As the reality of a second presidential term for Donald Trump became clear, Washington DC policy circles began the work of decoding campaign trail rhetoric and Republican priorities to determine how his return to the White House could affect higher education.
Speculation has run rampant in the months leading up to the election that Trump might?seek to?, drawing from the??developed at the Heritage Foundation, from which the candidate sought to distance himself despite clear ties to past staffers and connections to his running mate, JD Vance. In addition to abolishing the department, the plan also called for more oversight for accreditors, killing student loan forgiveness efforts, privatising student loans and numerous other recommendations.
But rhetoric and reality often diverge for the president-elect, leaving many experts speculating about his policy priorities and more questions than answers before he assumes office in 2025 after dealing Democratic vice-president and electoral foe Kamala Harris a resounding defeat.
Anxiety looms large
Speakers across different panels noted heightened anxiety for the sector after the election.
“If I was a college president this morning, I would be feeling very stressed,” said Frederick Hess, senior fellow and director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a conservative thinktank that hosted a panel unpacking what the election means for education.
Dr Hess said he expected the Trump administration to wield its power to take on issues that have frustrated Republicans, such as alleged campus antisemitism, free speech issues and other matters. With recent shifts toward??and??put in place after tumultuous spring protests, Dr Hess said he thought presidents had already tried to establish new guardrails amid heightened criticism. And over the next four years, he said, he believed a broader retreat was in order.
“How do [college presidents] figure out how to backpedal in a way that’s credible and where they can actually maintain the respect of the campus community?” Dr Hess?asked.
Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education (ACE), noted his own “anxiety” about what the election meant for higher education in an ACE webcast. Specifically, he cited concerns about what Mr Trump’s win could mean for oversight and regulations, student inclusion and belonging, and free speech, plus the fallout for undocumented students.
Dr Mitchell said he was surprised by “the strength of the Republican performance across the board” and “the breadth and depth of that is something we need to pay attention to as we think about the America that we serve”. But despite his concerns, Dr Mitchell noted that??that it?would continue to advocate for, focusing on college affordability, supporting students, advancing research and upholding academic freedom and free expression, among other issues.
“The sooner we can get to work with the new administration and Congress the better,” Dr Mitchell said. “We will lobby hard for what we care about and what we believe strengthens all of you and the work you do. We are not going to back down on our support for higher education. We are not going to back down in articulating the importance of higher education in building a great America.”
Will the Department of Education get the axe?
The fate of the Department of Education was a priority topic in both panels. While Project 2025 and various Republicans have over the years called for the elimination of the agency, speakers were sceptical that?this idea?would go anywhere. Instead, they?felt?a major overhaul was more likely.
Experts predicted that the Department of Education would stick around for two reasons. First, Republicans?need?to wield it as a tool for change if they planned to enact a sweeping education agenda.
“The reality is, when you talk to people in the MAGA orbit, there’s actually a deep split between those who embrace the Project 2025 philosophy of ‘let’s dismantle the department’ and JD Vance–style national conservatives who say, ‘You know what, it’s crazy to talk about dismantling it; we need to go in and use it the exact same way that the other side has during the past four years.’ I think what we’re going to see is that the second camp is going to emerge triumphant,” Dr Hess said.
An ACE panellist arrived at a similar conclusion about Trump wielding the department’s power.
“Realistically, this is a powerful tool for whoever is in office to expand their policy priorities and have Americans see them pushing those priorities. It just doesn’t make a lot of practical sense to give that up when you’re actually in power. You hate it when you’re out of office; you love it when you’re in,” said Jon Fansmith, senior vice-president for government relations and engagement.
The second reason? It’s an extraordinarily difficult political task to excise a federal agency.
“You can’t abolish the Department of Education without getting legislation through Congress,” Mr Fansmith said.
He also argued that the agency had been the subject of attacks for decades, but calls to disband it?had failed to gain legislative traction.
While much of the conversation focused on the policy fallout of a Trump election, some waded into speculation?about whom the president-elect might name as his next secretary of education.
Dr Hess offered two possible candidates: Cade Brumley, Louisiana state superintendent of education, and North Carolina Republican Virginia Foxx, who chairs the House Education and Workforce Committee. Ms Foxx could be a “fascinating appointment” in Mr Trump’s next term, he said.
On the ACE panel, several names emerged: Tiffany Justice, co-founder of the political organisation Moms for Liberty; Ryan Walters, the Oklahoma state superintendent of public instruction; and Chris Rufo, a New College of Florida trustee who has made a career out of critiquing diversity, equity and inclusion programmes, particularly in the higher education sector. Even Virginia’s Republican governor, Glenn Youngkin, was raised as a possible nominee.
Immediate and long-term actions
While Republicans have gained control of the Senate, the fate of the House was still unknown as of publication. But Mr Trump can bypass Congress in some areas through executive orders. Experts believe he is likely to do so within the first 100 days on a number of policy priorities.
“I think we’re going to see a whole slew of Biden administration regulations rescinded,” Mr Fansmith said, noting that the??introduced in the spring?were likely to?be among the first to go.
Experts noted other Biden priorities –?such as student loan forgiveness – were also likely to be scuttled.
Panellists said they expected Mr Trump to clamp down on university diversity, equity and inclusion programmes in the long term, possibly using the Office for Civil Rights as a tool to determine whether such programmes are discriminatory and to decentralise accreditation, limiting the oversight power of such agencies.
While Mr Trump’s higher education agenda will?probably become more clear as the inauguration nears in January, many experts said they believed the sector – caught up in feverish culture wars – was a high priority.
Preston Cooper, a senior fellow at AEI, argued that higher education would?probably be a focus for a newly empowered Mr Trump even if he?did not move immediately on his campaign trail rhetoric.
“I’ve never seen so much emphasis on things like accreditation reform, an endowment tax – something he called for many times – creating a national university,” Dr Cooper said. “Regardless of whether he goes after trying to accomplish those specific things, I do think that higher education is going to be a priority for the second Trump administration, really in a way it was not for the first.”
This is an edited version of a story that first appeared on .?
