Trump-voting states have more to lose if Education Department dismantled
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
President Trump's campaign promise to dismantle the Department of Education could prove more costly for red states than blue.
Why it matters: Funding for public schools primarily falls to local and state governments, but federal funds work to fill the gaps.
- States that voted for Trump last November, on average, use more federal funding in their education apportions than states that voted for former Vice President Harris.
- "That dependence is, in large part, because they're just lower wealth states and they don't have the same capacity to step in and make up that difference," Kevin Welner, the director of the National Education Policy Center, told Axios.
State of play: Average federal spending in the 2021-22 school year was 17% in Trump-voting states, compared to 11% in states that voted for Harris.
- At 23%, Mississippi had the highest proportion of federal public school funding that school year, with South Dakota and Arkansas following with 22% each, per USA Facts. New York, at 7%, had the lowest.
- Mississippi spends an average of $12,390 on public K-12 spending per student, compared to New York's $33,440, per the Education Data Initiative.
Zoom out: Anywhere from 11 to 14% of public school funding is federal, Welner said.
- That figure was on the higher end after the start of the pandemic but has since decreased.
The intrigue: Even if the Education Department is disbanded, programs within its purview could fall to other federal agencies. Head Start, for example, is already run by the Department of Health and Human Services.
- "Moving program administration to other departments is going to be highly disruptive, if that happens" Welner said. "But the bigger question is what Congress decides to do in response to any requests from the administration to cut these programs."
Threat level: States would likely handle cuts to federal education funding in different ways. Those that have more low-income families and, in turn, receive higher shares of Title I funding would feel the impact most, per Welner.
- "In wealthier states, we would probably see some reduced spending for students and some increased state allocations," he said.
- "In states that are already financially strained because they just have less wealth, this could result simply in less funding and fewer resources for the students," Welner said.
The big picture: Student performance, which was already in decline before the pandemic, has worsened since 2020, making federal funds to help bridge academic gaps all the more important.
- Federal funds include grant programs to help at-risk or disabled students, per the Peter G. Peterson Foundation.
Context: Trump regularly floated eliminating the Department of Education on the campaign trail, and has called the agency an example of federal overreach.
- Trump promised to sign an executive order curtailing the Department of Education's powers, and dozens of its employees were placed on administrative leave last week.
Yes, but: A president does not have the authority to create or dismantle a federal agency, only Congress.
- The legislative branch has historically resisted such moves, including during Trump's first term when he proposed merging the Education Department and Department of Labor. Those efforts never gained traction with lawmakers.
- House Republicans introduced a bill last month to terminate the Education Department on Dec. 31, 2026. With slim majorities in both chambers, it's unlikely to pass, if it even reaches to a floor vote.
Go deeper: What to know about Trump's plan to eliminate the Department of Education
