Donald Trump’s standard 2024 stump speech includes a vow that invariably receives far-right applause: “I will not give one penny to any school that has a vaccine mandate.” Though the Republican hasn’t offered details as to how this would work, it raises the prospect of a second Trump administration denying federal funds to schools that try to stop the spread of polio.
But as it turns out, this isn’t the only area in which the former president has talked about denying federal resources to education.
It was last year when Trump, echoing a key element of the Project 2025 blueprint, said he plans to shut down the Department of Education if given a second term — a radical step he was reluctant to take during his White House tenure. The presumptive GOP nominee has repeated the promise several times since.
But as part of the same pitch, Trump is also talking up the idea of slashing federal investments in education. Speaking to the Faith & Freedom Coalition over the weekend, the Republican twice said he’s prepared to cut federal education spending in half — even if that means leaving some states worse off.
Hours later, the former president headlined a rally in Philadelphia, where he made the same pitch. The Washington Examiner reported:
“We’ll be able to cut [spending on] education in half and get much better education in some of the states,” Trump said. “We’ll have the best education anywhere in the world.” However, he continued, “Some won’t do as well.”
The Republican candidate added that when it comes to education and student performance, “we’re at the bottom of every list.” It led Trump to ask, in reference to his regressive spending plans, “What the hell do you have to lose?”
There’s no shortage of problems with such a pitch, starting with the fact that American students are not, in fact, “at the bottom of every list.” I’d also love to hear Trump explain in more detail why he believes some areas will “get much better education” with fewer resources.
While he’s at it, perhaps Trump can identify which states he expects “won’t do as well” under his proposed vision on education investments.
But the historical oddity is also worth appreciating. While it’s true that school budgets mostly rely on local and state spending, the federal government does make some investments that benefit public school districts nationwide, and no major party presidential nominee in recent history has run on a platform of slashing those investments.
And yet, here we are, watching Trump talk about cutting education spending in half, and conceding that some parts of his own country would be worse off as a consequence.
To date, this hasn’t been much of a campaign issue. Don’t be too surprised if that changes.
Leave a Reply