Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Project 2025: Education savings accounts

Girl in a Christian school

Half the students benefiting from ESAs never attended public school — they were always privately educated.

Jonathan Kirn

Rogers is the “data wrangler” at BillTrack50. He previously worked on policy in several government departments.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

The “Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise," the Heritage Foundation’s guide for a second Trump administration is more commonly known as Project 2025. One section outlines an ambitious plan to expand education savings accounts, which allow parents to decide how to spend some of the public money allocated to their children’s education, across the United States. It recommends creating a model for ESAs by allowing their use by students in active-duty military families, those studying in D.C., and students attending schools on tribal lands.


It also suggests the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act should be changed, as should the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, to allow ESAs.

Advocates of ESAs claim that increasing choice drives up the quality of education for children and is a more efficient use of public money. Opponents claim they often benefit those who are already advantaged and are a method of using taxpayer money to fund private, religious education. Is a massive expansion justified?

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

What is the history of vouchers and ESAs?

The Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, established in 1989, is one of the longest-running and largest voucher programs in the country. State funds are used to pay for the cost of children from low-income families to attend private schools. The real push for school choice began to gain momentum later. In 2008, the Arizona Supreme Court struck down two voucher systems on the grounds that they could be used to fund religious education and were therefore unconstitutional. Many state constitutions have specific amendments expressly prohibiting taxpayer money from going to religious organizations — generally referred to as Blaine amendments.

In response, three years later Arizona introduced the nation's first ESA program, which avoided constitutional issues by providing funds directly to parents and allowing them to choose how to spend the money. This has been the model adopted by other states.

Following the initial implementation, several states enacted similar legislation, each with its variations. For instance, Florida expanded its voucher program significantly with the Gardiner Scholarship Program, catering specifically to students with disabilities. Nevada introduced a universal ESA program in 2015, intended to be available to all public school students, though it faced legal challenges and has yet to be fully implemented.

What challenges have ESAs faced?

According to CNN, since the new rules went into effect in September 2022, Arizona’s ESA program has grown from 12,000 students to about 75,000. This has ballooned the costs — to $332 million over the last year rather than the estimated $64.5 million, at a time when Arizona is dealing with a significant budget deficit. CNN also found that wealthy communities disproportionately benefit and half the students benefiting never attended public school — they were always privately educated.

About half of the money that went to private schools in 2023 went to religious schools, the vast majority Christian. For example, Dream City Christian School received more than $1.3 million in ESA funding in 2023. Its website includes a statement of faith that rejects “‘sexual immorality” such as homosexual or bisexual behavior and states that “rejection of one’s biological sex is a rejection of the image of God within that person.”

In Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott (R) has struggled to implement such a scheme despite strong Republican majorities in the Legislature. Twenty-one such bills were introduced in 2023, all of which died. House Republicans, particularly those representing rural communities, have always been suspicious of anything that risks affecting funding for public schools. Rural communities tend not to have many private schools, and in Texas the public schools will often act as community hubs, so representatives will not support measures that risk drawing funding away from them.

Do ESAs work?

Studies have shown mixed results with some suggesting modest academic gains for participating students while others highlight persistent achievement gaps and limited long-term benefits.

For example, a 2019 study by the Urban Institute found that students who used Florida’s tax-credit scholarship program were more likely to enroll in college. However, other studies, such as those by Stanford Graduate School of Education professor Martin Carnoy, have shown no significant improvement in standardized test scores for voucher recipients.

Is Project 2025 right in seeking to expand ESAs?

Few would argue that increased parental choice and some degree of control over their child’s education is necessarily a bad thing. But it does appear that some current ESA programs are characterized by a lack of transparency over who is benefitting, and evidence suggests they are being used to send children to private Christian schools to the detriment of the wider public education system.

The jury is still out over the question of whether they actually improve educational attainment, with no strong indicators that they are some kind of silver bullet for struggling education systems. Given this, without serious research and robust safeguards (which are unlikely, given that Project 2025 actually wants to eliminate the federal Department of Education entirely) an expansion of ESAs across the country seems hard to justify.


    Read More

    Man stepping on ripped poster

    A man treads on a picture of Syria's ousted president, Bashar al-Assad, as people enter his residence in Damascus on Dec. 8.

    Omar Haj Kadour/AFP via Getty Images

    With Assad out, this is what we must do to help save Syria

    This was a long day coming, and frankly one I never thought I’d see.

    Thirteen years ago, Syria’s Bashar Assad unleashed a reign of unmitigated terror on his own people, in response to protests of his inhumane Ba’athist government.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    Men and a boy walking through a hallway

    Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk, with his son X, depart the Capitol on Dec. 5.

    Craig Hudson for The Washington Post via Getty Images

    Will DOGE promote efficiency for its own sake?

    This is the first entry in a series on the Department of Government Efficiency, an advisory board created by President-elect Donald Trump to recommend cuts in government spending and regulations. DOGE, which is spearheaded by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, has generated quite a bit of discussion in recent weeks.

    The goal of making government efficient is certainly an enviable one indeed. However, the potential for personal biases or political agendas to interfere with the process must be monitored.

    As DOGE suggests cuts to wasteful spending and ways to streamline government operations, potentially saving billions of dollars, The Fulcrum will focus on the pros and cons.

    We will not shy away from DOGE’s most controversial proposals and will call attention to dangerous thinking that threatens our democracy when we see it. However, in doing so, we are committing to not employing accusations, innuendos or misinformation. We will advocate for intellectual honesty to inform and persuade effectively.

    The new Department of Government Efficiency, an advisory board to be headed by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, is designed to cut resources and avoid waste — indeed to save money. Few can argue this isn't a laudable goal as most Americans have experienced the inefficiencies and waste of various government agencies.

    Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

    Keep ReadingShow less
    From left: Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Emmanuel Macron, Donald Trump

    President-elect Donald Trump spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and French President Emmanuel Macron on Dec. 7. No one will be able to restrain Trump's foreign policy efforts.

    The true Trump threat

    Many Americans fear what Donald Trump will do after assuming the presidency in January — and understandably so. Trump's pathological self-absorption has no place in American government, let alone at its very top.

    But the specific type of threat Trump poses is often misunderstood. Like all presidents, his domestic powers are limited. He will face stiff resistance at the federal, state and local levels of government.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    Donald Trump and Tulsi Gabbard on stage

    President-elect Donald Trump has nominated former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard to be the director of national intelligence.

    Adam J. Dewey/Anadolu via Getty Images

    How a director of national intelligence helps a president stay on top of threats from around the world

    In all the arguments over whether President-elect Donald Trump’s choice for director of national intelligence is fit for the job, it’s easy to lose sight of why it matters.

    It matters a lot. To speak of telling truth to power seems terribly old-fashioned these days, but as a veteran of White House intelligence operations, I know that is the essence of the job.

    Keep ReadingShow less