The Presidential Election's Impact on Education

On November 5th, 2024, millions of Americans will cast their ballots for the 47th President and Vice President of the United States. Citizens are voting on several issues; the economy, healthcare, and immigration rank among the top three concerns. However, education policies could shift dramatically depending on whether the Trump-Vance administration or Harris-Walz administration takes office; such policies would affect not only the School District of Philadelphia (SDP) but also schools across the nation. 

Over 118,000 students are served by SDP’s 218 schools according to U.S. News and World Report. 25% of minors in Philadelphia live in poverty; in 2022, when 63% of the buildings were assessed, SDP reported that 3% were in “excellent” condition. Public schools across Pennsylvania (PA) are short $6.2 million in funding. A 2023 Philadelphia Inquirer article cited SDP as “poorer than 75% of the school districts [in PA].”

Before even entering the school district in kindergarten, one of the financial burdens impacting families is childcare. In April 2024, the Inquirer offered insight into PA’s childcare costs. Their data showed that “childcare price as share of median family income” was 22.5%— just over $14,000 per year per child.

Currently, the parties are focused on two broad components of preschool funding: child tax credits and universal childcare. Overall, the 2024 Republican National Convention’s GOP Platform lacks explicit information on this subject. Still, Project 2025 (a document by the right-wing think-tank Heritage Foundation and which Trump disavows despite past association) has called to abolish the Head Start program, which, in PA alone, has assisted 20,000 children. Though during his 2016-2020 presidential term Trump may have doubled child tax credits to $2,000, he came under scrutiny in September after evading a childcare question, instead detailing international trade and tariff policies. That same week, his running mate, JD Vance, provided a more concrete vision, proposing a $5,000 tax credit. 

Meanwhile, Harris also supports an increase in the child tax credit (to $3,500 for children under six and $3,000 for children over six) and, if elected, plans to raise it to $6,000 during the child’s first year. During his time as Minnesota governor, Walz—who taught social studies for 10 years in Minnesota public schools—signed a bill offering $1,750 per child in his state. Both campaigns support paid family leave. 

The parties diverge more on the concept of universal preschool—the Democratic ticket supports universal preschool for 4-year-old children, whereas Project 2025 correlates daycare time with higher “rates of anxiety, depression, and neglect as well as poor educational and developmental outcomes.” The solution proposed by the document is to “prioritize funding for home-based childcare, not universal daycare.” Vance—who is against universal child care—received criticism when he said, “...you might be able to relieve a little bit of pressure on people who are paying so much for daycare…maybe grandma and grandpa [want] to help out a little bit more, or maybe there’s an aunt or uncle that wants to help out a little bit more.”

Traditionally, Republicans advocate for “school choice” by offering vouchers to parents. Data is generally mixed regarding whether vouchers increase test scores. Urban-based studies in the early 2000s offered data supporting vouchers. Yet, newer studies, such as those conducted in Louisiana and Indiana, have seen lower math scores after implementing a voucher program. Questions loom regarding the cost, impact on non-urban communities, and overall effects when applied on a larger scale. 

Critics of vouchers say the money would “abandon public schools and drain away critical dollars” (National School Boards Association), directing tax money towards private and religious schools. Furthermore, vouchers could feed cycles of inequality—private schools can reject students based on academic performance, sexuality, disability, or language. Even beyond voucher-based programs, some far-right Republicans favor denying undocumented immigrants the right to public education, in contrast with the Supreme Court’s 1982 Plyler vs Doe decision. Republicans point to the increase of migrant students as a reason to overturn the longstanding precedent.

Trump’s arguably most defining educational proposal is to eliminate the country’s Department of Education (ED). Currently, about 10% of SDP’s funding comes from ED. “I’m going to close the Department of Education…” he stated proudly at a rally in Indiana, PA. The Washington Post summarized what ED currently does:

Today, the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights still investigates allegations of discrimination on the basis of race, as well as sex and other factors. It has also said sex discrimination includes discrimination based on gender identity…The department [also] administers federal grant programs, including the $18.4 billion Title I program that provides supplemental funding to high-poverty K-12 schools. It runs achievement tests dubbed the Nation’s Report Card and collects statistics...And it oversees the $1.6 trillion federal student loan program.

The topic of student loans in higher education has also come under the limelight in this election. According to The Wall Street Journal, though they failed to pass a bill offering free education at community daycares, the Biden-Harris administration passed significant loan forgiveness plans (relieving over $175 billion for millions of Americans). “I will continue our work to lower costs, make higher education more affordable, and relieve the burden of student debt,” stated Harris in mid-October on the White House website. The Supreme Court ruled against Biden’s debt-relief plan in 2023, Republicans calling the loan forgiveness an abuse of presidential power. “[Loan forgiveness is]...very, very unfair to the millions and millions of people who have paid their debt through hard work," stated Trump. Vance has also expressed a common Republican view: that citizens’ tax dollars should not go towards other people’s college education. "If you want to give student debt relief, you should penalize the people who have benefited from this very corrupt system, not ask plumbers in Ohio to subsidize the life decisions of college-educated young people,” asserted Vance in 2022.

*****