Projections of five past financial trends appear to be a reliable guide to the prospects for financing education, though these trends will not provide for "adequate" financing. Four of these trends are common to both the state and federal levels--a preference for categorical rather than general aid, the mandating of costly programs without fulfilling promises for increased funding, attempting fiscal accountability through rules and regulations, and labeling some noneducational expenditures "educational." The fifth trend, toward setting often unrealistic limits on annual budget increases, has been most noticeable at the state level. The federal role in the effort to achieve educational adequacy should include using general aid to help equalize state wealth and tax effort disparities; using categorical aid to achieve specific national educational goals; not exceeding state-supplied funding; minimizing rules and regulations attached to federal funds; and labeling funding purposes accurately. Treating the issues associated with the concept of educational adequacy requires defining education accurately. The history of public education should be considered when developing this definition, as should the fact that the care and treatment of some people now handled through the schools does not constitute education. (Author/PGD)