November 2024: AESA State Examiner

The 2024 November General Election garnered a great deal of national attention due to the hotly contested and much analyzed Presidential race between the Trump-Vance and Harris-Walz tickets. But there was a lot at stake at the state level too, particularly for an issue like public education, which is a responsibility largely left to the states. As such, the November 2024 State Examiner will review the election results - including gubernatorial races, legislative contests, education leadership, and statewide ballot initiatives - and examine the potential implications for state governments and education advocates that seek to influence them.

Eleven states — Delaware, Indiana, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington and West Virginia — held gubernatorial races. The election results indicate a mix of incumbents retaining their positions and new governors being elected.

Why are races for the governors’ mansions important to K-12 education? Beyond setting education policy and funding priorities by way of executive budget proposals, governors also get to appoint key leaders in many states. Newly elected governors in Delaware, Indiana, New Hampshire and Vermont each have the power to appoint the chief state school officer. Further, ten of the 11 states also have education governance structures wherein the governor appoints at least one member to the state board of education.

So, what are the emerging policy priorities for top officeholders? According to an analysis by Education Commission of the States, Republican candidates prioritized school choice, parental involvement in education, local control, and school safety. Democratic candidates meanwhile emphasized education funding and finance, early childhood education, and student support services. Both parties share common ground on several issues including teacher recruitment and retention, workforce development through career and technical education, and improving access to quality education. These consensus priorities may also create opportunities for education advocates to advance common sense proposals in key priority areas of agreement.

Ultimately, there were no party changes in 11 executive office races; this has not happened in over two decades dating back to 2000. More significant shifts occurred in state legislatures.

In the 50 states, there are 99 state legislative chambers altogether (Nebraska is unicameral). Across 44 states, 85 of those chambers held regular legislative elections in 2024. These elections were for 5,807 of the country's 7,386 state legislative seats (79%).

The election resulted in a continued division in legislative chambers across the states with Democrats making some modest inroads. Prior to the election, Republicans controlled the legislature in 28 states, Democrats in 19, and one state had a divided legislature. Post-election, 2025 will see 27 Republican-controlled legislatures, 17 Democratic and five divided. According to NCSL, split legislatures are now back up to the average over the past decade, moving past recent history of unified control. The high-water mark for split legislative chambers was in 1992 and 2000, when 16 state legislatures were split.

Ultimately, the overall party control result is 23 Republican trifectas (where one party controls the House, Senate and Office of the Governor), 15 Democratic trifectas, and 12 states with divided governments.

These realities reflect a balance of power that could affect legislative agendas moving forward. This division is critical as it may lead to increased partisan negotiations during lame duck sessions prior to the changes and the upcoming new legislative sessions set to begin in January 2025.

Changes in state education leadership were prominent, with several states electing new education commissioners or superintendents.

In the four states with elections for chief state school officers, two new partisan and two incumbent nonpartisan leaders were elected. In Montana, Republican Susie Hedalen succeeds Republican Elise Arntzen, who was term-limited. In North Carolina, Democrat Mo Green ousted Republican Catherine Truitt. Nonpartisan, incumbent candidates were re-elected in North Dakota and Washington state.

State Boards of Education in nine states (Alabama, Colorado, Kansas, Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Texas, Utah, and D.C.) also held elections for 49 seats (37 partisan, 12 nonpartisan), with 23 incumbents and 26 members being new to their respective boards.

These leaders will play crucial roles in shaping educational policies and addressing issues such as funding, teacher recruitment, and curriculum standards. For instance, newly elected officials have highlighted priorities such as early childhood education and workforce development. These priorities are generally aligned to those of the governors and legislatures outlined above. Again, consensus and cross-party priorities may create opportunities for advancement and represent areas for educational service agencies (ESAs) to integrate themselves and their priorities.

In the 2024 elections, voters acted on 16 total ballot measures across 14 states – the highest number in 18 years. Eleven initiatives passed and five failed for a 68% passage rate. Among these issues voters approved seven out of twelve education-related ballot measures in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Rhode Island, and Utah.

Key outcomes included approval for funding measures aimed at improving educational facilities and resources. However, several school choice initiatives were defeated, indicating a potential shift in public sentiment regarding educational governance and funding strategies for school choice options.

Voters in Kentucky, Nebraska, and Colorado decisively rejected statewide ballot initiatives aimed at expanding school choice through mechanisms like vouchers or public funding for private schools. These defeats highlight growing public resistance to diverting taxpayer money from public schools to private education and offer lessons for other states considering similar measures.

The following is a brief overview of the school choice related ballot initiatives:

• Kentucky (Amendment 2): This proposed constitutional amendment sought to allow the legislature to allocate public funds to private and charter schools. It was overwhelmingly defeated, with nearly 65% of voters opposing it. The measure faced bipartisan criticism, particularly from rural communities concerned about draining resources from local public schools. Opponents, including teachers' unions and Democratic Governor Andy Beshear, emphasized the need to fully fund public education instead of diverting resources to private institutions.
• Nebraska (Referendum on LB1402): Voters repealed a law that would have allocated $10 million annually for "opportunity scholarships," effectively a voucher program for private school tuition. Opponents argued that it would undermine public schools by redirecting state funds. The repeal passed with close to 60% of the vote, maintaining Nebraska’s unique status as a state without charter schools or voucher programs. The campaign against the law was bolstered by grassroots organizing and widespread public concern about preserving funding for public education.
• Colorado (Amendment 78): This measure aimed to establish a constitutional right to school choice, allowing state funds to follow students to private or charter schools. It was narrowly defeated, with 51.9% voting against it. Critics highlighted concerns about privatization and the potential weakening of public schools, while proponents framed it as empowering parental choice.

So, what are the key takeaways for other states?

First, across all three states, voters expressed strong support for keeping taxpayer dollars within the public school system. Campaigns opposing these measures successfully framed them as threats to already underfunded public schools.

Second, there was bipartisan opposition. In traditionally conservative states like Kentucky and Nebraska, opposition to these measures extended beyond partisan lines. Rural communities, often Republican strongholds, resisted voucher programs out of fear they would disproportionately harm their local public schools.

Third, well-orchestrated advocacy campaigns are critical. Teachers' unions, educators, and coalitions of parents played a pivotal role in mobilizing voters against these initiatives. Their efforts included grassroots organizing, petition drives (as seen in Nebraska), and effective use of advertising to highlight the potential consequences of diverting funds from public education.

Lastly, school choice advocates remain undeterred. Despite their defeats, proponents of school choice remain undeterred in many states.

These results may suggest that future efforts will need to address voter concerns more directly—particularly around equity and accountability in private education. For other states considering similar policies, these outcomes underscore the importance of engaging with local communities and addressing fears about undermining public education systems. The defeats in Kentucky, Nebraska, and Colorado serve as a reminder that school choice remains a contentious issue with significant resistance among voters when tied to public funding for private institutions.

As the 2024 elections conclude, lame duck legislative sessions may see heightened activity as outgoing legislators push through final measures before new members take office. This period could be crucial for advancing controversial or urgent legislation that may not survive under new leadership dynamics starting January 2025. The incoming governors and legislators will likely prioritize their campaign promises, which could lead to significant shifts in policy direction—especially concerning education funding and governance reforms.

In summary, the 2024 November General Election has set the stage for substantial changes in state governance, particularly in education policy. The outcomes will shape legislative agendas and executive priorities well into 2025, influencing how states address key issues such as educational equity, funding mechanisms, and overall governance structures. With turnover in legislatures, in the executive branch, and among educational leadership, education stakeholders may want to engage with newly elected and returning members early to educate them on key policy and funding priorities as part of an overall advocacy strategy.

For more information on enacted or pending legislation and issues coming from the states, check out the following resources:

• Ballotpedia: https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2024
• National Conference of State Legislatures: https://www.ncsl.org
• Education Commission of the States: https://www.ecs.org