Role of Unions and 3 Other Things Education Conservatives Are Eyeing in a Trump Presidency
Washington, D.C.
The surprising election of Donald Trump has sparked discussions about the impact on various American demographics and the implications for their respective concerns. When it comes to education, unions are deemed a significant stakeholder, as noted by panelists at a recent event organized by the conservative American Enterprise Institute.
Gerard Robinson, a resident fellow at AEI, has been providing advice on education issues to the Trump campaign and has been rumored as a possible pick for the position of education secretary. During the event, he moderated discussions by predominantly asking questions rather than providing answers.
National teachers unions were strong supporters of Hillary Clinton early on in the election process. Both the 3 million-member National Education Association and the 1.6 million-member American Federation of Teachers endorsed her well ahead of the Democratic primaries. Union volunteers were actively involved in campaigning for her, going door to door and making calls in large numbers.
However, the support from union households for Clinton was not as strong as in previous elections. Depending on the source, Clinton secured as little as 51 percent of that vote. Despite being a victory, this percentage is significantly lower than the 68 percent she obtained in 2012 when President Obama won over union households.
It is worth considering that the teachers unions collaborated with Republicans in Congress to establish the Every Student Succeeds Act, which resulted in the reduction of federal oversight in education policy — a change the unions desired. This stance sometimes put them at odds with Democrats and civil rights groups, who advocated for a stronger federal presence and accountability for the performance of disadvantaged students.
Given these circumstances, it is possible that the Trump administration may not have an inherently anti-union perspective, as suggested by Andy Smarick, a resident fellow at AEI and president of the Maryland State Board of Education. However, both Vice President-elect Mike Pence and Governor Chris Christie, who is leading the transition team, have had contentious relationships with teachers unions in their respective states. This may indicate a more traditional scenario of conflict between teachers unions and Republicans.
However, Smarick stresses that both scenarios are distinct and could materialize.
Other important questions and issues in the education realm moving forward include the following:
1.) How will Trump define "conservative"?
Trump’s positions on various public policies have been characterized by their fluidity and difficulty to ascertain with specificity.
Scott Sargrad, managing director of the K-12 policy team at the Center for American Progress, mentions that it is unclear what "conservative" means to Trump. His calls for significant infrastructure projects do not align with a small government approach, and his opposition to free trade contradicts the traditional business-friendly values of the Republican Party.
The view on Trump and conservatism can be perceived in two ways, according to Smarick. Will he be politically conservative, promoting conservative ideological principles even if it means overriding local decisions? Or will he be temperamentally conservative, attempting to limit federal government involvement as much as possible?
This dichotomy is already evident in some of his education proposals. For example, he supports a new school-choice program while simultaneously advocating for the elimination of the department that would oversee it. Trump also seeks to "end Common Core" despite leading a party that typically opposes federal intervention on the local level.
Perhaps Trump’s self-important personality might offer some insight.
Smarick suggests that Trump’s own view may be that he alone can solve America’s problems, thus indicating the use of federal government in many cases. This is reminiscent of Trump’s convention acceptance speech, where he claimed personal responsibility for fixing the country’s issues.
Rick Hess, education policy director at AEI, predicts that Trump will, at the very least, roll back many of the regulations implemented by the Obama Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights. These regulations have drawn conservative criticism for what they perceive as executive overreach, particularly regarding how colleges handle allegations of sexual assault and the use of bathrooms and locker rooms by transgender students in K-12 schools.
2.) A reduction in the education budget is on its way, but how significant will it be?
The Trump administration is expected to release its initial budget in either February or March. While the official deadline is the first Monday in February, the previous Obama administration often submitted it past the due date. However, it is anticipated that the budget proposed by President Trump will be considerably smaller than what Obama had advocated for schools. In fiscal 2016, which ended in September, Obama requested $70.7 billion, but Congress only allocated $68.1 billion.
Michael J. Petrilli, president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute and an education advisor in the Bush administration, stated, "I will be astonished if…the U.S. Department of Education asks for more than it currently does."
One reason for this is an impending mandatory budget cut known as the "sequester," which was established in 2010 as part of an agreement to increase the national debt limit in exchange for future spending reductions. Previous deals made by Congressional Democrats and the Obama administration have lessened the impact of the sequester, but it will come into effect again in 2017. Unlike the well-publicized mid-year cuts in 2013, this time the new caps will be implemented from the beginning. As a result, there will be significantly less funding for important federal education programs such as Title I grants, special education funds, and the Head Start preschool program.
Although Trump has not expressed much concern about increasing the national debt, implementing a sequester for non-defense discretionary programs like education could serve as an easy way to cut spending in order to gain support for new spending on infrastructure, border security, or tax cuts.
3.) Who will be chosen as the next education secretary?
The first indication of where the new president’s focus will lie in the education sector will be the selection of an education secretary. It was widely believed that Hillary Clinton would have chosen someone from the realm of higher education, as her campaign strongly emphasized college affordability and it would have prevented a split among Democrats who support or oppose education reform. However, for Trump, experts anticipate that he will most likely pick a former governor or state superintendent. Given the influence that Pence is expected to have on policy, it is plausible that someone from Indiana, such as former governor Mitch Daniels or former state superintendent Tony Bennett, could be selected.
Other names that have been suggested include Jim Peyser, the current state superintendent in Massachusetts, Paul Pastorek, the former Louisiana state superintendent who is currently leading the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation’s initiative to expand charter schools in Los Angeles, and Jeb Bush, the former governor of Florida and education advocate. However, it is unlikely that Bush will be chosen due to his history of conflicting with Trump. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, who was once a competitor of Trump but later endorsed him and helped deliver a traditionally Democratic state, is also a possibility.
(74 Interview: Jeb Bush — Yes on Choice and Standards, No on Trump and Clinton)
(VIDEO: Scott Walker on Education When He Was Running — Doubles Down on Fighting Unions and Protecting Best Teachers)
Sign up for Newsletter to receive stories like these directly to your inbox.
