The subject of vouchers—public money for religious and private schools—has been proposed in every legislative session since 1995. Vouchers have gone down to defeat every time.
Dr. Charles Luke of Pastors for Texas Children wonders whether the voucher lobby—led by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick—wants another showdown. How many times do you have to fail before you get the message?
Dr. Luke writes:
Vouchers have never fared well in Texas, failing each legislative session since 1995. Conversations with a variety of state legislators and Austin-based politicos indicate that while, vouchers will likely pass the Senate in the next legislative session in 2023, it is still unlikely that they will pass the House. In the regular session of the 87th Texas Legislature, the Texas House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to prohibit state funds from being used on school voucher programs.
On top of vouchers consistently failing in the Texas Legislature, three other states have recently voted against vouchers. Oklahoma, Georgia, and Utah recently rejected private school vouchers aimed at providing state dollars to private schools.
In Oklahoma, a voucher bill that would have provided $128.5 million taxpayer dollars for private schools failed in the Senate by a narrow margin in March of this year. Senate Bill 1647, called the Oklahoma Empowerment Act, was defeated by a 24-22 vote against the bill. The bill, authored by Senate Pro Tem Greg Treat was also supported by Governor Kevin Stitt who pledged to sign the bill if it passed. Had the bill passed the Senate, it likely would have failed in the House as Speaker Charles McCall had said he would not give the bill a hearing.
Opponents of the bill cited multiple problems. Rev. Clark Frailey, the Lead Pastor of Coffee Creek Church in Edmond and the Executive Director of Pastors for Oklahoma Kids said, “In Oklahoma, there are many reasons to oppose private school vouchers that are funded by taking resources away from public schools. There are religious liberty problems, constitutional issues, and practical implications for parents. In this session, it was made quite clear by parents in rural, urban, and suburban Oklahoma communities that they want well-resourced schools in their own communities. They are not interested in being forced to transit hours a day just to have access to good schools.”
Likewise, Georgia Senators refused to pass a voucher bill supported by their Senate Pro Tem, Butch Miller. Senate Bill 601, which would have given private schools up to $6,000 per student, failed by a vote of 29-20. While supporters of the bill argued that it would give some parents more educational options, opponents pointed out that the voucher would likely be used by wealthier parents that are able to supplement tuition from their disposable income. “If you were really going to try to allow lower income families to exercise school choice, this bill would be means-tested,” said Sen. Elena Parent, an Atlanta Democrat. “Instead, it’s going to be used a lot more by individuals who already have the means.”
In February, Utah lawmakers overwhelmingly rejected a $36 million voucher bill which would have provided leveled funding for private schools based on the parents’ income. House Bill 331 was struck down by a vote of 22-53. Critics noted that, even at the highest funding level, the amount of the voucher would not have covered private school tuition for many schools in Utah. Others questioned the accountability of private schools’ use of public taxpayer dollars, pointing out that private schools are not held to the same transparency standards as public schools. “I don’t see strong accountability measures here,” said Rep. Joel Briscoe of Salt Lake City. “There’s very minimal accountability measures here and then with an opportunity to opt out.”
All the issues cited in these cases have been raised in Texas for nearly 30 years since vouchers were first proposed in the Texas Legislature.
Vouchers do not typically provide enough money to cover private school tuition, so they are often used by parents wealthy enough to send their children to private schools already. They normally do not cover transportation costs so poor parents who are often working more than one job may not be able to get their kids to a private school, even if they could afford to supplement the voucher. Many private schools are religious in nature. Should taxpayer funds be used to provide a religious education in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?
Finally, vouchers are a redistribution of taxpayer funds to private citizens that divert funds from the common good of public education. Is it even right or just that such a thing occurs?
While some state leaders and voucher proponents claim that Texas citizens want vouchers, a recent poll has shown that parents overwhelmingly approve of Texas public schools and that 80% of them would keep their kids in their current school even if other options were available.
I’m surprised by this because reading within the ed reform echo chamber vouchers are extremely popular with the public and everyone is “fleeing” public schools.
There are people in this country who still support public schools? Shocking, and contrary to all the anti-public school politcking the echo chamber pumps out.
I’m starting to think ed reform is not “science” or “data based” after all, and is instead mostly a political campaign designed to abolish public schools because they are ideologically incorrect.
you are “starting to think that” Having read your posts for some years now, I think I can appreciate this really perfect subtle way of expressing yourself. I laughed inappropriately.
Imagine if a multi-billionaire had given 50 million dollars to public schools and excluded charter schools:
“The city’s Summer Rising program is already open to all students, including those attending private or charter schools, but Bloomberg indicated some charter school leaders want to run their own programs. The Bloomberg-funded Summer Boost program will also provide a five-week reading and math curriculum as well as teacher training for schools that want to use it.”
The entire ed reform echo chamber would be up in arms. There would be 50 outraged editorials in major newspapers.
But since Bloomberg gave 50 million to CHARTERS and excluded PUBLIC schools, they’re all celebrating.
Absolute hypocrites and absolutely anti-public school.
https://ny.chalkbeat.org/2022/4/18/23030611/michael-bloomberg-eric-adams-charter-summer-school
So what’s the sum total ed reform contribution to public education post-pandemic?
More charters and more vouchers. Nothing at all for public schools.
90% of US students gain no benefit at all from the thousands of adults who work full time “ed reform” yet they utterly dominate education policy and set policy for the public schools they don’t support and hope to eradicate. How is this fair to public school students?
Ask the ed reformers who are celebrating the Bloomberg gift to charter schools that excludes public schools- if we reversed this and gave a 50 million gift to public schools but excluded charters would they support that?
Of course not. They would all be outraged and churning out editorials about how unfair it is.
The one and only difference is they prefer charter and private schools.
Here’s some more unbiased and agnostic ed reform commentary:
“It’s week 110 of our new reality.
“Every weekday morning, Sharde Mercier drives her daughters, Aleeah, 8, and Alyssa, 10, past their old neighborhood school in the Alum Rock Union School District to get to a charter school in San Jose,” writes Kayla Jimenez for the Mercury News. “When she toured Rocketship Fuerza Community Prep one month before schools closed due to the pandemic, she was immediately sold on the school’s cultural diversity and parent involvement …More and more, Bay Area families – rich and poor – are opting out of nearby public schools in favor of charter, private or homeschool.”
It is one of the many trends in education that was already in motion before the pandemic but was accelerated by the disruption to normal routines and the choices made by traditional districts. Our challenge in this new reality is to find ways to guide all these changes into a new, more just era of education where we break down the old barriers while expanding opportunities for all kids.”
This marketing and promotion of charter schools and bashing of public schools is, within ed reform, completely accepted, encouraged and LOCKSTEP.
There are no alternate views ever presented. If it isn’t “rah rah for charters! boo hiss for public schools!” you won’t read it in the echo chamber.
No criticism of charter schools is permitted. Every charter school is superior to every public school.
These are the well-connected people who advise lawmakers, and lawmakers hear from no one else outside this echo chamber. Is it any wonder so few lawmakers support public schools?
Rocketship charters are especially loathsome. They target low-income—especially Latino—families, with their slick marketing. Then plop the kids behind a computer half the day, with TFA style “teachers.” No art, no music. A parent group in California blocked their expansion in many districts.
Greed never sleeps. And those that stand up to stop the fraud that is spawned by greed also may never rest.
So, yes, the paid for elected minions of the Destroy Public Education Crime Syndicate will never stop trying to have vouchers and charter schools approved in every state in the country and that includes Texas. The focus of the DPECS will be rabid in RED states where even murder is now legal, and the NRA hands out get-out-of-free jail cards that tell killers what to say when they shoot someone with a 2nd Amendment protected firearm.
“A License to Kill: Shoot First Laws, also known as Stand Your Ground”
https://everytownresearch.org/report/stand-your-ground-laws-are-a-license-to-kill/
YES, greed never sleeps…or ends. It is a disease which never, ever feels fulfilled
It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall in the Obama home today. Pres. Obama enacted policy to make taxpayers pay for private schools. Today, Michelle’s brother filed a lawsuit against the private University School of Milwaukee, The court filings show that his sons were not permitted to re-enroll in the school.
We’ll see how contract law plays out for the education consumer who claims harm in the private sector.
I recall an argument in favor of privatization- the schools didn’t have to adhere to the rules that schools in the public sector did.
I’d speculate that there are those who are surprised when exclusivity doesn’t pan out as they thought it would.