrow majorities typically counter to that and leadership especially from former Superintendent of Education John White and current Superintendent Cade Brumley kept reversal away and growth occurring at the margins. This culminated in recent years with the state escaping the bottom of state rankings in pre-K12 education to its reaching its highest placement ever this year – largely because while Louisiana children held the line in achievement during the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic era, other states’ learners fell back.

And in this year’s legislative session, despite a small reverse at the margins, lawmakers returned to bolder reforms by creating a mild version of education savings accounts. It would provide, in stages, creation of these vehicles that give families control over state dollars designed to educate their children, starting with lower-income households. However, program operation and expansion are dependent upon separate appropriations in a budget environment in the near term that looks very uncertain whether the money would become available.

Trump’s plans might alleviate this. He has stated he would like to eliminate, echoing former Senate leader and presidential nominee Republican Bob Dole and in Louisiana GOP former Gov. Buddy Roemer, the Department of Education. To some degree all Republican presidential candidates have stumped for paring DOE, but the timing seems right for Trump at the least to reduce substantially federal government involvement in education. Keep in mind that, constitutionally, education is left to the states, so the federal government can regulate it only in applying laws outside of its provision such as civil rights enforcement and through enticements such as grant payments.

Those monetary gifts can be substantial. The most recent data (academic year 2022) show that the federal government contributed about $125 billion out of the $909 billion total revenues spent on education by states, but that 13.7 percent has leverage beyond the actual amount. However, in the DOE 2025 budget request little of that outside of Title I funds (about a seventh of all which goes to schools with on the basis largely of proportion of students in poverty that the state sets standards on how to spend), not even five percent, goes out in the form of block grants with the majority dispensed in the form of formulaic grants (determined by a formula based on federal government goals for a specific purpose) or categorical grants (to achieve a certain policy goal established by the federal government, often competitive). Only a few of the dozens of DOE grant programs for elementary and secondary education are block grant in nature, or those establishing a broad functional purpose the details of spending of which are made by states (with oversight).

This strategy of maximizing use of block grants would collapse existing formulaic and categorial grants into block grants. For example, the per capitation mechanism for Title I could be expanded to include monies currently going to a host of other purposes, formulaic and categorical, related to monetary disadvantage. And, the formula under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act could be expanded to incorporate over a dozen categorial grants designed to serve students with disabilities in a specific manner and with IDEA requirements loosened to allow states to take their own approaches.

It fundamentally would shift the locus of educational decision-making to the states, making DOE less of a policy-imposer by dangling grants with strings attached and more of a clearinghouse to ensure funds go to broad national purposes. Part of that mechanism could include a tranche that could back ESA funding.

This would be tricky. Some funds are tied into laws establishing programs that Democrats never would want altered and would use Senate filibusters to protect. To some degree executive orders could assist in some redirection, but a portion of funds always will be hamstrung to discrete purposes that some states might find useful but other less so.

However, the majority of funding can be handled through the budget reconciliation process. That isn’t subject to the filibuster and with Republicans holding majorities in both congressional chambers can be accomplished. This could occur in the near term.

Again, the filibuster would prevent abolishment of DOE, but over the next four years it can be transformed to make it primarily a bookkeeper moving away from active policy-maker. This transition period also provides time to clean out its heavy-handed rules-making, vastly reducing regulation and ridding it of noxious ones, such as the Democrat Pres. Joe Biden Administration attempt to jackknife “gender” into the written standard of “sex” for enforcement purposes in Title IX.

This would be a tremendous boon to Louisiana, not just in aiding in ESA implementation but also in freeing state educators to use their best practices and policies in education provision. It’s a potential bonus probably few of the 60 percent of Louisiana voters who cast their lot with Trump realized would come their way with his Electoral College win.