Some education grants in limbo were used for ‘leftwing agenda,' Trump administration says
The administration this week withheld more than $6 billion intended for after-school and summer programs, English language instruction, adult literacy and more, saying it would review the grants to ensure they align with President Donald Trump's priorities. The freeze sent schools and summer camp providers scrambling to determine whether they can still provide programs like day camps this summer or after-hours child care this fall.
On Wednesday, the Office of Management and Budget said an initial review showed schools used some of the money to support immigrants in the country illegally or promote LGBTQ+ inclusion. The administration said it hadn't made any final decisions about whether to withhold or release individual grants.
'Many of these grant programs have been grossly misused to subsidize a radical leftwing agenda,' the Office of Management and Budget said in a statement.
It said New York schools had used money for English language instruction to promote organizations that advocate for immigrants in the country illegally. Washington state used the money to direct immigrants without legal status toward scholarships the Trump administration says were 'intended for American students.' Grant funds also were used for a seminar on 'queer resistance in the arts,' the office said.
Officials from New York and Washington state didn't immediately respond to requests for comment.
Advocates for low-income and immigrant children connected the grant freeze to the Trump administration's larger crackdown on immigrants. Two of the five federal programs put on hold were appropriated by Congress to help support English proficiency of students still learning the language and migrant children who move with their parents to follow agricultural and other jobs.
School districts use the $890 million earmarked for English learners in a wide range of purposes, from training teachers' aides who work with English learners, to running summer schools designed for them, to hiring family liaisons who speak the parents' native languages. The $375 million appropriated for migrant education is often used to hire dedicated teachers to travel close to where students live.
By 'cherrypicking extreme examples,' the administration is seeking to conflate all students learning English with people who are in the country illegally, said Amaya Garcia, who directs education research at New America, a left-leaning think tank in Washington, D.C.
In reality, the majority of English learners in public schools were born in the United States, according to data from the Migration Policy Institute.
'The way they're framing it is that we're using this money for undocumented students and families,' said Margarita Machado-Casas, president of the National Association of Bilingual Educators. 'It's a distraction. A distraction from what's actually happening: that 5.3 million English learners who speak lots of different languages, not just Spanish, will suffer.'
Even if the students lack legal status, states may not deny public education to children in the country illegally under a 1982 Supreme Court decision known as Plyler v. Doe. Conservative politicians in states such as Oklahoma, Texas and Tennessee have pursued policies that question whether immigrants without legal residency should have the right to a public education, raising the possibility of challenges to that landmark ruling.
Meanwhile, states and school districts are still trying to understand what it will mean for their students and their staff if these funds never arrive.
In Oregon, eliminating grants for English learners and migrant students would 'undermine the state's efforts to increase academic outcomes for multilingual students, promote multilingualism, close opportunity gaps and provide targeted support to mobile and vulnerable student groups,' said Liz Merah, spokeswoman for the state's Department of Education.
____
Associated Press writer Collin Binkley contributed from Washington.
_____
The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
I Asked ChatGPT What Would Happen If Billionaires Paid Taxes at the Same Rate as the Upper Middle Class
There are many questions that don't have simple answers, either because they're too complex or they're hypothetical. One such question is what it might mean for billionaires to pay taxes at the same rate as the upper middle class, whose income starts, on average, at around $168,000, depending on where you live. Find Out: Read Next: ChatGPT may not be an oracle, but it can analyze information and offer trends and patterns, so I asked it what would happen if billionaires were required to pay anywhere near as much as the upper middle class. Here's what it said. A Fatter Government Larder For starters, ChatGPT said that if billionaires paid taxes like the upper middle class, the government would bring in a lot more money — potentially hundreds of billions of dollars more every year. 'That's because most billionaires don't make their money from salaries like upper-middle-class workers do. Instead, they grow their wealth through investments–stocks, real estate, and businesses–which are often taxed at much lower rates or not taxed at all until the assets are sold,' ChatGPT told me. Billionaire income is largely derived from capital appreciation, not wages. In other words, they make money on their money through interest. And as of yet, the U.S. tax code doesn't tax 'unrealized capital gains' so until you sell your assets, you could amass millions in appreciation and not pay a dime on it, ChatGPT shared. Learn More: What Do Billionaires Pay in Taxes? Right now, many billionaires pay an effective tax rate of around 8% or less, thanks to loopholes and tax strategies. Meanwhile, upper-middle-class households earning, say, $250,000 might pay around 20% to 24% of their income in taxes. (Keep in mind that the government doesn't apply one tax bracket to all income. You pay tax in layers, according to the IRS. As your income goes up, the tax rate on the next layer of income is higher. So you pay 12% on the first $47,150, then 22% on $47,151 to $100,525 and so on). So, if billionaires were taxed at the same rate as those upper-middle-class wage earners, 'it would level the playing field–and raise a ton of revenue that could be used for things like infrastructure, education or healthcare,' ChatGPT said. The Impact on Wealth Equality I wondered if taxing billionaires could have any kind of impact on wealth equality, as well. While it wouldn't put more money in other people's pockets, 'it could increase trust in the tax system, showing that the wealthiest aren't playing by a different set of rules,' ChatGPT said. It would also help curb 'the accumulation of dynastic wealth,' where the richest families essentially hoard wealth for generations without contributing proportionally to the system. But it's not a magic bullet. 'Wealth inequality is rooted in more than just taxes–wages, education access, housing costs, and corporate ownership all play a role,' ChatGPT said. Billionaires paying taxes doesn't stop them from being billionaires, either, it pointed out. Taxing Billionaires Is Not That Simple While in theory billionaires paying higher taxes 'would shift a much bigger share of the tax burden onto the very wealthy,' ChatGPT wrote, billionaires are not as liquid as they may seem. 'A lot of billionaire wealth is tied up in things like stocks they don't sell, so taxing that would require big changes to how the tax code works.' Also, billionaires are good at finding loopholes and account strategies — it might be hard to enforce. What's a Good Middle Ground? We don't live in a black and white world, however. There's got to be a middle ground, so I asked ChatGPT if there is a way to tax billionaires more, even if it's not quite how the upper middle class are taxed. A likely compromise would come from a policy decision, which isn't likely to be forthcoming anytime soon. President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill only offered more tax breaks to the wealthiest. However, policy proposals that have been floated, include: A minimum tax on billionaires where they might pay around 20% of their overall income Limiting deductions and closing tax loopholes that allow them to significantly reduce taxable income Tax unrealized gains (those assets that have only earned but not yet been sold), gradually. ChatGPT agreed that billionaires could pay more than they currently do, even if they don't pay exactly what upper-middle-class workers pay in percentage terms. 'The key is to design policies that are fair, enforceable, and politically feasible.' I asked how realistic such policy proposals are, and ChatGPT told me what I already knew: They're 'moderately realistic' but only with the 'right political alignment.' More From GOBankingRates 9 Downsizing Tips for the Middle Class To Save on Monthly Expenses This article originally appeared on I Asked ChatGPT What Would Happen If Billionaires Paid Taxes at the Same Rate as the Upper Middle Class Se produjo un error al recuperar la información Inicia sesión para acceder a tu portafolio Se produjo un error al recuperar la información Se produjo un error al recuperar la información Se produjo un error al recuperar la información Se produjo un error al recuperar la información
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New poll finds 96% Idaho voters say public lands should remain in public hands
More than 60% of the land in Idaho is public land, including this high altitude lake at the base of Thompson Peak in the Sawtooth Wilderness. (Photo by Clark Corbin/Idaho Capital Sun) Ninety-six percent of all registered voters in Idaho believe that public lands should remain in public hands, according to a new poll paid for by Conservation Voters for Idaho. The poll was conducted in the aftermath of a federal proposal from U.S. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, to make millions of acres of public land in the U.S., including in Idaho, available to be sold off. The poll specifically asked Idaho voters questions about Idaho public lands and who they support in Idaho's 2026 U.S. Senate race. Alexis Pickering, executive director of Conservation Voters for Idaho, said she has never in her career seen Idahoans from all sides of the political spectrum unite behind a single issue like they have behind public lands this year. 'It really is clear that voters are unified in keeping public lands in public hands,' Pickering said in a phone interview Wednesday. 'It demonstrates that Idaho voters are very cognizant of this fight right now,' Pickering said. 'They are very engaged, and they are not going to sit this out.' More than 60% of the land in Idaho is public land of some form. The polling firm Change Research conducted the poll among 1,027 registered Idaho voters from July 15-17. The margin of error was 3.2%, according to Change Research. One poll question asked voters, 'Did you support or oppose the amendment to sell off over 3 million acres of public land across 11 Western states, including Idaho?' – with 87% of respondents saying they opposed it. Battles over public lands loom even after sell-off proposal fails Another poll question asked voters which statement came closest to their opinion: Public lands in Idaho, where people enjoy outdoor activities such as fishing, hunting, hiking, camping, and biking, should remain public and be protected so that everyone can keep enjoying them. Public lands in Idaho, where people enjoy outdoor activities such as fishing, hunting, hiking, camping, and biking, should be made available for purchase and private ownership. Ninety-six percent of Idaho registered voters said public lands should remain public, including 97% of registered Democrats and 95% of registered Republicans, the poll found. Lee withdrew his amendment to sell public lands after a public backlash and three of Idaho's four members of Congress provided public opposition from within the Republican Party to selling public lands. Even though the public lands amendment was withdrawn, Pickering said the issue isn't going away. She said Conservation Voters for Idaho plans to highlight public lands as a central issue and continue to hold elected officials accountable for keeping public lands public. Pickering also said the public is deeply invested in the issue and knows Lee could file another proposal to sell public lands. She compared the proposal to sell public lands to waking a sleeping bear. 'Now that they have woken the bear, it will be really hard to get that bear back in hibernation mode,' Pickering said. Three of Idaho's four members of Congress, U.S. Sens. Jim Risch and Mike Crapo and U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson, all R-Idaho, provided public Republican opposition to the proposal to sell off public lands, the Sun previously reported. On June 20, Risch and Crapo, both announced they were opposed to the provision in the budget reconciliation process to sell off public lands. Simpson co-sponsored the Public Lands in Public Hands Act. Meanwhile, U.S. Rep. Russ Fulcher, R-Idaho, opposed the Public Lands in Public Hands Act, the Utah News Dispatch reported. In a phone interview with the Idaho Capital Sun earlier this month, Fulcher said, 'public land should remain public, but the control, management should be local stakeholders, not the federal government.' Polling data shows that Risch received a 10% bump in support among all registered voters after they learned Risch provided opposition to the proposal to sell off public lands, up from 41% to 51%. Among registered Republican voters only, Risch's support increased from 60% to 72% after voters learned Risch provided opposition to the proposal to sell off public lands. The poll only asked voters about Risch's upcoming U.S. Senate race, where he faces re-election in 2026. The poll did not ask about Crapo, Simpson or Fulcher, Pickering said. Idaho Capital Sun is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Idaho Capital Sun maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Christina Lords for questions: info@ Solve the daily Crossword
Boston Globe
16 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
'Relieved': Educators await Trump administration to release $6 billion in frozen funding
Advertisement The Trump administration announced the funding freeze on June 30, a day before the money was supposed to be sent to school districts in both New England and across the nation. It was another move toward the White House's goal to dismantle the Education Department, as President Trump argues that classrooms are teaching left-wing ideology. In Massachusetts, the freeze translated into $108 million withheld, leaving many districts scrambling to ensure they could still provide services during the summer months and the upcoming fall semester, with some cancelling summer programs entirely. In addition to training educators Advertisement Ray Hart, executive director of the Council of the Great City Schools, a nationwide association of urban districts that includes Boston, said in a statement they're 'relieved' about the administration releasing the funds 'for the benefit of schoolchildren throughout our nation.' In Rhode Island, education commissioner Angélica Infante-Green said, 'On behalf of Rhode Island's students, families, and teachers,' it is 'relieved to hear that the congressionally approved education funding is set to be released.' The Education Department 'will begin dispersing funds to states next week,' said Madi Biedermann, a spokesperson for the department, in a statement Friday. Biedermann said the Office of Management and Budget completed its review of the grants and directed the Education Department to release the funding. The move comes after the District of Columbia and 24 states, including Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Maine, 'It is impossible for states to effectively budget for an upcoming school year ... when the president takes the football away from us, like Lucy in a Charlie Brown cartoon,' said Peter Neronha, Rhode Island Attorney General, at a press conference announcing the lawsuit earlier this month. Related : A coalition of school districts and teachers' unions, including the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers and Health Professionals, Susan Collins, a Republican senator from Maine, and Ed Markey, a Democratic senator from Massachusetts, were among the politicians who criticized the freeze and demanded the administration release the money. Advertisement 'Every day that goes by without this education funding hurts our students, educators, and communities,' said Pedro Martinez, Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department for Elementary and Secondary Education, in a statement Thursday. 'We are still recovering from pandemic learning loss, and these federal funds are directly related to improving student academic achievement.' In early July, Governor Maura Healey said in a statement that districts would be forced to lay off staff, delay or cancel programs, and disrupt learning. 'Our schools were promised this funding, and the Trump Administration needs to deliver it,' Healey said. In a survey by the School Superintendents Association, about three-quarters said they would cut academic programs, and half said they would lay off teachers if funding was not restored. In a statement, the executive director of the association, David Schuler, said he was 'pleased' with the news of the funding being released. Some programs saw an immediate, negative impact following the freeze, including the The program, which has operated in Massachusetts since 1966, aims to address the toll on children's education caused by the frequent moves, as students transfer between different school districts or miss school altogether to work alongside their parents. In Springfield, 9-year-old Ery Perez Gutierrez last summer focused on sharpening his academic skills at Advertisement Ery is among hundreds of children in Massachusetts spending the summer at home because of the funding freeze. President Trump had proposed cutting the Migrant Education Program altogether in the next Last year, the grant served 438 students for summer programs statewide, said Emily Hoffman, director of the program in Massachusetts. The loss of the program at Boland Elementary is 'heartbreaking' and a 'huge step backwards,' as students are going without much-needed services, said Lisa Bakowski, the school's principal, who oversaw the program for the past three summers. Bakowski said the children enrolled in the program are among the most vulnerable in the community. Their parents work in the fields all day and often don't speak English. 'It sickens me that it's become a political issue when it really should never have been,' Bakowski said. 'It's about the betterment of humanity and being able to work to assist and provide for pockets of our community that need it.' Related : Other programs targeted in the freeze weren't immediately impacted. The largest grant frozen, known as Advertisement In previous years, Boston Public Schools used the funding to provide additional support for the district's recruitment efforts and educator preparation, including through an intensive 12-month program that prepares aspiring teachers to enter the classroom at no cost to them. Following the freeze announcement, BPS 'identified temporary one-time funding to maintain these efforts, which will continue in Fiscal Year 2026 despite the funding freeze with the hopes that the funding will eventually be available,' a spokesperson said in a statement Thursday. Massachusetts districts received $27 million in fiscal year 2025 for teacher training, with BPS receiving about Marcela Rodrigues can be reached at
