Public education is a public commitment. Treat it like one.

US K-12 funding draws from federal, state, and local sources, with the bulk traditionally from local property taxes. The result is one of the most unequal funding patterns among advanced economies — wealthy districts spend 2-3x what neighboring districts spend per pupil, often within the same state. State funding formulas were designed in part to mitigate this, but in many states the formulas are inadequate, outdated, or actively gamed by political dynamics. The federal lever (Title I) targets high-poverty schools but is far too small relative to the gap. Reform options span scales: state funding formula updates that account for actual cost-of-education differentials, federal Title I expansion (proposals to triple it have circulated for years), and litigation under state constitutional adequacy clauses, which has produced incremental but meaningful gains in several states.

School voucher programs and education savings accounts (ESAs) have expanded rapidly since 2020, particularly in red states. Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Indiana, West Virginia, and others have enacted near-universal voucher programs that divert state education spending to private (often religious) schools. The empirical record on student outcomes is poor — most rigorous studies find vouchers produce neutral or negative outcomes for participating students compared to public-school peers. The political dynamic is the more important one: vouchers function as a fiscal mechanism for shrinking public school systems by reducing their funding base, while also subsidizing private school tuition for families that would have paid it anyway. Resistance focuses on state-level legislation, ballot measures (which have repeatedly defeated voucher expansions when put to voters directly), and litigation under state constitutional clauses requiring adequate public education funding.

Through the 1960s and 1970s, four-year public universities in many states (California's master plan being the best-known) provided substantially free or near-free tuition to in-state residents. State appropriations per student have declined since then, with sharp reductions during the 2008-2010 recession that were never fully reversed. The funding shortfall has been covered by tuition increases, which have driven the enrollment decline among lower-income students and the explosion of student debt. Restoring affordability requires both state-level reinvestment (a multi-decade trend that several states have begun reversing) and federal action (Pell Grant expansion, debt-free pathways for in-state residents at participating institutions, federal-state matching programs). The College for All proposals address this most directly; more incremental versions (Pell Grant doubling, free community college) have advanced periodically without reaching enactment.

Total US student loan debt now exceeds $1.7 trillion across 44 million borrowers — larger than the credit card debt and auto loan markets, smaller only than mortgages. The structural problem is that debt has accumulated faster than wages have grown for the workers expected to repay it, and the standard repayment options (10-year fixed) are unaffordable for many. Three reform tracks: (1) broad cancellation, attempted by executive action under the 2003 HEROES Act and largely struck down by the Supreme Court in 2023; subsequent narrower cancellation has continued through targeted programs (PSLF, borrower defense, total and permanent disability discharge). (2) Income-driven repayment reform, including the SAVE plan, which substantially reduces monthly payments and accelerates forgiveness; in active litigation. (3) Public Service Loan Forgiveness, which after years of mismanagement now functions and has discharged over a million borrowers' debt since 2021 reforms. Defending and expanding all three is the active agenda.

The empirical case for public investment in early childhood education is among the strongest in social-policy research. Programs like the Perry Preschool Project, the Carolina Abecedarian Project, and well-implemented Head Start have shown long-run effects on educational attainment, employment, earnings, criminal justice involvement, and health. The question is no longer whether to invest, but how to scale. The Build Back Better framework included universal pre-K and substantial child-care funding; the components were broken apart in the Senate, with most not enacted. State-level universal pre-K programs (in DC, NYC, Oklahoma, Florida, Georgia, others) provide working models. Federal options include direct funding to states for universal pre-K expansion, child-care worker wage floors (the workforce is chronically underpaid, contributing to high turnover and quality issues), and tax credit reforms (Child Tax Credit expansion, Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit reform).