Why the White House Backed Down From Its First Big Education Cuts

(The Atlantic) The email arrived at 10:55 p.m. on Friday, July 25, with an upbeat subject line: “Big News: Key Federal Title Funds Set to Release Next Week.” It was sent by North Dakota’s schools superintendent, Kirsten Baesler, who is awaiting confirmation to become an assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of Education, the very agency that had been holding back the funds in question—more than $5 billion—from school districts for weeks.

“Thank you for your advocacy, patience, professionalism, and persistence as we’ve waited for these essential funds to flow,” Baesler wrote to local school leaders. Like their peers across the country, North Dakota educators had grown dismayed as the congressionally approved money, one of the largest federal-grant programs for K–12 students, had been held up. Some had spent the summer pondering layoffs and sweating over spreadsheets. “Hopefully, this development will provide greater clarity as you move forward with budget planning for the upcoming year,” Baesler reassured them. She signed the message, “With relief and gratitude.”

That an incoming official of the Department of Education was touting the importance of federal dollars for a heavily Republican state underscores the conundrum that President Donald Trump faces in his attempt to dismantle the agency. On the campaign trail, Trump’s promise to “send education back to the states” was often greeted with applause, and the Supreme Court has allowed the president to go ahead with his plans to gut the Education Department. But the four-week funding freeze—and the backlash it sparked—showed that cutting popular programs for schoolkids can be as unwelcome in Trump country as it is in coastal cities.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/why-white-house-backed-down-110000508.html