This is Part 2 of a two-part series on the Big ‘Ugly’ Bill: This part covers impacts on Education

When the “One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) Act” was signed into law on July 4, 2025, it came with full and complete support from North Dakota’s Republican congressional delegation U.S. Rep. Julie Fedorchak, U.S. Sen. Kevin Cramer, and U.S. Sen. John Hoeven.

Fedorchak, Cramer, and Hoeven, like all their other Republican counterparts, are betraying the middle class and raising costs on American families with the One Big Beautiful (Ugly) Bill. Why? So Americans can foot the bill for giveaways to Trump’s billionaire donors.

Here are vital notes about and harmful impacts on Education from Fedorchak’s, Cramer’s, and Hoeven’s support of the One Big Beautiful (Ugly) Bill Act:

Trump: Control how and what America thinks

With an atmosphere of interference and intimidation, the Trump Administration seems to want to control how and what America thinks. From a revision of the Smithsonian to a takeover of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, Trump and MAGA try to impose their distorted vision of history, psychology, literature, science, morality, theology, the arts, economics, and entertainment. Perhaps math is next, where 2+2=3.

Included in this zeal to control information are efforts against public broadcasting, libraries, news organizations, National Weather Service, Bureau of Labor Statistics, National Institute of Health, and Centers for Disease Control. They are just getting started.

There is a basic tension in all that the Trump Administration is proposing for education between state responsibility and federal control. They want the responsibility for funding education to go from the federal government to the states, while they want the control of policy and curriculum to go from the states to the federal government. This includes hiring and firing practices, library holdings, research projects, and more. And they are willing to withhold grants and other funding to get their way.

The Right loves to talk about parental rights and local control like they are the only ones who care. The rest of us care, too. That’s why we have school boards and participate in parent-teacher organizations. That’s why we see what our kids are reading and their homework. We know parental involvement is one of the leading factors for student success. And we recognize that other parents have a voice too.

In North Dakota, we need to figure out how to make up the federal funding that has been cut. And we can’t wait for the next Legislative Session. Typically, 15% of funding for public schools comes from the federal government.

But the last thing Trump and MAGA want – with full support from Fedorchak, Cramer, and Hoeven – is an educated electorate.

Higher Education

Besides the ongoing interference in campus governance, curriculum, and research, based on the imagined evils of diversity, equity and inclusion, the main area of change in the OBBB Act has to do with student loans and grants. The Administration also opposes federal funding for disability services in higher ed or for programs to help students catch up.

LOANS and GRANTS – Changes to student loan programs include new loan limits and fewer repayment options. Undergraduate limits remain unchanged, but limits are imposed on PLUS Loans (parent loans) and loans for graduate students. The current seven repayment options have been cut to two.

For a college to participate in the federal student loan program, it must meet minimum earning requirements for its graduates, regardless of the student’s intent with a college education. Also a risk-sharing plan would impose a penalty on the colleges based on their students’ repayment rate.

Pell Grants are expanded to include job-training programs (good news!), but other grants are withheld or released chaotically.

OVERSIGHT and ACCOUNTABILITY – Accreditation by a federally recognized accrediting body is required for a college to be eligible for federal research grants and certain private grants. Additionally, accreditation of a college is required for its students to be eligible for federal student financial aid or for its degrees to be recognized. Project 2025 calls for “a radical overhaul” or elimination of accreditation requirements, but so far, the OBBB Act does not go that far. The Trump Administration has pushed to deregulate for-profit colleges and universities, in spite of a history of some predatory practices that exploit students.

K-12 Education

Private school is a choice; public school is a responsibility.

Public schools are a target of hostility from the right. With a legal mandate to educate all students up to a certain age or grade (depending on state), public schools take on the challenge and opportunity of welcoming all students. This means a variety of backgrounds and experience—different abilities, different skills, different motivations, and different goals—all in the same school. Such variety explains the array of efforts to lift all. Some kids need a leg up to get started. Some just need the tools for learning and a clear runway to fly. Some need specialized instruction. Some need a safe place to be before and after school. Some need help overcoming trauma. Everyone needs acceptance; everyone can use a nutritious meal.

The needs are as diverse as the students. But with the belief that we all do better when we all do better (Paul Wellstone), public education has tried to include everyone in an education that strives toward equity, that tries to help every student flourish. Under Trump, programs are being cut that are designed to help students of all kinds. This includes students with physical and cognitive disabilities. It includes English-language learners. It includes those with social or economic disadvantages, as well as populations that are historically discriminated against. These programs are being cut, and the explanation is often simply that the program does not match Trump’s policy priorities.

SCHOOL CHOICE – Project 2025 calls universal school choice “a goal all conservatives and conservative Presidents must pursue” (p. 5). It has many forms (Vouchers, Education Savings Account or ESAs, Tax-credit Scholarships, or Tax credit and deduction), but the common factor is redistributing public funds meant for public schools.

In developing school choice policies, we must guard against various abuses, such as, funding plans that disproportionately benefit the rich, or lack educational standards and accountability, or employ discriminatory admissions policies, including discrimination based on race, religion, or gender identity, and against students with disabilities.

School choice is particularly fraught in rural states, where school districts struggle to hold onto their schools at all. Many funding models tend to pull money from rural to urban school districts and run well ahead of cost estimates.

School choice provisions in the OBBB Act allow for states to opt out and, to some extent, shape a program to fit the state. So far North Dakota has yet to opt in, but there were enough school choice bills introduced by Republicans in the last session to know where they are headed.

In a recent poll, North Dakotans opposed using Legacy Fund dollars to fund private schools (58%) (The Bismarck Tribune, August 19, 2025). School vouchers would have a corrosive effect on public schools, especially in rural school districts where choices are limited but funding could flow to large schools.

MEDICAID, CHIP, and SNAP – Cuts to programs like Medicaid and CHIP (Children Health Insurance Program) will mean less money for school services, such as school nurses, psychologists, occupational and physical therapists, and speech-language pathologists. Without a universal free lunch program, students who lose SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) also lose free lunch.

TITLE I – The Trump Administration intends to sunset Title I funding in the next 10 years. Title I funding is to help low-income students and school districts. Over half of the schools in North Dakota were eligible for Title I funding in 2025 (National Center for Education Statistics).

SCHOOL LUNCHES – Most North Dakotans polled (70%) favor using the state’s Legacy Fund dollars for free school lunches for all students (The Bismarck Tribune, August 19, 2025). When schools offer lunch to students, it helps with classroom attention and order, student health, socialization, and overall attendance. When all students are eligible for lunch, economic differences are not highlighted.

ENGLISH-LANGUAGE LEARNERS – The Trump Administration laid off personnel and asked Congress to terminate federal funding that helped pay for educating English-language learners. This affects about 5 million students nationally and as many as 5,000 students in North Dakota (The Washington Post).

ELIMINATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION – This is not accomplished in the OBBB Act, but a March 20, 2025, executive order makes it clear this is the direction the Trump Administration is headed. Such a move is a potential threat to the Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, and a number of other ways of tracking progress and uncovering problems. Programs like the Office of Civil Rights and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act currently housed in the Department of Education may be moved to other departments or have their funding changed from federal to state.

LONG-TERM CONCERNS – Funds for teacher professional development were frozen then unfrozen, making long-term planning harder. Funding was rescinded for some physical plant concerns in schools, specifically, funds for improvements to air quality measures and other environmental issues going forward.

Sources: Education Week, Brookings Institution, ND Monitor, National Center for Education Statistics, Kids Count North Dakota, The Annie E. Casey Foundation, Center for American Progress, Project 2025, Georgetown University, National Public Radio, The Washington Post, and The Bismarck Tribune.