We’ve gone nearly a decade without a president who prioritized education reform—and the country is worse for it. If the issue is going to have a meaningful place in the next presidential race, the groundwork must begin now. While school choice has gained traction in red states, structural reforms—namely standards, assessments, and accountability—remain largely sidelined everywhere. Their abandonment after No Child Left Behind may have contributed to a steep drop in student achievement, with recent NAEP scores painting a bleak picture. Democratic reformers who want that to change need to start building alliances, refining messages, and preparing candidates. Waiting until 2028 is too late.
A key test of what’s possible will come next year, when voters head to the polls for midterms and a whopping thirty-six gubernatorial races. That cycle will offer a clearer picture of where education stands in the hierarchy of voter concerns—and which messages resonate across party lines. With Republicans currently in control of Congress and the White House, they have little incentive to change course. But Democrats, having seen their historic edge on education collapse during Covid, are adrift in the wilderness. If they’re serious about making their way back, going big on education could be part of the ticket.
But to reclaim the mantle of the education party, Democrats will need to decide whether they’re ready to let go of the recent past. With their old coalition shattered, they must chart a different path—one that brings together Black, Hispanic, and Asian voters, the college-educated, the affluent, and the upwardly mobile—alongside a slice of what was once the Eisenhower coalition. These are voters who value competence, civil rights, and good governance—and who see education as central to all three. It would mean leaving behind parts of their more populist base, just as LBJ turned his back on the South. The question is whether they’re ready for that kind of clarity—and that kind of gamble.
To start, Democrats should seize on “abundance” as a winning message. Republicans have been aggressive in expanding school choice, arguing that it empowers families and breaks down barriers to opportunity. But abundance can—and should—mean more than choice alone. It’s the idea that every child, regardless of race, income, or zip code, deserves access to an excellent education. That means not just more options, but better ones—strong academics, high expectations, great teachers, and rigorous assessments. It also means re-centering education as a civil rights issue. The latest NAEP results show the bottom has fallen out for our most vulnerable students. A party serious about equity (properly understood) and justice should treat that like the five-alarm fire it is. But first, it needs a serious platform—one that echoes the ambitions of the Clinton and Obama years rather than the timidity of recent campaigns.
To that end, Democrats must give their education platform the upgrade it desperately needs. The 2024 version was anemic—thin on ideas, reactive on school choice, and lock step with the teachers unions’ wish list of more money, less work, less competition, less testing, and zero accountability. As Matthew Yglesias recently argued, the current political landscape provides a chance for Democrats to address education reform head on:
If we’re talking about learning loss (and we should be), shouldn’t we be talking about the old education reform standbys of standards and accountability? High-dosage tutoring is a good idea, but it’s weird to put all the responsibilities for improving outcomes on tutors rather than everything else that happens in school buildings. More mental health inputs sounds like a good idea, but are we going to measure the outputs? We know that across the board in education, more inputs usually help. But just adding inputs is no substitute for measuring outcomes.
In short, Democrats need a bold education agenda to reclaim its edge—one that unapologetically focuses on student academic performance.
The unions may not welcome stronger policies on standards and accountability, but they also won’t abandon the party for it. Even during the Obama years—when teacher evaluations and charter schools were front and center—they didn’t break ranks. They had no choice then, and they don’t now. Backing Republicans—especially the current incarnation—would be a nonstarter.
It's early days, but the horse race is already under way. Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro’s star continues to rise, propelled by a throwback political brand centered on “getting shit done.” Meanwhile, former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel has been leading the charge in search of a message that resonates on education, but he’s probably the wrong messenger for this moment. Democrats will likely need a candidate with populist resonance, someone like John Fetterman—who’s shown a keen ability to connect with working-class voters and break away from traditional establishment norms. Yes, his strong ties to teachers unions may complicate his appeal to a broader electorate, but he has not been afraid to buck party orthodoxy when necessary. If Fetterman can learn to navigate the complexities of education reform, he could become an unlikely—but powerful—champion.
Of course, skeptics will argue that Democrats can’t simply turn on a dime, shedding the far-left factions that currently dominate its education discourse. Complicating matters, growing internal dissent within the party makes such a pivot appear increasingly unlikely. But the reality of American politics is that politicians, for better or worse, eventually go to where the voters are. The GOP’s rapid shift in response to Trump is a clear example of this maxim at work. Voters care about outcomes—and if the Democratic Party embraces a more pragmatic, reform-oriented agenda on education, they may find a durable coalition eager to rally behind it.
