This piece first appeared in our subscriber-only Politics K-12 newsletter. Want to receive education policy news first? Become an EdWeek subscriber.
Voters are making decisions with major implications for the nation’s schools as they finish casting their ballots Tuesday.
Education Week reviewed what’s on the ballot in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, and we’re focused on a handful of school-related themes as we prepare to watch election returns trickle in. (Check out our election guide here for highlights on the statewide races and ballot initiatives of greatest consequence to schools nationwide.)
This is what we’re keeping an eye on.
Who captures control of Congress?
That’s the biggest question of the night. Pollsters and election forecasters throughout campaign season have projected Democrats will capture a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, and that enough U.S. Senate races are in play to make the chamber competitive.
After two years of unified Republican control of Congress and the White House, Democratic control of one or both chambers would usher in some major changes.
Oversight hearings into the Trump administration’s attempts to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education by sending its functions to other agencies would be almost assured.
What’s less certain is the extent to which Democrats would push an affirmative education policy agenda of their own, given that President Donald Trump will retain veto power and Democrats in most scenarios are unlikely to have enough votes to pass legislation without Republican support. One avenue Democrats would have is the federal budget, where members have floated the idea of including language ending the agreements that have outsourced Education Department functions.
If that language ended up in a must-pass spending bill, Trump would “have to decide whether [to] shut down the federal government or bring the people back to the Department of Education,” Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., recently told EdWeek’s Alyson Klein.
But some see the possibility for bipartisan policymaking in a divided Washington. One of the last major education policies to pass Congress, the Every Student Succeeds Act, happened in 2015 in a time of divided government, with a Democratic president and Republican Congress.
“There’s always room for bipartisanship if the goal is to advance education,” said Scott, who is well-positioned to lead the House education committee in a Democratic majority.
Others, meanwhile, predict gridlock, with little movement to change the status quo on federal education policy.
How do Trump’s key education policies fare on state ballots?
As president, Trump has made it a top priority to eradicate what his administration terms “illegal DEI” from schools and keep transgender girls off girls’ school athletic teams.
Those priorities are on several states’ midterm ballots.
Voters in Arizona, Colorado, Nebraska, and Washington state are deciding on ballot measures to restrict transgender students’ participation in athletics. They’re the first ballot tests for such policies, which a majority of Americans support in public polls.
Arizona and Nebraska already bar transgender girls from girls’ athletic teams. The Arizona ballot measure would expand the ban to transgender boys seeking to play on boys’ teams and to non-school athletic leagues such as Little League. Nebraska’s measure would enshrine the existing ban in the state constitution, along with a requirement that school sports be designated male, female, or co-ed.
Colorado and Washington are among the 21 states that allow transgender athletes to join teams aligned with their gender identity, according to the Movement Advancement Project. Washington state’s education department has faced related investigations from the Trump administration, which contends the state’s policies violate Title IX, the federal sex discrimination law.
On the anti-DEI front, Arizona and Wisconsin voters are considering ballot measures that would bar state entities, including schools, from giving anyone “preferential treatment” based on race.
The Arizona measure would also prohibit schools from using public funds for DEI-related positions and disciplining students differently based on race—a nod to federal rules aimed at preventing the “disparate impact” of school policies, such as discipline, on different racial groups that the Trump administration has rescinded.
Are voters in an anti-tax mood?
Funding and taxes are the most common subjects addressed by this fall’s education-related ballot measures.
At least 18 questions on ballots in 12 states deal with tax and funding questions that would affect key K-12 funding sources, according to an Education Week analysis.
Twelve of those measures are designed to limit taxation—and funding sources schools rely on—in some way, either by repealing taxes, limiting tax rates, expanding tax exemptions, or restraining state revenue growth. The remaining six are intended to expand revenue available for schools, either by raising taxes on high earners or dedicating new revenue sources to K-12.
Here are some examples:
- In Washington state, a ballot initiative would repeal a newly passed state income tax on higher earners.
- Two measures in North Carolina would amend the state constitution to lower the state income tax rate and limit the amount by which local governments can increase property taxes.
- Measures in Florida and Wyoming would increase the amount of residential property value shielded from taxes.
- A Minnesota measure would convert a long-running state trust fund into an ongoing funding source for schools.
- A Colorado measure would introduce graduated state income tax brackets through which higher-income residents pay higher rates.
California, meanwhile, has two ballot measures designed to generate more state revenue—a permanent extension of higher state income tax rates for top earners and a one-time tax on billionaires’ assets.
But if the billionaires’ tax passes, it could be nullified by two additional ballot measures if either one garners more votes. Those measures would also make it more complicated for state policymakers to pass new taxes. And a fifth ballot measure would make it more difficult for local governments to pass special taxes by raising the threshold for passage to two-thirds voter support from a simple majority.
Will state private school choice programs keep growing?
Over the past four years, Republican-led states have passed new programs or expanded existing ones that make public funds available to families for private- or home-school expenses.
But Democratic contenders found some success this campaign season in pushing back against some of them. If they win select races, they could be in a position to check their growth.
In Iowa, where all students now qualify for education savings accounts, or ESAs, state Auditor Rob Sand, a Democrat, has repeatedly criticized the policy during his campaign for governor, calling for income caps for participating students and audit requirements for private schools accepting public money. (He’s called himself a “public school dad” in campaign ads.)
In Arizona, Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs and the Democratic candidate for state superintendent, Teresa Leyba Ruiz, both called for more restrictions on the state’s ESA program, the nation’s first that became available to all students. Those could become possible if Democrats claim enough legislative seats and retain the governor’s office.
In Arkansas, Idaho, New Hampshire, and Texas, challengers to Republican governors who have overseen large private school choice expansions have pledged to pause or repeal those programs.
And a gubernatorial election in Democratic-leaning Colorado could determine whether the state remains in the new federal school choice program for the long haul.
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis became the first Democrat to enroll his state in the tax-credit scholarship program that launches next year. But the Democrat vying to replace the term-limited governor, Attorney General Phil Weiser, has said he’s a “firm no” on the program.
Governors have to choose each year whether their states will participate, so Weiser could withdraw after a year if he’s elected.
‘The Star-Spangled Banner’ at school, free breakfast and lunch, spending on ‘direct instruction’
There are several noteworthy school-related referenda on statewide ballots. Here are a few:
- Alabama: A proposed constitutional amendment would require that schools broadcast or hold a live performance weekly of “The Star-Spangled Banner.”
- Arizona: Proposition 320 would require that larger school districts and those in the state’s most populous counties devote at least 60% of their budgets to “direct instruction”—which generally includes teacher and teacher aide salaries, field trips, and classroom supplies, and excludes line items such as special education services and instructional support such as math and literacy coaches. Proponents have touted the policy as a way to boost teacher salaries. Opponents worry about the reductions in state funding for districts that don’t meet the threshold. Arizona’s state auditor calculated that all districts—not only those that would be subject to this new restriction—spent 52.1% of their budgets on instruction in 2024-25.
- North Dakota: A proposed constitutional amendment would make North Dakota the 10th state—and the first under full Republican control—to make free breakfast and lunch available to all public school students, using oil and natural gas revenues.
