There are many ways to dismantle public education. Some leaders do it slowly, through attrition and austerity, with spreadsheets that flatten need into numbers. Others do it suddenly, with executive orders and mass layoffs, striking at the structure so quickly that institutions collapse before they can resist. But whether the pace is glacial or brutal, the result is the same: children lose access, teachers burn out, and public trust erodes. This analysis compares two such dismantlings—one in British Columbia under Christy Clark, the other in the United States under Donald Trump—not to measure suffering against suffering, but to understand the patterns of disinvestment that governments cloak in language like efficiency, choice, or greatness.
- Donald Trump (2025, U.S.): In 2025, President Trump’s administration withheld roughly $6.8–7.0 billion in federal K‑12 education funds that were supposed to be disbursed on July 1 edweek.org. This represented a significant share of federal support – those targeted programs made up over 10% of federal K‑12 funding in many states edweek.org. The cuts focused on specific grants: e.g. $2.2 billion cut from teacher training (Title II), $1.3–1.4 billion from after-school programs (Title IV-B), $1.3 billion from academic enrichment (Title IV-A, e.g. STEM/counseling), $890 million from English learner support (Title III), and $375 million from migrant student education (Title I-C) chalkbeat.org. In higher education and research, the administration also moved to terminate billions in federal research grants to universities that it deemed politically undesirable, with over $3.3 billion in grants to public and private colleges targeted for elimination americanprogress.org americanprogress.org. (By comparison, previous Trump-era budgets had already proposed double-digit percentage cuts to the Department of Education, but many of those were blocked by Congress. The 2025 actions were an unprecedented executive-branch funding freeze.)
- Christy Clark (2001–2017, B.C. Canada): As B.C.’s Education Minister (2001–2004) and then Premier (2011–2017), Christy Clark oversaw persistent underfunding and cuts totaling hundreds of millions of dollars from public education bcstudies.com. B.C.’s education spending went from one of the highest-funded in Canada to one of the lowest. By the mid-2010s, B.C. had the second-lowest per-student funding in Canada – about $1,000 per student below the national average rabble.ca – despite the province running budget surpluses policyalternatives.ca. Education operating budgets grew much more slowly than in other provinces (only ~5% over several years, vs. >12% nationally), effectively shrinking as a share of GDP. Over Clark’s tenure, more than 200 public schools were closed across B.C. (2002–2016) to save money bcndp.ca. At the same time, her government increased funding to private schools at over three times the rate of public school funding growth, reaching $358 million for private academies by 2016/17 policyalternatives.ca policyalternatives.ca. In short, Clark’s budgeting choices squeezed public education funding significantly in both absolute and relative terms.
Impact on staff, research, and educational programming
- Donald Trump (2025): The immediate impact of the 2025 federal cuts was a shock to school staffing and programs. Thousands of districts suddenly faced budget holes, since they had expected these federal dollars for the 2025–26 school year edweek.org. Many states warned they might have to freeze hiring or lay off staff(e.g. instructional aides, specialist teachers funded by these grants) and slash student services if the money didn’t arrive edweek.org nea.org. For instance, teacher professional development programs were defunded, forcing districts to consider cutting training initiatives or even teacher positions edweek.org. Critical programs for vulnerable students were hit hardest: the freeze on Title III and migrant education funds meant ESL teachers, bilingual aides, and migrant student support staff were at risk, undermining services for English-language learners and immigrant communities chalkbeat.org. After-school and summer programs (21st Century Community Learning Centers) also faced closure, affecting tutoring, extracurriculars, and childcare for many families chalkbeat.org. In the higher-ed sphere, Trump’s broader agenda to “scrutinize” research funding led to terminated grants for university R&D projects americanprogress.org americanprogress.org. This jeopardized research staff positions (lab technicians, graduate assistants) and halted studies ranging from health and science to teacher training initiatives. Education advocates noted that the administration’s moves were effectively “dismantling” parts of the Department of Education – undermining everything from literacy grants to civil rights enforcement – as many programs were targeted due to political motives politico.com politico.com.
- Christy Clark (B.C.): The long-term underfunding in B.C. translated into significant staffing reductions and program cuts over many years. Clark’s government (and her predecessor’s) eliminated thousands of teaching positions or left them unfilled to cut costs. Notably, between 2002 and 2014, B.C. public schools lost 1,400 specialist teachers, including about 700 special education teachers, 300 teacher-librarians, 100+ counselors, and others rabble.ca. These specialists provide critical support (literacy intervention, special needs support, library programs, counseling), so their loss meant those services were dramatically scaled back. Non-enrolling teacher roles (librarians, special ed, etc.) were disproportionately slashed bcstudies.com. Many enrichment programs were trimmed or cancelled; for example, art and music programs struggled for funding, and adult basic educationprogramming lost provincial funding entirely in 2014 (forcing adult learners to pay tuition) wearebcstudents.ca. There was also essentially no new investment in school infrastructure and resources: school supply budgets stagnated (parents had to fundraise for basics), and promised capital projects like seismic upgrades lagged far behind (only 12 of 45 promised earthquake-safe school upgrades were delivered by 2016) bcndp.ca. In higher education, while not the direct focus of K–12 cuts, the general climate of austerity meant limited growth in university seats and research funding from the province. B.C.’s universities saw little boost in operating grants, and some training programs for teachers were not expanded even as needs grew (contributing to later teacher shortages). Overall, Clark’s cuts forced districts into “do more with less,” often by cutting staff, increasing fees (for supplies or programs), and reducing programming options for students revelstokereview.com.
Consequences for educational quality & access
- Donald Trump (2025): Because Trump’s cuts were so recent, their measurable effects on student outcomesare still unfolding, but educators warned of immediate quality impacts. If sustained, the per-student funding in many districts would drop (the frozen funds amount to roughly $130–$200 per K–12 student on average nationwide). Schools serving low-income, migrant, or English-learning students would feel this most acutely, since the targeted federal programs supplement those populations. In the short term, districts prepared to increase class sizes or cancel planned hires to plug budget gaps edweek.org edweek.org. For example, without Title II funds for teacher hiring/training, some districts couldn’t add teachers to growing classes – leading to more students per class and less training for the teachers in those rooms. The freeze in Title III (ELL) funds meant many English learners risked not getting language support, likely hindering their progress. After-school programs faced shutdown, which would reduce tutoring and homework help for struggling students and could negatively affect academic progress and graduation rates over time. There was also concern about long-term “brain drain” and innovation loss due to cuts in research and higher-ed support – fewer research opportunities for students and cuts to STEM enrichment grants could translate into lower student engagement in science and potentially fewer advancements (a systemic impact beyond K–12 schooling) americanprogress.org americanprogress.org. In terms of equity, these cuts were expected to widen achievement gaps, as the affected programs were designed to level the playing field. Civil rights groups noted the freeze would “disproportionately hurt students from low-income families, students of color, and newcomer (immigrant) students” nea.org. In sum, the short-term disruption (sudden budget shortfall) risked crowded classrooms and reduced services, and the longer-term effect, if the cuts persisted, would be lower educational quality and access for the most vulnerable, potentially reflected in lower test scores, higher dropout rates, or fewer college-ready graduates in the coming years.
- Christy Clark (B.C.): Years of budget constraints under Clark led to tangible declines in educational quality and access in B.C.’s public schools. Class sizes grew markedly: with provincially-imposed limits on class size and support removed in 2002, many classes swelled well above earlier caps. By 2016, B.C. had the worst student-to-educator ratio in Canada rabble.ca. It was common to see elementary classes in the high 20s and high school classes of 30+ students, straining teachers’ ability to give individual attention. Class composition also deteriorated – over 16,000 classes (25% of all classes) had four or more students with special needs by 2014, a 70% increase in high-need classes since 2006 rabble.ca. With far fewer special educators and aides, those students often did not get adequate support, impacting their learning and classroom dynamics. Per-student funding lagged so much that schools struggled to provide basics; parents had to fundraise millions for library books, playgrounds, and even toilet paper in some cases bcndp.ca bcndp.ca. Inequities widened, as wealthy school communities could raise extra funds, while poorer areas went without enhancements. Educational outcomes showed subtle signs of strain: for instance, the graduation rate for students with special needs and Indigenous students remained worryingly low throughout this period (though overall average test scores and grad rates in B.C. stayed relatively high, likely due to strong teaching and a generally educated populace). Another consequence was a loss of public confidence and access – some families left the public system for private schools (ironically benefiting from the increased private school funding), and adult learners had reduced access to high school completion courses after tuition was imposed on adult basic education in 2015 wearebcstudents.ca. In essence, a generation of B.C. students “were robbed of the education they deserved,” as overcrowded, under-resourced classrooms became the norm revelstokereview.com. The long-term impact was evident in strained school infrastructure (many unmet capital needs) and in the teaching profession itself – new teachers were less likely to enter or stay in B.C. given poor conditions, contributing to later teacher shortages.
Recovery and long-term legacy
- Donald Trump (2025) – Reversibility: Trump’s 2025 education cuts have faced intense legal and political pushback. Lawsuits were filed (by NEA, NAACP, and others) arguing that the funding freeze is an illegal impoundment of congressionally approved money nea.org edweek.org. There was also bipartisan pressure in Congress to release the funds. In fact, by mid-July 2025 the administration partially backtracked, offering to release about $1.3 billion for after-school and summer programs (Title IV-B) on the condition that states assure alignment with Trump’s priorities nea.org. However, as of late 2025, roughly $5.5 billion in K‑12 funds were still being withheld nea.org. The long-term outcome is still unfolding: if the courts or Congress force the funds to be released, schools may avoid the worst-case scenario. But if Trump’s policy continues through his term, these cuts could effectively bake into the base education budget, potentially reducing federal education spending for years. Trump’s broader budget proposals for FY2026 aimed to permanently eliminate or slash dozens of education programs in line with the freeze chalkbeat.org chalkbeat.org. It’s unclear if a future administration would restore all these programs – some damage (e.g. lost staff or canceled research projects) is hard to undo quickly. The legacy of Trump’s cuts might be measured by how far they went in shifting the federal role in education. If his actions succeed, they set a precedent that a President can unilaterally retract funding for public schools, potentially leaving lasting uncertainty in school financial planning. Also, the targeted nature of the cuts (focused on immigrant, low-income, and “liberal” education initiatives) could have a chilling effect: states might be wary of investing in those areas if federal support is unstable. On the other hand, if the impounded funds are restored relatively soon (through legal injunction or a change in leadership), the disruption may be short-term. In that case, the legacy would mainly be a period of chaos and distrust – a shock that nonetheless did not structurally dismantle public education. It’s worth noting that even during the freeze, many school districts tapped emergency reserves or state funds to cover critical services, hoping for reimbursement later nea.org nea.org. This indicates resilience, but also means other areas (or taxpayers) bore the cost. In summary, Trump’s 2025 cuts inflicted sharp short-term pain and threatened longer-term federal disinvestment, but their ultimate permanence depends on political outcomes. The episode has, however, underscored how vulnerable certain supports (like Title programs and research grants) are to shifting federal priorities, possibly altering how education leaders plan for the future.
- Christy Clark (B.C.) – Recovery: The erosion of B.C.’s public education under Christy Clark proved difficult to reverse, though steps have been taken. A major turning point came in November 2016, when the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against Clark’s government and restored the teachers’ union’s 2002 contract language on class sizes and support revelstokereview.com globalnews.ca. This forced the province to reinvest in education. In 2017, after Clark left office, the new government (NDP) reached an agreement to implement the court decision. Thousands of teaching positions were added back: roughly 3,700 new teachers were hired in 2017–2018 to reduce class sizes and improve support news.gov.bc.ca news.gov.bc.ca. The province committed over $500 million in new funding for these hires and related resources news.gov.bc.ca. Specialist teachers (special ed, librarians, etc.) began to be reintroduced to schools. Overcrowded classes started to shrink, though hiring enough qualified teachers (after years of discouraging conditions) proved challenging – B.C. faced a teacher shortage as it tried to refill roles that had been cut, a direct legacy of the prior underfunding news.gov.bc.ca news.gov.bc.ca. In the years since, B.C.’s education funding has improved: budgets have increased above inflation, and B.C.’s per-student funding ranking in Canada has inched up from the bottom. The long-term damage, however, cannot be entirely undone. As one MLA noted, “there is no way to repair the damage done to a generation of students”who went through the system between 2002 and 2016 with fewer supports revelstokereview.com. Many experienced larger classes and less attention during their formative years, which may have affected their outcomes in subtle ways (e.g. unmet learning needs, mental health supports missed). Additionally, infrastructure deficits (schools that never got built or upgraded during the cuts) take years to address – B.C. is still catching up on school capital projects and replacing makeshift solutions like portable classrooms. In retrospect, Clark’s cuts left a legacy of strained resources and labor relations: it took a Supreme Court case and a change of government to reinvest in schools, and the relationship between teachers and the provincial government was badly frayed by 15 years of conflict. The positive news is that much of the funding has been restored since 2017, and key metrics (class size, support ratios) have improved, suggesting that with political will, recovery was possible. But the lesson in B.C. is that prolonged cuts can cause systemic issues (teacher shortages, infrastructure backlogs, lost trust) that only reverse slowly.
Overall impact: which cuts were more damaging?
Both Trump’s 2025 cuts and Christy Clark’s earlier cuts delivered serious blows to public education, but Christy Clark’s funding reductions in B.C. were more damaging in a long-term, systemic sense, while Trump’s 2025 cuts, though larger in absolute dollars, have so far been a short-term shock with potentially significant but not yet fully realized consequences. Clark’s cuts lasted over a decade, permeating every level of the B.C. school system – class sizes swelled, support staff vanished, and an entire cohort of students went through an under-resourced system revelstokereview.com rabble.ca. The effects on educational quality and equity in B.C. were profound and measurable (worst pupil–teacher ratios, low funding rankings, numerous legal battles) and took years to begin to undo. In contrast, Trump’s 2025 cuts were abrupt and sweeping across the U.S., causing widespread disruption; in the short term they created chaos in school budgeting and threatened critical programs edweek.org nea.org. However, because they were quickly met with legal challenges and political resistance, there is hope that much of that funding might be restored before permanent damage is done. If Trump’s cuts were to persist throughout his term, the scale of impact could ultimately surpass B.C.’s (given the millions of students nationwide affected and the attack on research capacity), potentially leading to nationwide increases in class sizes and a rollback of decades-worth of equity programs. But as of now, those outcomes remain somewhat speculative.
In summary: Christy Clark’s sustained austerity in B.C. inflicted deep, lasting harm on public education – shrinking the system’s capacity and leaving a legacy that needed drastic action to repair rabble.ca revelstokereview.com. Trump’s 2025 education cuts, while extremely severe in the immediate term, are poised to do great damage primarily if they continue unabated; their ultimate impact is contingent on political reversals. Short-term, Trump created more nationwide disruption at once, but long-term, Clark’s cuts were arguably more structurally damaging because they were fully implemented and maintained for many years. An objective analysis suggests that B.C.’s public schools suffered a more prolonged decline under Clark, whereas the U.S. in 2025 is in a fight to prevent Trump’s cuts from solidifying. Each scenario serves as a cautionary tale: prolonged underfunding (as in B.C.) can erode a public education system’s foundation, and sudden large cuts (as in 2025 U.S.) can spark immediate crisis – both are highly damaging, albeit on different timelines. The more damaging overall in hindsight is Clark’s era (due to its long-term systemic degradation), but if Trump’s plans fully take hold, the U.S. could face a comparably far-reaching setback in educational quality and access rabble.ca edweek.org. The severity of disruption vs. duration of neglect is the key distinction: Clark showed how damaging sustained erosion can be, and Trump demonstrated how a swift funding shock can jeopardize education across a broad system.
Conclusion
There is nothing efficient about abandoning children. There is nothing bold about cutting the very people who hold systems together. What Christy Clark did slowly over years and what Donald Trump did abruptly in months are not opposites; they are variations on the same ideology: that public education can be hollowed out without consequence, that the labour of educators and the learning of children are expendable. What matters now is whether we learn from these trajectories—not only to resist future cuts, but to reject the logic that made them possible. Public education does not recover by accident. It must be rebuilt on purpose.
References: Trump 2025 cuts – Chalkbeat chalkbeat.org chalkbeat.org, EdWeek edweek.org edweek.org, NEA nea.org nea.org. B.C. (Clark) cuts – BCTF/Rabble data rabble.ca rabble.ca, Norm Macdonald (Revelstoke Rev.) revelstokereview.com revelstokereview.com, BC NDP summary bcndp.ca bcndp.ca.