Jon Valant, head of the Brown Center at the Brookings Institution, reviewed the education sections of both parties.
He writes:
K-12 education has captured its share of headlines over the last few years. Schools—and, specifically, local school boards—became a lightning rod for anger about the disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. From the first weeks of the pandemic, Republicans accused Democratic leaders of being too slow to reopen schools. That accusation gained potency as evidence mounted that schools hadn’t been the vectors of COVID-19 transmission that experts initially feared. Sensing vulnerability, Democrats became reluctant to engage on K-12 issues, and Republicans such as Glenn Youngkin showed that Democrats wouldn’t put up much of a fight if education became a battlefield for culture war conflicts. The result was a dizzying, maddening stretch where schools were embroiled in controversies over critical race theory and transgender students’ rights when education leaders needed to focus on pandemic recovery.
Now, as memories of the pandemic recede, the politics of education are changing. Democrats are talking more about schools, emboldened by the selection of a former schoolteacher, Tim Walz, as Vice President Harris’s running mate. Republicans, for their part, have harnessed discontent with public schools into an aggressive push for private school voucher programs that threaten America’s public education systems.
The platforms of the Democratic and Republican parties, along with the education-related portions of Project 2025, provide a glimpse of where K-12 education might be headed.
The Democratic platform
The Democrats’ 2024 platform is light on specifics, with more attention to the current administration’s accomplishments and the would-be Harris administration’s support for some broadly defined goals (e.g., reducing chronic absenteeism). To some extent, the lack of specifics stands in contrast to both the Democrats’ 2020 platform—which, for example, pledged a tripling of Title I funds for high-needs schools—and more detailed 2024 proposals for early childhood education (e.g., free, universal pre-K) and higher education (e.g., free community college).
The 2024 platform does contain relevant, specific ideas outside of its “Education” section. For example, Democrats propose rebates for school districts that purchase electric school buses—an idea grounded in research on the harms of students’ exposure to toxins. They also offer specific proposals to reduce gun violence (amid a scourge of school shootings) and to strengthen civil rights protections for LGBTQ+ children and students of color (frequent targets of culture war attacks).
Notably, some of the platform’s clearest statements on education describe what Democrats oppose. That includes private-school voucher plans and policies hostile to transgender youth that have become increasingly popular among Republican leaders.
The Republican platform
Republicans’ 2024 platform is also light on policy specifics. The platform has a few ideas that have long been cornerstones of GOP education politics. That includes ending teacher tenure—an idea that would require local or state action and confront fierce opposition from teachers’ unions.
The platform has language about resisting political indoctrination in schools—while seeming to propose some indoctrination of its own. This includes proposals to “support schools that teach America’s Founding Principles and Western Civilization” and “promote Fair and Patriotic Civics Education.” Along similar lines, former President Trump recently described a bewildering plan to create a credentialing body to “certify teachers who embrace patriotic values, support our way of life, and understand that their job is not to indoctrinate children.”
Substantively, the most important part of the Republican education platform might be its support for universal school choice. In about a dozen states, Republicans have recently created or expanded education savings account (ESA) programs that make public funds available to pay for private school or other educational expenses. Critics of these programs—myself included—argue that they violate our basic traditions, benefit the wealthy at the expense of others, and are not well supported by research.
Project 2025
If the Republican platform is light on policy proposals, Project 2025 certainly is not.
Along with my colleagues Rachel Perera and Katharine Meyer, I recently wrote a more detailed piece that analyzes Project 2025’s education proposals. Project 2025 proposes severe cuts to the resources and protections available to the country’s poorest, most marginalized children. For example, it proposes to eliminate the Head Start program (for young children in poverty), discontinue federal Title I funding (for schools that serve low-income children), and kneecap IDEA (federal legislation that supports students with disabilities). It’s especially harsh on transgender children, with proposals aimed at reorienting civil rights enforcement around “rejecting gender ideology and critical race theory” and stripping Title IX protections from transgender students.
In other words, Project 2025 sets its sights on the programs that serve America’s neediest students. It would essentially terminate the federal government’s long-running role in addressing inequities that arise in locally governed school systems.
Notably, many key Project 2025 proposals would require an unlikely degree of congressional cooperation. This includes some of the highest-profile proposals, such as eliminating the U.S. Department of Education (a vaguely defined idea that’s unlikely to materialize in its most extreme form). Still, a second Trump administration couldenact some Project 2025 proposals unilaterally. That includes rolling back civil rights protections and replacing civil servants in the U.S. Department of Education with political appointees after reinstating Schedule F.
Taking stock
It’s fair to say that Democrats’ plans for federal education policy are modest. Democrats aren’t proposing a markedly stronger role for the federal government. On K-12 education, Democrats remain in a mostly defensive posture as they offer a more “conservative” agenda that protects against the GOP’s increasingly radical efforts.
Just what those GOP plans might be—and just how radical they are—depends on whether the true Trumps X administration plan is the Republican platform, Project 2025, or some combination of the two. That remains to be seen

Each side may provide an “Education Platform”, but that doesn’t mean that education will be a “priority” after election. We have witnessed this time and time again. HRC stated she was “for” public schools, but in reality, she would have pumped up Charter schools if she had won that election….because the 1st Clinton administration brought Charter schools into the mix. The other side thought trump would blow up the DOE….but all he did was bring in a Scamway artist to disrupt and direct the narrative. Everyone thought Biden would put an end to the “test and punish” deforms because he was married to Dr. Jill the public school advocate……..nope, because that would tank the Education Industry and cause the destruction of many high paying jobs in the industry at a time when everyone needed to see the economy was improving. Sorry, but a Harris/Walz win won’t do any good for public education….because there will be other “bigger” things to consider.
When will education advocates learn that the government doesn’t really care what happens to kids or what happens to public schools. The “industry” is complete and making/distributing public tax $$$ and not a single politician is willing to tank it.
LikeLike
Diane and Lisa: Lisa has the central point, I think. They are all fabricators and liars and users of half-truths and logical fallacies. What they do in post-election times has little or no relationship to what they are saying now.
“. . . but you said . . .” will be wasted breath spoken from under the bus of history.
Also, DIANE, an ADDENDUM to our previous (yesterday’s) discussion about administering from afar and encroaching on the freedom and creativity of teachers in the classroom . . .
It occurred to me (duh) that (1) at any point of communication between different aspects of a stretched-out administrative base . . . needed for the good of order to become the norm . . . things can become corrupt, which makes for the vulnerability of large administrative states, especially for democracies which depend on the creativity, intelligence, and good character of “the people” “on the ground” at each point to survive. (We already live in that tension.)
(2) Steve Bannon knows this . . . and it is why he (and J.D. Vance and others who hate freedom) want to “dismantle the administrative state.” Once that communicative interactive order is gone, chaos ensues and where a dictator and his minions can have at what’s left of the dead and dying corpse–like the military.
BTW, did you see Rachel Maddow last night about J.D. Vance, and the video where Wm. Graham, Jr. was standing behind Vance? The religious right thinks that, with Trump in office, they will be in control of a theocracy.
Ha ha ha ha! CBK
LikeLike
“..anger about the disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.”
Seems to me most of the anger is caused my mis/information campaigns directed at teachers
LikeLike
Of course these states are going all-in on vouchers for private schools. This is a transfer of vast wealth from suckers, uh, taxpayers to the private pockets of private school owners who, in return for the favor, make ginormous campaign contributions in the latest version of the old payola circle jerk.
LikeLike
This is quite a promise in the Dems’ 2024 platform: “Democrats will end
violence against transgender Americans, especially Black and brown transgender women”
I just went down a rabbit hole and did a search of every Dem platform document from 1968 to the present. “Affirmative action” appears in every platform from 1972 through 2008, and has not appeared since then.
LikeLike
Political platforms are stages where politicians spew mostly BS to attract the most voters.
Anyone who knows how the US government works, know what poltiics say on platforms is meaningless because Presidents are not dictators.
Presidents do not create the laws. Congress does that.
Presidents don’t rule what is unconstitutional, the US Supreme Court does that.
Presidential campaign platforms are a wish list of what they claim they want to accomplish.
But how much of that wish list is what the politician thinks voters want to hear so they get those votes?
I think the results of campaign promise tracker is the tell. How many campaign promises did Traitor Trump deliver from his platform list in 2016 when the traitor was in the White House, compared to Biden from his platform in 2020.
Trump broke 53% of his campaign platform promises.
Trump-O-Meter : Tracking Trump’s Campaign Promises | PolitiFact
Biden 3%
Biden Promise Tracker | PolitiFact
Since we do not have campaign platform promise results for Kama Harris yet, she has to finish her first four years as president first, let’s look at her PolitiFact honesty scorecard compared to Traitor Trump.
True & mostly true 44%
False or mostly false 41%
Pants on fire 0%
PolitiFact | Kamala Harris
Now it’s Traitor Trump’s turn:
True & mostly true 11%
False or mostly false 57%
Pants on fire 19%
PolitiFact | Donald Trump
LikeLike
I think it is extremely useful to look at platforms to understand candidates. I look back on the campaign platforms of Reagan, Clinton, and others to study history. Thank you for posting it. I really appreciate it.
LikeLike
Especially regarding public education, the blood that flows through my heart.
LikeLike
Clinton and Obama were TERRIBLE for U.S. K-12 education.
LikeLike
Clinton’s platform was illiberal. His ideas dominated the party since he won espousing them. Still voting for Harris because Republican platforms for half a century have led to, well, whatever pejorative term you choose to describe what this era of Republicanism is. Go Bernie. He’s still doing his thing creating legislation for presidents to sign.
LikeLike
Democrats’ 2020 platform—which, for example, pledged a tripling of Title I funds for high-needs schools—and more detailed 2024 proposals for early childhood education (e.g., free, universal pre-K) and higher education (e.g., free community college).
It’s fanstastic that the new president (Harris) will take on free pre-K,hence the US will join the rest of the World in recognizing how essential it is in a civilized, democratic society. .
LikeLike
Mate, I think the Democrats would have carried out the promises in the 2020 platform if they had control of both Houses of Congress. They had a razor-thin majority but two turncoats–Manchin and Sinema–who voted with the Republicans.
LikeLike
Is it unlikely that both houses and the presidency are all controlled by dems from next year?
LikeLike
Maté,
We hope so. But the Senate will be tough to win this year. Most R’s are in safe red seats.
LikeLike
MATE: I think that’s the missing insight that has been the problem for the democrats recently (Clinton and Obama, and others) . . . that is, the intimate relationship between a democratic state and the long-time education that occurs there–
. . . and I do not mean propaganda–except to be able to recognize it when presented with it . . . just truthful education and the critical thinking and ability to express oneself that enables one to be open-minded and to reflect and to make responsible decisions based on a wealth of background understanding.
I was surprised about the Obamas on this very issue as it was going forward. CBK
LikeLike
I may misunderstand what you are saying, Catherine, but what I am looking forward to is the prospect that kids under age 6 will be taken care of during the day for free. I hope they do not want to turn this into some kind of “let’s teach the kids to read at age 2”. I hope the college education of pre-K teachers will be also free, so that we can have highly qualified people taking care of our kids, teach them games, songs, dances, and read them fairy tales in every single neighborhood, rich or poor.
LikeLike
Amen to that.
LikeLike
Mate: I have always thought that . . . “education” covers allot of areas. And what you are saying in your note usually comes with the caring, closeness, special one-person attention and love that, if not missing in K-12, gets dissipated pretty fast. CBK
LikeLike
Mate: BTW, the question of the relationship between a political structure and the education of its citizens, which I drew from your note and was commenting on, is not the same thing as distinguishing levels of education. CBK
LikeLike
Sounds excellent, Maté.
LikeLike
Really good to see you on the blog again, Professor Wierdl!
LikeLike
Yeah, Bob,
I am happy to see that the text formatting on this blog has become much better.
I just sent in my ballot from here in Europe. Hopefully, it’ll make it to the officials in Memphis, TN. The absentee ballot request didn’t go smoothly, to put it mildly. While my (TN) vote won’t affect the presidential election, we have a democratic senate hopeful against the incumbent Trump parrot, and there is also a highly controversial gun control measure on the ballot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bless you for this.
LikeLike
Worried AF here about the bombing of Israel by Iran and what the consequences will be!!!
LikeLike
Yes, Gloria Johnson–a special Ed teacher and state senator-is running against MAGA Senator Marsha Blackburn. Gloria was be of the three rebel legislators who were rebuked by the legislature for speaking out for gun control after the murders at the Covenant Dchool in Nashville. The other two–the Justins are Black. They were expelled from the legislature. She was not, by one vote.
LikeLike