LA Mayoral Candidate Nithya Raman Criticizes Trump Administration's English-Only Head Start Proposal
Raman argues the proposed change to the federal early education program would harm multilingual communities and immigrant families.
Los Angeles mayoral candidate Nithya Raman has voiced strong opposition to a Trump administration proposal that would mandate all classes in the federal Head Start program be conducted in English. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced the proposed change last month for the program, which provides preschool and early education services to low-income families nationwide.
The current Head Start framework allows teachers and aides to speak the predominant home language of students, accommodates requests for assessments in various languages, and provides essential materials for parents in multiple languages. The proposed English-only policy would eliminate these provisions, impacting an estimated 290,000 dual-language learners across the country.
The Trump administration contends that the change would help children learn English and improve their readiness for school, aligning with an executive order designating English as the official language of the U.S. An HHS spokesperson stated that Head Start's primary goal is to prepare young children for school, and a "firm foundation in the English language is a critical part of that preparation." The department also indicated that children whose native language is not English would receive priority for English instruction, and some American Indian and Alaska Native Head Start programs using Tribal languages would be exempt.
Raman, however, called the proposal "cruel" and "outraged" by the plan, asserting that it is not about improving early education quality but is part of a broader effort to "target and destabilize immigrant families." She emphasized the benefits of bilingualism, stating, "Kids who grow up bilingual are prepared for the future." If elected, Raman pledged to "bring the full weight of the mayor's office to fight this cruel mandate" and explore a joint lawsuit with the school district if necessary.
Raman drew parallels to California's Proposition 227, a 1998 law that significantly reduced bilingual K-12 programs before its repeal in 2016. She argued that the proposition "targeted immigrant and working families, banned transitional bilingual education, and set back a generation of Angeleno kids." Studies following the repeal of Proposition 227 indicated that English immersion did not enhance academic performance for bilingual children. Conversely, research suggests that students who received bilingual instruction after the law's repeal demonstrated higher English proficiency than those taught solely in English, according to UC Berkeley professor Lisa Garcia Bedolla.
Los Angeles Unified School District serves over 400,000 students speaking more than 150 languages, highlighting the potential impact of such a policy in the city. The Administration for Children and Families estimates that the English-only proposal could necessitate curriculum changes in one-third of Head Start programs, with associated costs for altering materials or retraining staff estimated between $31.1 million and $124.4 million. This figure is relatively small compared to the $1.5 billion in Head Start funding California received in fiscal year 2024 for approximately 84,000 students.
Beyond the English-only mandate, other proposed changes to Head Start include cost-cutting measures such as reducing the administrative spending cap from 15% to 5% and eliminating staff-to-child ratio mandates. The department estimates these broader changes could save approximately $2.22 billion annually, out of Head Start's current annual budget of about $12.3 billion.