Light posting—it’s summer, and I’ve been focused on logging miles on my bike. Why? In August, I’ll ride 192 miles across Massachusetts to raise money for the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. I do this each year as part of the Pan-Mass Challenge, but is especially important this year with research funding under pressure. You can learn more and donate here —100% of your donation goes directly to Dana-Farber—if this aligns with your philanthropic plans. Progress against cancer is more pronounced than many people realize, and it’s thanks to research at places like DFCI.
Good Pod
Jed Wallace and I talked with Steven Wilson about his recent book for a new WonkyFolk. Listen to find out why insiders are saying things like, “best conversation on this issue yet.”
You can listen and see show notes at this link. Or get it wherever you get podcasts.
You can watch here:
Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack? Sign up for free here.
Rick Hess and I joined Nat Malkus again on his Report Card podcast. As is often the case, there was news between when we recorded and when the episode was released (see below). But among other topics, we discuss the new federal tax bill’s implications for school choice and for higher education, what’s happening at UVA and Harvard, and the Trump administration’s various policy gambits.
It’s all here. Or, listen below, or where you get podcasts.
Schrödinger’s Impoundment
Last time we talked about the Trump administration’s efforts to hold back almost $7 billion in education funding, including funds for English language learners and after-school programs. As expected, some states (blue states, natch) have now sued. Here’s the lawsuit.
Ordinarily, there would be clear legal authority in a situation like this—but that’s not the case here. The administration is not technically impounding the money; they’re claiming the funds are just under review. The lawsuit argues this is impoundment. The deadlines for when funds must be released are not as clear-cut in statute as people assume. Messy. But—and this is the practical effect—school districts rely on predictable appropriations, were planning on these funds, and it’s now mid-July. “Review” versus “impoundment” matters legally, less so to people getting ready to open schools for the 2025–26 school year.
Ten Republican senators sent a letter to OMB Director Vought, arguing that withholding these funds runs counter to President Trump’s emphasis on returning education to the states. But also note the quotes from red-state chiefs in the Ed Week article linked above.
The idea that this is counter to the president’s goals is an OK talking point, but besides the question of legality and expansion of executive authority, the real issue here is something we’ve talked about in relation to other administration actions: predictability. Government has to operate in a predictable way. That doesn’t mean everything is frozen in amber—there is too little reform of government, something Trump is now weaponizing against Democrats by exploiting the myriad rules and requirements to advance his agenda. But it does mean people need to know changes are coming far enough upstream to plan for them. And appropriators need to know that deals will stick. If the White House can simply undo appropriations it doesn’t like, then what’s the forcing function for any bipartisanship? Or bipartisanship at all.
Fish Porn
It’s a Friday. It’s summer.
Here’s Knowledge Alliance’s Rachel Dinkes with two beauties.
Want more? Here are hundreds of pics of education folks, including others from the research community, with fish. Even more pics here.
Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack? Sign up for free here.
View the original article and our Inspiration here