Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
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 The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.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?

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

    The Puncher’s Illusion: Winning the First Round and Losing the War
    Toy soldiers in a battle formation
    Photo by Saifee Art on Unsplash

    The Puncher’s Illusion: Winning the First Round and Losing the War

    In the Rumble in the Jungle, George Foreman came in expecting to end the fight early.

    At first, it looked that way. He was stronger, faster, and landing clean punches. I watched the 1974 championship on simulcast fifty-two years ago and remember how dominant he was in the opening rounds.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    Calling Wealthy Benefactors!
    A rusty house figure stands over a city.
    Photo by Katja Ano on Unsplash

    Calling Wealthy Benefactors!

    My housing has been conditional on circumstances beyond my control, and the time is up; the owner is selling.

    Securing affordable housing is a stressor for much of the working class. According to recent data, nearly 50% of renters are cost-burdened, meaning they spend over 30% of their take-home income on housing costs. Rental prices in California are especially high, 35% higher than the national average. Renting is routinely insecure. The lords of land need to renovate, their kids need to move in. They need to sell.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed upon entering the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building on June 6, 2023 in New York City. New York City has provided sanctuary to over 46,000 asylum seekers since 2013, when the city passed a law prohibiting city agencies from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement agencies unless there is a warrant for the person's arrest.(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)
    An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed.
    (Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)

    The Power of the Purse and Executive Discretion: ICE Expansion Under the Trump Administration

    This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

    Key Takeaways

    • Core Constitutional Debate: Expanded ICE enforcement under the Trump Administration raises a core constitutional question: Does Article II executive power override Article I’s congressional power of the purse?
    • Executive Justification: The primary constitutional justification for expanded ICE enforcement is The Unitary Executive Theory.
    • Separation of Powers: Critics argue that the Unitary Executive Theory undermines Congress’s power of the purse.
    • Moral Conflict: Expanded ICE enforcement has sparked a moral debate, as concerns over due process and civil liberties clash with claims of increased public safety and national security.

    Where is ICE Funding Coming From?

    Since the beginning of the current Trump Administration, immigration enforcement has undergone transformative change and become one of the most contested issues in the federal government. On his first day in office, President Trump issued Executive Order 14159, which directs executive agencies to implement stricter immigration enforcement practices. In order to implement these practices, Congress passed and President Trump signed into law the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), a budget reconciliation package that paired state and local tax cuts with immigration funding. This allocated $170.7 billion in immigration-related funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to spend by 2029.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    Towards a Reformed Capitalism
    oval brown wooden conference table and chairs inside conference room

    Towards a Reformed Capitalism

    Despite all the laws and regulations that apply to corporations, which for the most part are designed to make corporations more responsive to the greater good, corporations have wreaked great harm on our environment, their workers, their customers, and the general public. Despite all the rules, capitalism can still pretty much do what it wants.

    The problem is not that the laws and regulations are not enforced, although that is partly true. The problem is more that the laws and regulations are weak because of the strong influence corporations have on both Congress (this is true of Democrats as well as Republicans) and those responsible for regulating.

    Keep ReadingShow less