Identifying the Impact of November’s Elections on Education
Last month, the October 2024 Capitol Perspectives offered readers a guide to the November elections involving the U.S. presidency, the U.S. Congress, the Michigan House of Representatives, the Michigan State Board of Education, and local school boards. Now that the dust has mostly settled, families, teachers, and administrators have a sense of which officials will help shape education policy across Michigan and the United States over the next few years. On the federal level, as readers have likely seen, Republicans took control of the presidency with President-elect Donald Trump’s victory over Vice President Kamala Harris, flipped the U.S. Senate, and retained power in the U.S. House (The New York Times; CNN; Bloomberg Government). Concerning Michigan’s federal representation in the U.S. Congress, the results were mixed, with Democrat Elissa Slotkin winning her race to replace retiring Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow in the U.S. Senate but Republicans ending up with seven of the state’s thirteen seats in the U.S. House of Representatives (MASA 11/8 Legislative Update).
Regarding what education leaders can expect from these new officials, President-elect Trump has “promised massive changes to the national education system that could have extreme consequences for states like Michigan” (Bridge). Most famously, he “has pledged to eliminate the Education Department” (U.S. News & World Report). Though, this campaign promise would require congressional approval (BBC). While Senator Mike Rounds (R – SD) has “introduced legislation…to eliminate the Department of Education,” most commentators have dismissed its chances, given the “Senate filibuster,” basically “no Democratic support for that idea, and…Republican opposition too” (The Hill; PBS News). More realistically, the Trump administration and a Republican Congress could cut “diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives or funding for LGBTQ services,” reduce “bureaucratic requirements for schools and state agencies that do compliance work,” increase reliance on “block grants” that “give states more flexibility,” and condition federal funding on schools not teaching “critical race theory, gender ideology, or other inappropriate racial, sexual or political content” (Bridge). Additionally, President-elect Trump’s appointee to lead the U.S. Department of Education, Linda McMahon, has expressed support for added “school choice” and “restoring parental rights in schools,” and these new federal leaders could advance related policy measures (PBS News).
Closer to home, following this month’s elections, Republicans will control the Michigan House by a margin of 58-52, with Representative Matt Hall (R – Richland Township) “as the next Speaker of the House” and Representative Ranjeev Puri (D – Canton) “as head of the [minority] Democratic caucus” based on separate “caucus leadership elections” (MASA 11/8 Legislative Update). Throughout November, Republicans’ ability to take control of the Michigan House and end the “two-year Democratic trifecta” helped spark a “buzzing” environment around the Michigan Capitol “as House Democrats [began] preparing for their transition to minority caucus status in January,” and “lawmakers started outlining priorities for the upcoming Lame Duck session” (MASA 11/15 Legislative Update; MASA 11/8 Legislative Update). After back-to-back breaks for “Hunting Season” and Thanksgiving, state lawmakers are expected to begin this “period…the week of December 2” (MASA 11/15 Legislative Update). Then, starting in January, Michigan will again experience “divided government” (MASA 11/8 Legislative Update). At this point, there will be “a new 14-member House education committee that will be in place for the next two years under a Republican chair” (Chalkbeat Detroit). Importantly, “the new chair will decide which education bills will get hearings, and a majority vote of the panel will decide whether legislation moves forward for votes in the full House” (Chalkbeat Detroit).
Beyond having to navigate this dynamic, Governor Whitmer and Michigan Democrats will have to think carefully about their approach in the Michigan Senate, which “was not up for election this year and remains under Democratic control with a 19-18 margin” (MASA 11/8 Legislative Update). That said, “once Senator Kristen McDonald Rivet (D) is sworn into her new position in Congress,” there will be an 18-18 tie in this body “until a special election is held” (MASA 11/8 Legislative Update). Furthermore, Democratic leaders will have to keep losses involving the Michigan State Board of Education in mind. There, “both Republican incumbents, Nikki Snyder and Tom McMillin, [won] re-election,” keeping Democratic control of the body at a margin of 6-2 (MASA 11/8 Legislative Update; Bridge; The Detroit Free Press). While this entity “does not have power over some important areas, such as school funding,” it can “hire and fire the state superintendent” and “make policy recommendations” (Chalkbeat Detroit).
In terms of what these state results mean for Michigan’s K-12 institutions, education stakeholders might look to Republican leaders’ past priorities. Historically, Representative Hall, the new Speaker of the House, has “called for reforming requirements for teacher preparation programs at universities, expanding dual enrollment to include trade schools, and exploring alternatives to state standardized testing” (Chalkbeat Detroit). Relatedly, policy watchers might think back to previous eras of divided government that involved substantial Republican “power to block any legislation” from Governor Whitmer and Senate Democrats “and stronger input in the” budget process (MLive). Regardless of how these dynamics play out, resultant policy developments will be included in future editions of In Focus.
Potential Regulation of Charter Schools in the Lame Duck
Another significant education policy development this month goes way back to May when the Michigan House passed a “five-bill package” that is “aimed at increasing transparency and accountability in charter schools” by forcing “charter schools to post average salary information for specific roles, including new teachers, veteran teachers, and support staff” and requiring “that a charter school’s authorizing body be clearly listed on school signage, advertisements, and other promotional materials” (MASA 11/15 Legislative Update). This November, the Senate Education Committee considered these bills, HB 5269, HB 5231, HB 5232, HB 5233, and HB 5234, and “advance[d]” them “to the Senate floor after” a party-line vote (MASA 11/15 Legislative Update). With that, the Senate Education Committee approved a “second package of bills [SB 943, SB 944, SB 946, and SB 947] to strengthen accountability and oversight in public school academies that work with educational management organizations” by mandating “detailed financial disclosures,” noting “specific requirements for authorizing bodies, including attending academy board meetings, enforcing contract compliance, and producing biannual reports,” and “prohibit[ing] academies from leasing or purchasing property from affiliated management groups, requiring transactions to reflect fair market value” (MASA 11/15 Legislative Update).
Proponents of these charter school reforms have argued that they are “important” for “fair[ness]” because they place these entities “on the same playing field as traditional public schools” (Chalkbeat Detroit). In terms of specific elements in the measures, supporters have noted that certain entities are presently taking advantage of concerning dynamics around “selling [and] leasing properties” to “use…taxpayer money to buy private property” and “benefit…for-profit companies managing charter schools” (Chalkbeat Detroit). Conversely, critics of the bills have said that they are unnecessary because charter schools are already “publicly accountable and transparent” (Chalkbeat Detroit). Moreover, they have posited that the effort could be harmful in “add[ing] new costs and regulations for charter schools” that might ultimately “hamper school choice” (Chalkbeat Detroit; Chalkbeat Detroit). At the crux of the issue is whether Michigan’s charter school environment represents the “wild west” as some have claimed or if “charter schools publicly report ample financial data” and members of the public have sufficient access to charter schools’ finances (Chalkbeat Detroit; Mackinac Center).
Generally speaking, this back-and-forth makes sense given charter schools’ “long and complex” history in Michigan (Chalkbeat Detroit). It is also timely, with “school choice again…in the national spotlight with the election of President Donald Trump” (Bridge). Looking forward, some observers have called “transparency for charter schools…the top education policy priority for Michigan Democrats as they count down the remaining days that they have complete control of state government” (Chalkbeat Detroit). If this description is valid, party leaders are likely to focus on getting these bills approved in the relevant chambers. HB 5269, HB 5231, HB 5232, HB 5233, and HB 5234 still need to be passed by the Michigan Senate. With that, SB 943, SB 944, SB 946, and SB 947 must be considered by the Michigan House and Senate. If these bills can get across these legislative finish lines, they “would likely be signed into law by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer” (Chalkbeat Detroit).
Limited Progress on School Safety Legislation
While charter school regulations appear at the top of Michigan Democrats’ end-of-the-year to-do list, a close second is “bipartisan school safety legislation” (Chalkbeat Detroit). Last month, the October 2024 Capitol Perspectives flagged this topic in a list of “legislative leftovers” from Bridge and explained the “languish[ing]” of an associated package of bills in the House Education Committee. If advanced, this legislation, including HB 4089, “would outline safety and security training requirements for all security personnel, require tips sent to the OK2Say student safety program be forwarded to authorities within 24 hours, [and] require each intermediate district to employ at least one emergency and safety manager as well as at least one mental health coordinator” (Bridge).
While education stakeholders will need to continue waiting for further action on these bills, November did bring some legislative progress on a pair of related measures. Mid-month, the Michigan House approved “two pieces of legislation concerning the safe storage of firearms” – HB 5450, which would mandate that the Michigan Department of Health & Human Services “develop[s] guidance on best practices regarding the safe storage of firearms,” and HB 5451, which would have “school districts distribute this information to parents” (MASA 11/15 Legislative Update). Each bill passed by a close margin of 56-53, and it remains to be seen how they do in the Senate Education Committee and then the Michigan Senate (Michigan Legislature; Michigan Legislature; MASA 11/15 Legislative Update).
Considering the merits of the legislation, backers of the bills argue that they are an effective way of “get[ting] information [about Michigan’s safe storage laws] to the people who need it” and that “education is key to preventing gun violence” (CBS News; Michigan Advance). On the other hand, critics have suggested that the legislation is part of an anti-gun “political agenda,” that “school districts have to pay for it, and [that] kids are notoriously bad at bringing home information from schools” (CBS News). Whether lawmakers opt to dig into this debate during the lame duck, how they resolve it, and how much time exists to focus on this issue area versus other education priorities, including a bill “mak[ing] completing the Free Application for Federal Student Aid a graduation requirement” that has “passed in the Senate but has not yet had a hearing in the House Education Committee,” remains to be seen (Chalkbeat Detroit).
For questions or more information, please contact Tyler Thur in the Office of K-12 Outreach at thurtyle@msu.edu.