GOP Slams Down on China’s Classroom Influence—Democrats Defy Crackdown

Paul Riverbank, 12/5/2025Congress debates bills to block Chinese influence in U.S. schools, exposing partisan divides over national security and fairness in education—underscoring a complex clash over who shapes the minds of America’s youth.

Stroll the marble corridors of the House these days, and you’ll catch snippets of anxious conversation: what happens when the lines between education and geopolitics start to blur? Should it matter who’s funding the new science lab or the afterschool Mandarin program, provided the curriculum remains solid? For House Republicans, the answers seem clear enough. With three bills—H.R. 1005, H.R. 1049, and H.R. 1069—they've planted a flag, warning of a “growing threat” from the Chinese Communist Party that allegedly reaches from the Ivy League to small-town public schools.

Rep. John Moolenaar, chairing the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, hasn’t disguised his frustration. “Look, China’s trying to rewrite what American kids know about the world. The Cultural Revolution, Tiananmen, even the Uyghur crisis—they’d rather none of it gets coverage in U.S. classrooms,” he told one network, his words offering a window into the anxieties driving the legislation.

The bills themselves go straight for the jugular. One, sponsored by Rep. Kevin Hern, wants to make federal funding off-limits for schools that so much as brush up against Beijing-supported organizations like the Confucius Institute. “We owe it to the next generation to keep foreign propaganda out of their textbooks,” Hern insisted, his remarks echoing concerns that have simmered for years but now seem to boil over whenever reports of clandestine funding or dubious research partnerships make the news.

Another bill, styled the TRACE Act and shepherded by Rep. Aaron Bean, takes a slightly different tack—transparency over prohibition. It would require schools to notify parents if any foreign funds are flowing into their programs, borrowing a page from earlier fights over curriculum transparency and parental rights. “Schools are for education, not soft-power games,” Bean declared, his plainspoken approach masking a serious worry about the line between cross-cultural exchange and covert influence.

And then there's the CLASS Act from Rep. David Joyce—an effort to block federal dollars from any institution cutting deals, directly or at a remove, with the Chinese government. The reporting requirements here look onerous to some, necessary to others.

But for all the bluster about unity in the face of foreign threats, the votes told a muddier story. While a handful of Democrats crossed the aisle, most voted against the bills—raising eyebrows in some quarters and tempers in others. Skeptics on their side flagged what they saw as vague language and potentially sweeping definitions. Rep. Bobby Scott, never one for sloganeering, warned that the wording might sweep in even well-meaning parent contributions, especially from families of Chinese descent. “Do we expect schools to vet every donation for signs of foreign influence, or just the ones that sound unfamiliar?” he asked, the question hanging heavily over the proceedings.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries took the argument a step further, pivoting away from China toward what he views as the more immediate threat: domestic political gamesmanship. “Let’s focus on building better schools, not staging partisan theater,” he retorted. The subtext was hard to miss; in an era when the Department of Education itself has become a punching bag, some Democrats were wary of fueling another panic.

But for advocates on the right, concerns aren’t just theoretical. They point to scattered but vivid examples: researchers caught ferrying sensitive materials, donations with strings attached that sometimes go unnoticed, even curriculum materials peppered with party-line interpretations of Chinese history. Each incident, they argue, is a pebble in a growing avalanche.

Meanwhile, outside the Beltway, parents express a duo of worries. On the one hand: who’s really shaping what kids learn? On the other: could this crackdown spill over, inadvertently targeting students and families who straddle both cultures?

As these bills head towards a skeptical Senate, no resolution is imminent. If anything, the arguments seem destined to deepen as U.S.–China rivalry intensifies and digital borders prove easier to cross than ever. What does seem clear, at least for now, is that the battle over who gets to inform the next generation of Americans is far from settled. The lines—between vigilance and overreach, openness and caution—are likely to be redrawn again and again, as the world grows smaller and the stakes grow higher.

There’s no surer way to spark a heated debate on Capitol Hill than to invoke the specter of foreign meddling in American classrooms. This week, that familiar unease returned to Washington, as lawmakers clashed—sometimes quietly, sometimes not—over a set of measures aimed at shutting out Chinese influence from the nation’s schools.Stroll the marble corridors of the House these days, and you’ll catch snippets of anxious conversation: what happens when the lines between education and geopolitics start to blur? Should it matter who’s funding the new science lab or the afterschool Mandarin program, provided the curriculum remains solid? For House Republicans, the answers seem clear enough. With three bills—H.R. 1005, H.R. 1049, and H.R. 1069—they've planted a flag, warning of a “growing threat” from the Chinese Communist Party that allegedly reaches from the Ivy League to small-town public schools.Rep. John Moolenaar, chairing the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, hasn’t disguised his frustration. “Look, China’s trying to rewrite what American kids know about the world. The Cultural Revolution, Tiananmen, even the Uyghur crisis—they’d rather none of it gets coverage in U.S. classrooms,” he told one network, his words offering a window into the anxieties driving the legislation.The bills themselves go straight for the jugular. One, sponsored by Rep. Kevin Hern, wants to make federal funding off-limits for schools that so much as brush up against Beijing-supported organizations like the Confucius Institute. “We owe it to the next generation to keep foreign propaganda out of their textbooks,” Hern insisted, his remarks echoing concerns that have simmered for years but now seem to boil over whenever reports of clandestine funding or dubious research partnerships make the news.Another bill, styled the TRACE Act and shepherded by Rep. Aaron Bean, takes a slightly different tack—transparency over prohibition. It would require schools to notify parents if any foreign funds are flowing into their programs, borrowing a page from earlier fights over curriculum transparency and parental rights. “Schools are for education, not soft-power games,” Bean declared, his plainspoken approach masking a serious worry about the line between cross-cultural exchange and covert influence.And then there's the CLASS Act from Rep. David Joyce—an effort to block federal dollars from any institution cutting deals, directly or at a remove, with the Chinese government. The reporting requirements here look onerous to some, necessary to others.But for all the bluster about unity in the face of foreign threats, the votes told a muddier story. While a handful of Democrats crossed the aisle, most voted against the bills—raising eyebrows in some quarters and tempers in others. Skeptics on their side flagged what they saw as vague language and potentially sweeping definitions. Rep. Bobby Scott, never one for sloganeering, warned that the wording might sweep in even well-meaning parent contributions, especially from families of Chinese descent. “Do we expect schools to vet every donation for signs of foreign influence, or just the ones that sound unfamiliar?” he asked, the question hanging heavily over the proceedings.House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries took the argument a step further, pivoting away from China toward what he views as the more immediate threat: domestic political gamesmanship. “Let’s focus on building better schools, not staging partisan theater,” he retorted. The subtext was hard to miss; in an era when the Department of Education itself has become a punching bag, some Democrats were wary of fueling another panic.But for advocates on the right, concerns aren’t just theoretical. They point to scattered but vivid examples: researchers caught ferrying sensitive materials, donations with strings attached that sometimes go unnoticed, even curriculum materials peppered with party-line interpretations of Chinese history. Each incident, they argue, is a pebble in a growing avalanche.Meanwhile, outside the Beltway, parents express a duo of worries. On the one hand: who’s really shaping what kids learn? On the other: could this crackdown spill over, inadvertently targeting students and families who straddle both cultures?As these bills head towards a skeptical Senate, no resolution is imminent. If anything, the arguments seem destined to deepen as U.S.–China rivalry intensifies and digital borders prove easier to cross than ever. What does seem clear, at least for now, is that the battle over who gets to inform the next generation of Americans is far from settled. The lines—between vigilance and overreach, openness and caution—are likely to be redrawn again and again, as the world grows smaller and the stakes grow higher.