民主党人将保守派有争议的2025项目及其教育议程作为武器，在民主党全国代表大会上攻击共和党总统候选人唐纳德·特朗普。
解散教育部是保守派在这个选举季的一个关键问题，在下一任保守派总统的922页剧本中也有提及。虽然特朗普有试图保持距离从2025项目开始，它在许多方面与他的47议程平台相一致。
乔·拜登总统在演讲中抨击了共和党的教育愿景民主党全国代表大会周一晚上。
“唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)和他的共和党朋友们，他们不仅不会思考，也不太会阅读，”拜登说，并补充道，“说真的，想想吧。看看他们的项目2025。他们想取消教育部。”
米歇尔·奥巴马在第二天晚上的演讲中谈到了这个话题:“关闭教育部，禁止我们的书籍——这些都不会让我们的孩子为未来做好准备。”
特朗普重申了他的教育计划x空间面试上周与埃隆·马斯克。
特朗普对马斯克的100多万听众说:“我想关闭教育部，把教育带回各州。”他声称，美国在其他国家中排名垫底，各州在没有联邦授权的情况下，在教育孩子方面做得更好。
美国并不像川普声称的那样排名垫底，但由于新冠肺炎疫情期间的历史性学习损失，美国在最近的数学等科目上接近垫底国际学生评估项目(PISA)。根据世界卫生组织发布的新数据，近三分之一的美国学生在上个学年结束时，至少有一门学科的成绩落后于年级水平国家教育统计中心(NCES)。
目前还不清楚这位前总统是否会关闭该机构并将其资金重新分配给各州，或者停止资助并将其完全关闭。美国广播公司新闻已经联系了特朗普竞选团队，但截至发稿时尚未收到回应。
该计划的批评者称，这将损害大多数小型的农村学校系统，其中许多都在红州。
在接受非营利组织“更完美联盟”采访时，教育部长米格尔·卡多纳表示，他将为公共教育辩护，反对取消资助，因为这将加剧“富人和穷人”一名教育部官员警告说，如果该机构被关闭，各州将失去来自联邦政府和州及地方政府的“一大块”资金——平均约10%。大约90%的公立学校经费来自州政府和地方政府。
教育金融专家杰斯·加特纳(Jess Gartner)表示，如果联邦机构的资金被削减，拥有“最高需求”学生的学区可能会受到毁灭性的打击，因为学区的资金并不总是平均分配的。
“这些目标基金被锁定是有原因的，”Gartner说。
我在[宪法]中找不到“教育”这个词
众议院教育和劳动力委员会主席弗吉尼亚·福克斯是该部门最强烈的反对者之一。她提出了照顾者和当地学校董事会成员的担忧，他们不应该与政府“共同家长”。
保守派也反对他们所谓的官僚将文化战争的话题灌输到他们孩子的学校课程中。
福克斯认为政府首先处理州教育问题是违宪的。
“我在[宪法]中找不到‘教育’这个词作为国会或联邦政府的职责之一，”福克斯告诉美国广播公司新闻。
Arnold Ventures高等教育主任克莱尔·麦肯(Clare McCann)表示，这种意识形态让位于特朗普，如果他赢得白宫，共和党人保持对众议院的控制，并在11月接管参议院，他将与福克斯和国会共和党人合作，通过关闭一个部门。
“国会创建了教育部，”麦肯告诉美国广播公司新闻，并补充说，“如果他们愿意，国会可以取消它。”
麦肯说，理论上，特朗普可以在国会批准下进行转变，但这不太可能立即发生。需要有一个支持系统来把钱分发给各州，但这是国务院有能力做的事情。
“教育部的成立是有原因的，它是为了在这些问题上拥有这种内部专业知识和政策背景，”麦肯说。“在教育部工作的公务员是该领域真正的专家，”她补充道。
阿肯色州反对“灌输”学生
自2022年成为第一位当选该州州长的女性以来，前特朗普白宫新闻秘书萨拉·桑德斯(Sarah Sanders)一直在推动保守派教育改革。去年，她签署了该州的法律学习行为该法案呼吁提高最低教师工资，普及学前教育，禁止在五年级之前教授“性别认同、性取向和性生殖”，并禁止“向学生灌输批判性种族理论等意识形态”的课程。
它还为所谓的“学校选择”制定了一个通用代金券计划，这也类似于特朗普的47议程和2025项目。
小石城学区的负责人杰莫尔·赖特说，取消教育部将是“灾难性的”
赖特上周宣布，在工作两年后，他将辞去他的职位，他引用了与学校董事会的摩擦，他说，这样的行动将阻碍旨在补充国家资金的头衔和拨款。他还担心这将剥夺各州对低收入和弱势学生的第一类资助，以及麦金尼-文托基金，其中包括对无家可归者和暂住人口的支持。
“我们依靠这些额外的资金为学生和家庭提供一系列的服务和支持，”赖特告诉美国广播公司新闻。“无家可归者的面貌已经改变。你知道，不仅仅是住在街上的人。我们有流动性极强的家庭。他们从公寓搬到公寓、旅馆、汽车旅馆等。我们的孩子可能和不是他们亲生父母的家庭成员住在一起。所有这些类型的情况。”
在小石城之前，赖特领导了密西西比成就学区，该学区包括密西西比三角洲农村地区的两个较小的学区，共计约5000名学生。他说，他亲眼目睹了这个国家最贫穷的州的一些地区所依赖的联邦援助的数量。
“在那些小的农村地区，我们的大部分资金来自联邦基金，这是我一天前在我工作过的任何地方从未经历过的，”他说，并补充道，“那些地区将无法生存，更不用说，你就是无法运转。”
赖特还表示，联邦机构在监督各州的民权问题上发挥着重要作用。
对弱势学生的影响
这是加州等其他州的担忧，教育倡导者担心取消该部门会对弱势学生和残疾学生以及学生和教师的总体学习成果产生影响。
“美国教育部在支持各州思考如何满足学生群体的需求方面发挥着关键作用，这些学生群体要么被边缘化、得不到充分服务，要么我们真的没有机会思考如何最好地满足他们的需求，”加州Teach Plus执行董事莎拉·莉莉斯说
教育金融专家高德纳表示，这种对话很大程度上取决于经济机遇，而不是地理位置。
“加州有非常富裕的地区，也有非常贫穷的地区(以及其他地方)，”Gartner告诉ABC新闻。“富裕地区不会因为他们的所有权被削减而受到太大影响。他们将出去发行债券，并在两天后在当地筹集这笔钱——甚至更多。贫穷的农村地区将会被摧毁，而且没有办法填补这个缺口。”
根据州政策专家的说法，由于他们强调地方控制，像德克萨斯州这样经济强大的州实际上不会受到影响。
爱达荷州公共教育主管黛比·克里切菲尔德在爱达荷州议会大厦前拍照。
爱达荷州公共教育部
其他人说他们不需要联邦政府的帮助。
爱达荷州公共教育主管黛比·克里茨菲尔德说，该州并不指望美国教育部在教育政策上给予指导。她告诉美国广播公司新闻，她不介意取消该机构。
“我们正在做出关于教育的决定，重点是我们自己的州，”克里茨菲尔德告诉美国广播公司新闻，并补充说，“我们很少接触联邦政府，以帮助我们知道我们希望在爱达荷州为我们的孩子制定什么倡议和目标。”
克里茨菲尔德认为关闭该部门对她的州“影响不大”。
“我们不指望他们(教育部)来告诉我们应该做什么，”克里茨菲尔德说。“我正在与州领导、当地学校董事会、我们州的家长交谈，他们告诉我应该关注什么。没有[教育部]的监督，对结果的影响就不存在。”
Democrats at DNC attack Trump on how they say Project 2025 would hurt education in states
Democrats have made conservatives’ controversial Project 2025 and its education agenda a weapon in their attacks against Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump at the Democratic National Convention.
Dismantling the Department of Education is a key issue for conservatives this election season and is mentioned in the 922-page playbook for the next conservative president. And while Trump hastried to distance himselffrom Project 2025, it aligns in many ways with his Agenda 47 platform.
President Joe Biden slammed the Republican vision for education as he addressed theDemocratic National Conventionon Monday night.
"Donald Trump, and his Republican friends, they not only can't think, they can't read very well," Biden said, adding,"Seriously, think about it. Look at their Project 2025. They want to do away with the Department of Education."
Michelle Obama touched on the subject in her speech the following night: "Shutting down the Department of Education, banning our books -- none of that will prepare our kids for the future."
Trump reiterated his plan for education in his wide-rangingX Spaces interviewlast week with Elon Musk.
"I want to close up the Department of Education [and] move education back to the states," Trump told Musk's more than 1 million listeners, claiming that the U.S. had fallen to the bottom of rankings among other countries and that states do a better job educating their children without federal mandates.
The U.S. is not ranked at the bottom, as Trump claimed, but due to historic learning loss during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is close to the bottom half in subjects like math in the most recentProgramme for International Student Assessment(PISA). Nearly a third of U.S. students also ended last school year behind grade level in at least one academic subject, according to new data released by theNational Center for Education Statistics(NCES).
It's unclear whether the former president would close the agency and redistribute its funding to states or stop funding it and close it altogether. ABC News has reached out to the Trump campaign but didn't receive a response by time of publication.
Critics of the plan say it would hurt mostly small, rural school systems, many of them in red states.
In an interview with the nonprofit More Perfect Union, Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said he would defend public education against defunding because it would exacerbate the "haves and the have-nots." An Education Department official warned that if the agency were shuttered, states would lose a "large chunk" of funding from the feds and state and local governments -- on average about 10%. State and local governments make up roughly 90% of public school funding.
Education finance expert Jess Gartner said school districts with the "highest need" students could take a devastating blow if the federal agency's funding was cut because funding for school districts isn't always equally distributed.
"Those targeted funds were being targeted for a reason," Gartner said.
'I can't find the word 'education' in [the Constitution]'
House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairwoman Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., is one of the most vocal opponents of the department. She raises caregivers' and local school board members' concerns that they shouldn't have to "co-parent" with the government.
Conservatives also reject what they characterize as bureaucrats infusing culture war topics into their kids' school curriculums.
Foxx argued it's unconstitutional for the government to handle state education issues in the first place.
"I can't find the word 'education' in there [the Constitution] as one of the duties and responsibilities of Congress or the federal government," Foxx told ABC News.
That ideology gives way for Trump to work with Foxx and congressional Republicans to pass a department closure if he wins the White House and Republicans maintain control of the House and take over the Senate in November, according to Arnold Ventures Director of Higher Education Clare McCann.
"Congress created the Department of Education," McCann told ABC News, adding, "Congress could uncreate it if they wanted."
In theory, McCann said, Trump could make the shift with congressional approval but it's unlikely it would happen immediately. There would need to be a support system to dole out the money to states, but that's something the department would be equipped to do.
"There's a reason the Department of Education was created and it was to have this kind of in-house expertise and policy background on these issues," McCann said. "The civil servants who work at the Department of Education are true experts in the field," she added.
Arkansas moves against 'indoctrinating' students
Former Trump White House press secretary Sarah Sanders has pushed for conservative education reform since becoming the first woman elected as the state's governor in 2022. Last year, she signed into law the state'sLEARNS Act, which calls for raising minimum teacher salaries, introducing universal pre-K, banning teaching on "gender identity, sexual orientation, and sexual reproduction" before fifth grade and banning curriculum that would "indoctrinate students with ideologies, such as Critical Race Theory."
It also instituted a universal voucher program for so-called "school choice," which is also similar to plans in Trump's Agenda 47 and Project 2025.
Superintendent of the Little Rock School District Jermall Wright said abolishing the Department of Education would be "catastrophic."
Wright, who cited friction with the school board in announcing last week he was stepping down from his position after two years on the job, said such an action would hinder title and grant funding meant to supplement state funding. He also fears it would strip states of Title I funding for low-income and disadvantaged students as well as McKinney-Vento funds, which includes support for the unhoused and transient populations.
"We rely on those additional funds to provide, you know, an array of services and supports for students and families," Wright told ABC News. "The face of homelessness has changed. It's not just, you know, people who are living on streets. We have extremely mobile families. They move from apartments to apartments, hotels, motels, etc. We have children who may live with family members that are not their biological parents. All those types of situations."
Before Little Rock, Wright led the Mississippi Achievement School District -- which encompasses two smaller districts totaling about 5,000 students in the rural Mississippi Delta. He said he saw firsthand the amount of federal aid some districts in the poorest state in the nation rely on.
"In those small rural districts, the majority of our funding came from federal funds, which I'd never experienced that a day before in any place that I had worked," he said, adding "Those districts wouldn't be able to survive, let alone, you just can't function."
Wright also said the federal agency plays an essential role in overseeing states' civil rights issues.
An impact on vulnerable students
That's a concern in other states like California, where education advocates worry abolishing the department would have an impact on vulnerable students and students with disabilities as well as general learning outcomes for students and teachers.
"There's a critical role for the U.S. Department of Education to support states in thinking about how to meet the needs of student groups who either have been marginalized, underserved, or for whom we really haven't had the opportunity to think about how best to meet their needs," said Sarah Lillis, California executive director for Teach Plus
Gartner, the education finance expert, said much of this conversation is dependent on economic opportunity, not location.
"There are very wealthy districts in California and there are very poor districts in California [and everywhere else]," Gartner told ABC News. "Wealthy districts aren't going to be impacted very much by their Title I money being cut. They're going to go out and pass a bond and raise that money – and then some – locally in two days. It's the poor, rural district that's going to be devastated by that and have no recourse to fill that gap."
Due to their emphasis on local control, states like Texas with strong economies would virtually be unaffected, according to state policy experts.
Idaho Superintendent of Public Instruction Debbie Critchfield poses in the Idaho State Capitol.
Idaho Department of Public Education
Others say they don't need the feds' help.
Idaho Superintendent of Public Instruction Debbie Critchfield said the state doesn't look to the U.S. Department of Education for guidance on education policy. She told ABC News that she’s fine with abolishing the agency.
"We are making decisions about education focused on our own state," Critchfield told ABC News, adding "It is very rare that we're reaching out to the federal government to help us know what initiatives and goals we want to have here for our kids in Idaho."
Critchfield believes shuttering the department would have “little impact” on her state.
"We don't look to them [the Department of Education] to say what should we be working on," Critchfield said. "I'm talking to leaders in the state, local school boards, parents in our state, they're the ones telling me what I should be focused on. Outside of [the Department of Education] watchdogging, the influence on outcomes just isn't there."
