Most of Texas’ school voucher applications came from white families and children who previously attended a private school or home-school.

The Texas comptroller’s office, which manages the program, released final applicant data Thursday evening, saying it will continue verifying information before admitting students in the coming months. The program will allow families to use taxpayer funds for private school or home-schooling costs.

Of the 274,183 Texans who applied for vouchers before Tuesday night’s deadline, 45% are white, 23% are Hispanic and 12% are Black. Low-income families make up 37% of applicants — defined by the program as a family of four earning $66,000 or less per year. Children with disabilities make up 16% of applicants.

For comparison, 24% of Texas 5.5 million public school students are white, 53% are Hispanic and 13% are Black. About 60% of students are considered low-income — defined in public education as a family of four earning $61,050 or less annually. Children with disabilities make up 16% of enrollment.

Meanwhile, about 75% of voucher applicants attended a private school or home-school during the 2024-25 academic year. The comptroller did not provide data on students’ current enrollment.

The state found nearly 25,000 voucher applications ineligible.

The applicant pool, while not fully reflective of the families who will ultimately receive voucher funds, indicates that taxpayer money will mostly flow to families who, before the program, had already committed to having their children educated in a private school or home-school.

During the 2025 legislative session, state lawmakers and advocates as a benefit for low-income families and students with disabilities fed up with inadequate public schools. Of all applications, 63% came from middle- to high-income families — 27% of them making at or above $165,000 per year for a household of four.

“It’s not surprising that a state as big as Texas has more voucher applicants than other smaller states, especially with such a large marketing budget,” Carrie Griffith, executive director of Our Schools Our Democracy, a public education advocacy group, said in a statement.

“It’s also not surprising that so few public school families have applied for a private school voucher,” Griffith added. “Public schools deliver special education services, provide transportation, support extracurriculars, keep kids safe, and prepare them for life. They are one of Texas’s most effective, unifying public institutions. And the data remains undeniable: Most Texans want strong, fully funded public schools — not vouchers.”

Travis Pillow, a spokesperson for the comptroller, said Texas anticipates having only enough funding to offer vouchers to children with disabilities and students from low- and middle-income families. Program participants, Pillow believes, will look different than the pool of applicants.

“We are working on a detailed report that captures all our outreach efforts for year 1, but we know there’s going to be more work to do to get the word out in year 2 and beyond,” Pillow said. “We’ll be looking for opportunities to reach more families we didn’t reach in year 1 and for ways to build trust in this new program.”

In with voucher programs structured like Texas’, white families with children previously in private school make up the majority of participants.

Most participating Texans with children in private schools will receive about $10,500 annually. Home-schoolers can receive up to $2,000 per year. Children with disabilities qualify for up to $30,000 — an amount based on what it would cost to educate that child in a public school.

Demand for the program exceeds $1 billion in available funding, which means the state will conduct a lottery to determine who can receive vouchers. The state will consider, in order of priority:

• Students with disabilities and their siblings in families with an annual income at or below 500% of the federal poverty level, which includes a four-person household earning less than roughly $165,000 a year (12% of applicants).
• Families at or below 200% of the poverty level, which includes a four-person household earning less than roughly $66,000 (32% of applicants).
• Families between 200% and 500% of the poverty level (29% of applicants).
• Families at or above 500% of the poverty level (22% of applicants); these families can receive up to $200 million of the program’s total budget. Children who attended public school for at least 90% of the prior school year will receive priority within this group (5% of applicants).

Families must still find private schools — which are generally not required to accommodate students with disabilities — to accept their children. Whether families identify a private school will ultimately determine who receives voucher funding. Parents must have their children enrolled in a school by July 15.

Later this month, families will begin finding out if they can receive voucher funding. Most families applied to receive funding for pre-K, though the state deemed half of those applications ineligible.

This first appeared on .

A Muslim parent has sued Texas leaders for excluding Islamic private schools from participating in the state’s private school voucher program.

The , filed March 1 by a parent acting on behalf of two children who attend a Houston private school, asks the court to block the voucher program from discriminating on the basis of religion. The suit names Texas Attorney General , Acting Comptroller and Education Commissioner Mike Morath as defendants.

Here’s what to know.

Background: Gov. signed into law in 2025, which authorized the creation of a statewide program that allows families to use public funds to pay for their children’s private school or home-school education.

Between Feb. 4 and March 17, virtually any family with school-age children in Texas to participate. Private schools interested in joining the program can apply on a rolling basis, as long as they have existed for at least two years and received accreditation.

More than 143,000 students have applied, while more than 2,100 private schools have been accepted.

Hancock — Texas’ chief financial officer who manages the voucher program — in late 2025 from Paxton, asking if he could exclude schools from the voucher program based on their connections to groups designated as foreign terrorist organizations or foreign adversaries.

Hancock said schools associated with the accreditation company Cognia had hosted events organized by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Muslim civil rights group that Gov. Greg Abbott recently designated a terrorist organization. CAIR has sued Abbott over the label, calling it defamatory and false. The U.S. State Department has not designated the organization a terrorist group.

Texas Republicans have made anti-Muslim rhetoric a during primary election season. Hancock, appointed by the governor on an interim basis, is running to serve a full term as comptroller.

Hancock shut hundreds of Cognia-accredited schools out of the voucher program, including those that primarily serve Muslim students, Christian students and children with disabilities, which the Houston Chronicle .

Paxton released in January stating his belief that Hancock has the authority to block certain schools from participating in the program if they are “illegally tied to terrorists or foreign adversaries.” To date, no Islamic schools are known to have been accepted into the state voucher program.

The comptroller’s office said it began inviting groups of Cognia schools that it considers in compliance with the law to participate, though it is unclear what that review entails.

In mid-February, Texas Senate Democrats Hancock to administer the program in a manner “neutral, transparent and consistent with the law and to immediately cease discriminatory and exclusionary practices that single out certain communities without lawful justification.”

Why the parent sued: Mehdi Cherkaoui, a Muslim father of two children and lawyer representing himself in the lawsuit, argued that state leaders “have systematically targeted Islamic schools for exclusion.”

The Islamic schools blocked from joining the program meet the voucher program’s eligibility requirements and “have no actual connection to terrorism or unlawful activity,” the lawsuit states. That includes Houston Qur’an Academy Spring, a private school attended by Cherkaoui’s two children.

Cherkaoui pays almost $18,000 per year in tuition for his children at the Houston private school and wants to apply for the nearly $10,500 per child in voucher funding to offset those costs, according to the lawsuit. But with Islamic schools blocked from participating in the program, the suit says, Cherkaoui cannot complete the application.

“The exclusion is not based on individualized findings of unlawful conduct by any specific school, but rather on categorical presumptions that Islamic schools are suspect and potentially linked to terrorism by virtue of their religious identity and community associations,” the lawsuit states.

The lawsuit names Hancock, the comptroller, because of his role overseeing the program; Paxton, the attorney general, because of his legal opinion backing Hancock; and Morath, the education commissioner, because his agency works with the comptroller’s office on certain program conditions.

Morath does not oversee private schools in Texas, but schools in the voucher program must receive accreditation from organizations recognized by his agency or the Texas Private School Accreditation Commission.

Before the voucher program’s March 17 deadline for family applications, the lawsuit asks that the court require the state to accept all Islamic schools that meet program requirements and prevent the state from delaying or denying approval based on schools’ religious identity, alleged “Islamic ties,” or “generalized associations with Islamic civil-rights or community organizations absent individualized, adjudicated findings of unlawful conduct.”

Hancock, Paxton and Morath did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

This first appeared on .

Gov. Jared Polis plans to opt Colorado into a federal tax-credit scholarship program, opening the door to private school choice in a Democratic state where lawmakers and voters have rejected previous proposals.

Conservatives, children’s advocates, and supporters of school choice praised the decision for its possibility to raise money for all students’ education. Meanwhile, a coalition of public school advocates sent a letter to Polis in December asking him to reconsider.

The voucher-like program, part of President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful” budget bill, has the potential to generate billions of dollars for private school tuition and other educational expenses, such as tutoring, but governors have to decide whether to participate.

Polis appears to be the . North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein did so in August under pressure from state Republican lawmakers who have dramatically expanded the state’s voucher system. Polis also is the second governor to opt in from a state where voters rejected a school choice measure at the ballot. Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen, a Republican, , setting the stage for Nebraska’s first private school choice program after voters there overturned voucher legislation in 2024.

School choice supporters had hoped the federal program would expand educational opportunities in states where politics made it difficult or impossible to pass voucher legislation. Polis, meanwhile, said he saw other potential benefits.

Polis spokesperson Shelby Wieman said in a Dec. 5 statement that the governor would not have voted for the budget bill, but he is not interested in leaving hundreds of millions in federal money on the table that could provide additional funding for after-school programming, summer school, scholarships, and academic tutoring.

“This tax credit creates an immense opportunity for Coloradans to support students in our state, but only if we opt in,” she said. “He welcomes the opportunity to work with school districts and other education stakeholders to help ensure this credit can benefit the greatest number of students across our state with evidence-based programs that supplement school days. He encourages the administration to ensure these tax credits lead to improved student outcomes.”

The tax-credit program allows taxpayers to reduce their tax liability if they donate to eligible scholarship-granting organizations, which then pay for students’ educational expenses.

The law allows donations to benefit public and private school students alike, but how feasible it might be to harness donations for public school students will depend in part on rules that the Treasury Department has yet to issue.

that Polis plans to opt Colorado into the program. He expressed openness to the idea last summer and earlier in his career. Polis said in a statement that he doesn’t believe vouchers are a good use of public funds and that this tax credit is not a voucher.

States officially opt in by presenting a list of eligible scholarship-granting organizations to the Treasury Department, a step that must wait until rules are finalized next year.

Polis’ decision doesn’t necessarily mean Colorado will participate in the tax-credit program over the long term. Polis is term-limited, and the winner of the governor’s race next year could make a different decision.

Supporters of Polis’ decision agreed that the tax credits present an opportunity for the state to raise millions for students, including to support them in out-of-school opportunities and to pay for transportation and school supplies. Advocates say the tax-credit scholarship program helps students in underperforming schools attend other school options.

Tony Lewis, executive director of the Donnell-Kay Foundation, which works on education policy, said he hopes the tax credit rules allow scholarship-granting organizations the ability to pay for a wide range of activities, such as sports, after-school programs, theater classes, and summer camps. (The Donnell-Kay Foundation also has provided funding to Chalkbeat. Read more about our supporters and our ethics policy .)

“If we pass up this opportunity to opt in now, we close any possibility of doing good work for public school kids,” he said. “Why not keep your options open?”

The Colorado Children’s Campaign, an advocacy organization, also expressed optimism about the potential to benefit public school students.

And Ready Colorado Executive Director Brenda Dickhoner said the decision means more opportunities for kids, especially those wanting to participate in enrichment programs. The conservative organization focuses on school choice and education reform.

“It’s a way for us to solve this problem of closing this opportunity gap, and making it more equitable for kids to access after school enrichment, whether it’s band or sports or any type of tutoring,” she said in an interview.

The program doesn’t require state investment. Instead, it allows states to decide whether taxpayers can donate funds to scholarship-granting organizations and receive a dollar-for-dollar federal tax credit. Individual taxpayers can claim a credit of up to $1,700 starting in 2027.

Those organizations would give the money to parents to pay for education expenses, such as a students’ private school tuition, books, transportation, and uniforms. Families earning up to 300% of area median income would qualify. That threshold includes well-off families in expensive urban areas but might exclude middle-class families in some rural communities.

, which would have enshrined the right to school choice in the state’s Constitution. In 2021, they .

Polis reiterated his decision to opt in despite pleas from a that delivered a letter to Polis saying the state should not participate.

The letter said the state should focus on providing more resources to schools and respect voters’ wishes to keep vouchers out of the state.

The group added that the state can and must do better when it comes to public education. “But publicly funded school vouchers are not the way to achieve this,” the letter says.

The letter says studies have shown vouchers provide mixed results in improving student achievement. It also says the program lacks public accountability and allows discrimination against children with disabilities or who identify as LGBTQ+.

“Unlike the private or religious schools that vouchers support, our public schools are obligated to teach all students, holding fast to the American ideal of public education as a springboard to success and as necessary to a well-functioning democracy,” the letter says.

The list of organizations calling on Polis to reject the plan include the Colorado Education Association, Colorado Fiscal Institute, Colorado PTA, Movimiento Poder, and The Bell Policy Center.

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools. This story was originally published by Chalkbeat on Dec. 5, 2025. Sign up for their newsletters at .

Tennessee families experienced a bottleneck earlier this year as they waited to submit applications for the state’s new program. In July, 166 parents that they had received a scholarship, only to alert them a few days later that the notification was a mistake. 

“It wasn’t the most ideal user experience,” said Heide Nesset, a senior fellow for the Beacon Center of Tennessee, a right-leaning think tank. But there was a “tight runway,” about three months, to get the program off the ground. 

With state leaders hoping to serve up to 70,000 students next year, they’re now . Proposals are due Friday.

But the rough start in Tennessee wasn’t an anomaly. All states with education savings accounts have struggled to some extent with ensuring smooth transactions for families, whether that’s paying a school on time or ordering a homeschool curriculum. Some say the solution lies in picking more than one company to handle the increasing demand and improve customer service.

“If it’s one contract, I think the vendor is inherently trying to ensure that the state department has a really fantastic experience,” said Nesset, who is also the vice president of

implementation at the Yes. Every Kid. Foundation, a school choice advocacy organization. “If you have more than one [vendor], then they start competing, and families have the opportunity to make choices.”

Tennessee’s current vendor is Student First Technologies, which won to run a smaller ESA program in three counties. Earlier this year, the state with the Indiana-based company to manage the new statewide program, despite its problems in other states. 

In West Virginia, where Student First still operates the Hope Scholarship program, an ESA, homeschool families complain that they can’t access the platform on their phones and that approvals and denials for purchases are inconsistent. Arkansas canceled its contract with Student First last fall after it failed to deliver a “fully operational” system on time. The company paid the state . 

‘Get what they need’

Eighteen states now have at least one ESA program. With a new federal tax credit scholarship system beginning in 2027, the demand for organizations to manage them will surely grow. The trick is delivering a system that runs smoothly for families while ensuring that they’re using the money the way the state intended. 

In a , Michael Horn, cofounder of the Clayton Christensen Institute, a think tank, talked with Jamie Rosenberg, the founder of ClassWallet. Still the biggest player in the market, the Florida-based company manages nine ESA programs. 

Prior to platforms like his, states had two options, he explained. They either issued debit cards, which made it hard to ensure parents spent the money on allowable purchases, or expected them to pay up front and request reimbursement — a significant obstacle for families on a tight budget.

ESA vendors, he said, give families the “agency to get what they need but also the ease of knowing that what they’re doing and what they’re buying [complies with] program rules.”

Adding more than one vendor to the mix could make the companies work harder to reach lower-income and minority families who are less likely to use the programs, said Lisa Snell, a senior fellow at Stand Together Trust, which funds school choice initiatives.

“Family outreach and satisfaction become the goal rather than the government as the customer to one vendor,” she said.

Texas had the option to choose multiple vendors for its new ESA program, which launches next fall. allows the comptroller’s office to contract with up to five companies. But officials opted against it and awarded a two-year, $26 million contract to New York-based Odyssey, which currently runs programs in four other states. 

Joe Connor, Odyssey’s CEO declined to comment on the state’s decision and referred ����Ӱ�� to the state comptroller’s office. The office did not respond, but Amar Kumar, CEO of KaiPod Learning, a large national network of microschools, said the state likely felt multiple vendors would further complicate the process.

“There was this huge question of the complexity of doing that,” he said. “How do you tell families which portal to go to or how will they decide who manages which part of the program?”

‘Send a quarterly check’

The vendor platforms include built-in tools to prevent misuse. Student First Technologies has an AI feature, , that reviews each expense, “assigns a confidence score” and flags anything that’s new or that the state hasn’t approved in the past. 

But Katie Switzer, a West Virginia parent using the state’s Hope Scholarship to homeschool her children, said it’s unreliable, sometimes approving purchases for some families and rejecting the same items for others. She thinks states should focus more on monitoring students’ academic progress than tracking every purchase. 

“It’s stupid in my opinion to micromanage down to like the $20 workbook level,” she said. “Honestly, I think it would be more cost effective to send a quarterly check to families.”

That’s unlikely with such programs constantly under the microscope, and critics, especially in Arizona, pointing to high-end purchases, like , as examples of misuse. The state education department says it takes steps to prevent fraud and has to the attorney general’s office that have . 

West Virginia officials said they’re pleased with Student First’s progress since October, when that delayed orders caused students to fall behind on lessons. Orders are now “generally” processed within two business days, said Assistant Treasurer Carrie Hodousek, and the company has added and trained staff to prepare for peak order times.

Providers like Kaipod have their own concerns. School founders in the network have sometimes gone to the brink of eviction from their leased space because of late tuition payments, said CEO Kumar. 

“There should be a predictable schedule, but sometimes it can take weeks extra to get paid,” he said. “If you’re running a small business and you owe rent, you owe payroll and your state payment is delayed, that creates a huge amount of stress for founders.”

For now, rebidding contracts for vendors is the strongest form of accountability, he said.

“They ought to not feel safe once they’ve won a contract,” he said.

Disclosure: Stand Together Trust provides financial support to ����Ӱ��. 

Since 2022, when the Supreme Court allowed Maine private schools to receive public funds, at least five lawsuits have been filed by teachers unions, in Wyoming, Utah, Montana, Missouri and South Carolina. Additional legal challenges have been mounted by advocacy groups and parent organizations.

The Supreme Court’s Carson v. Makin ruling, combined with growing interest among parents in post-COVID, has fueled the rise of voucher programs and led to a tug-of-war in state courts between public educators and school choice advocates. 

Heading into the 2025 legislative session, at least 33 states had some form of private school choice, according to the Georgetown University think tank . Most union lawsuits have focused on , in which public dollars pay for children to attend private schools —  including religious schools — and cover other education-related expenses such as homeschooling.

In Wyoming and Utah, judges ruled in favor of the unions — at least for now. In South Carolina, the program was retooled after a court declared its previous version unconstitutional.

The Wyoming Education Association, which represents roughly 6,000 public school teachers, landed a win in July after District Court Judge Peter Froelicher granted against the state’s universal voucher program. The union and nine parents had sued the state in June on grounds that the is unconstitutional because it violates a state regulation that it must provide a “uniform system of public instruction.” 

The union decided to sue after lawmakers made the voucher program universal this spring. It was originally created with a family income cap of 250% of the federal poverty level.

“No income guidelines, in essence, means that you could be someone in Jackson who owns an $18 million property, and the state’s giving you money,” said union President Kim Amen. “Our constitution clearly says that we cannot give public money to private entities, so that’s why we challenged that.”

The injunction temporarily stops the distribution of — which are funded from a state appropriation of $30 million — until the court determines the program’s constitutionality. The state has since filed an appeal to the Wyoming Supreme Court.

“I am disheartened at the court’s written order granting the WEA’s injunction. As one of nearly 4,000 Wyoming families, you have had your lives unnecessarily upended through no fault of your own,” Megan Degenfelder, state superintendent of public instruction, wrote in to parents. 

The case is similar to the one in Utah, where a judge ruled a $100 million voucher program unconstitutional in April, following a lawsuit by the state teachers union.

The Utah Education Association last year, arguing the Utah Fits All Scholarship Program violates the state constitution by diverting tax money to private schools that aren’t free, open to all students and supervised by the state board of education. The Utah Supreme Court is set to later this year.

Lawsuits in other states are still working their way through the courts.

In July, the Montana Federation of Public Employees, which represents the state’s public school teachers, challenging the constitutionality of the statewide voucher program that funds private education expenses for special education students. 

“Even voucher programs like [this one] that are targeted to students with disabilities deprive them of crucial legal protections and educational resources,” the plaintiffs said in a .

In Missouri, the state teachers union is over the , which started as a tax credit scholarship in 2021. It currently relies on nonprofits to collect donations that are turned into scholarships. Donors can receive a tax credit amounting to 100% of their contribution, but it can’t exceed more than half of their state tax liability. 

This year, Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe dedicated $50 million in taxpayer dollars for the scholarships and $1 million for program marketing, according to the suit. The Missouri National Education Association, which has 28,000 members, sued in June in an effort to block the appropriation.

“The General Assembly has far overstepped its authority and violated five provisions of the Missouri Constitution by using an appropriations bill to construct out of whole cloth a scheme to divert general revenues to what are essentially vouchers for the payment of private school tuition for elementary and secondary school students,” wrote Loretta Haggard, the union’s attorney, in the suit.

On July 30, — part of a national nonprofit that advocates for school choice — filed a motion to join the suit as defendants. Thomas Fisher, litigation director, said in a that the program helps Missouri families afford an education that fits their children’s needs. 

“The recent expansion of the program is constitutional and will expand education freedom for low-income families and students with learning differences,” he said.

In South Carolina, the ruled in 2024 that its Education Trust Fund Scholarship Program was unconstitutional following a lawsuit from the state teachers union, parents and the NAACP. The program resumed this year after to funnel money from the lottery system instead of the general fund. 

Unions have also been involved in school choice lawsuits in and . In 2023, National Education Association Alaska over a state system that sent cash payments to the parents of homeschool students. That same year, Wisconsin’s largest teachers union asked the state Supreme Court to hear its case challenging the constitutionality of the statewide voucher program, but the .

After more than 24 hours of negotiations and a from Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries opposing the “Big, Beautiful Bill,” the House on Thursday passed President Donald Trump’s tax-and-spending package by a 218 to 214 vote. The president plans to sign the legislation on July 4.

The House made no changes to the bill after the Senate passed it Tuesday, despite opposition from Republicans who thought it strayed too far from the version they passed in late May. Rep Keith Self of Texas posted on X that their original tax credit scholarship proposal would have created a national voucher program, while the Senate version “leaves blue state students in failing schools with ‘optional’ school choice.” He still voted for the bill, but two Republicans voted against it — of Pennsylvania and .����

Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, who sponsored the school choice provision, said “enshrining the first ever federal school choice provision into our nation’s tax code is a major win. We will continue to advocate for and pass improvements moving forward.”

The Senate on Tuesday passed the nation’s first federal tax credit scholarship program as part of a massive tax and spending President Donald Trump wants to sign by July 4.

But the provision is significantly watered down from the one school choice advocates have been working toward since the first Trump administration. As it currently stands, states may opt in, meaning many Democratic-majority states probably won’t participate.

Jim Blew, co-founder of the Defense of Freedom Institute, a conservative think tank, called the Senate passage “an important step toward making sure every family and teacher in our country enjoys education freedom.” But the restrictions, he said, will “make it very, very hard to put funds into the hands of families who just want to get their children in a better school.”

House staff began deliberations over the bill immediately, with a vote expected Wednesday. But it’s unclear how members will greet the revamped choice plan.

The plan grants donors to scholarship organizations a tax credit for the same amount they contribute. Those nonprofits then award funds to families for private school tuition and other educational expenses. But unlike the more expansive plan the House passed in late May, the Senate gives states a say over which groups can participate and strikes language that would have prohibited any control over private schools. That could be a major sticking point for House members, said Joshua Cowen, an education professor at Michigan State University and a vocal voucher opponent.

“Maybe they’ll just hold their nose and pass it,” he said. But that would come at the cost of “the most wide-ranging federal regulations we’d ever see on private and religious K-12 schools.” 

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a longtime supporter of tax credits for school choice, didn’t mention the revisions when he addressed the chamber during the early morning hours Tuesday after members worked on Trump’s “one big beautiful bill” through the night. 

“This tax credit provision will unleash billions of dollars every single year for scholarships for kids to attend the K-through-12 school of their choice,” he said, calling school choice “the civil rights issue of the 21st century.” 

The new program is just a small part of a legislative package that continues Trump’s 2017 tax cuts and could add at least to the national debt by 2034. With a trifecta in Congress and the White House, Republicans passed the bill in a party-line vote. But Vice President  J.D. Vance still had to break a 50-50 tie in the Senate after opposition from Republican Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Susan Collins of Maine.

Child tax credits and Trump accounts

The legislation includes other child-related provisions, including the extension of an existing $2,000 . The House version boosts it to $2,500, while the Senate version increases the credit to $2,200. “Trump accounts,” a new feature, would provide for children that they could later use for education or a house.

Among the most controversial changes are cuts and work requirements for Medicaid and food assistance programs for low-income families. The $1 trillion proposed cut to Medicaid could especially who are more likely to depend on the program for health care. 

On the Senate floor Monday morning, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said the “reforms” make the program more efficient by targeting “people who are supposed to benefit from Medicaid.” But Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, ranking member of the finance committee, warned: “Kids with disabilities will lose health care.” 

Those provisions have generated far more debate among GOP members than the school choice provision. But Republicans made significant changes to that portion after a Senate official Thursday that it didn’t meet the standards for reconciliation and would require 60 votes to pass. In addition to allowing government oversight, Republicans dropped the total amount a donor can contribute from 10% of their annual income to $1,700.

“To raise $1.7 million for scholarships, [organizations]need to identify 1,000 donors, which is a lot harder to do,” Blew said. “That wasn’t done to help students or families.” 

Multiple questions remain over which families stand to benefit the most from the program. Some existing scholarship groups target funds to low-income students, but the federal program lacks such a requirement. 

The bill sets eligibility at 300% of median income, meaning that in higher-income areas, families earning nearly half a million dollars could use the scholarships. Preference for the scholarships would also go to students who received them the previous year or to their siblings, contributing to concerns that families who already have their children in private schools would be more likely to receive a voucher. 

“You can be a very wealthy family in a very wealthy area and still be eligible for [these] funds,” said Jon Valant, director of the Brown Center on Education Policy at the left-leaning Brookings Institution. “Who knows exactly how this is going to play out.”

DeVos calls it a ‘win’

Supporters say the program will bring private school choice to students nationwide at a time of increasing demand. Tennessee’s newly expanded voucher program, for example, received in the first few hours it was open on May 15, creating technical glitches 

Opponents argue the program allows donors to avoid taxes and would fund tuition at schools that discriminate against students. 

The House version, Cowan said, “rams” vouchers into states like Michigan that have rejected them since . Michigan billionaire Betsy DeVos, who promoted a similar federal plan as education secretary during Trump’s first term, to get a voucher initiative on the ballot in 2023. and said no to private school choice initiatives last November, and voters repealed a program lawmakers passed in that state in 2024. 

In other states — , and Utah — judges have ruled that voucher programs violate the law. 

On Tuesday, DeVos sounded a triumphant note, calling the Senate passage “a major win for students and families” .

Cowan said the vote would not give the former secretary “her long-sought after goal of forcing vouchers into the states using the tax code” and gives “substantial authority to state governors and perhaps [education] agencies to say ‘no.’ ”

Education Secretary Linda McMahon that limits student loans for college, but had nothing to say about the school choice aspect of the bill.

Critics frequently cite the scarcity of private schools in rural areas as the reason they oppose vouchers. from the Urban Institute shows that over 60% of students in urban areas live within two miles of a private school, compared with just a quarter of students in rural areas. 

Participation in the new program depends on how many families apply and the size of scholarships. Historically, take up rates have been relatively low with new voucher programs, said Colyn Ritter, a senior research associate at EdChoice, an advocacy organization. 

If scholarships are large enough to cover the full ride to some private schools, which , more families might seek a scholarship, Ritter said. But that amount wouldn’t be enough to afford more expensive schools in the Northeast. 

If scholarship awards are as low as $2,500, that might offer a cut on tuition for families who can make up the difference, but it wouldn’t be enough to make private school an option for a family in poverty, he said. 

Families could use the scholarships for homeschooling costs, like tutoring, curriculum and educational therapies. But Ritter called homeschoolers a “hard-to-predict” group. The population has grown more diverse racially and politically. Some, he said, could be “early adopters” of the new funds, but many homeschoolers are still leery of government-run programs.

“We just want to make sure that there are no strings attached and that we won’t end up in some government database that can track us and tell us what to do in the future,” said Faith Howe, president of Texans for Homeschool Freedom.

The Children’s Scholarship Fund in New York is one of the nonprofits that would likely participate in the program. The group has affiliates in 23 states, including several blue states, that are closely watching negotiations over the final wording, said spokeswoman Elizabeth Toomey.

Her organization has a small homeschool pilot program and might take advantage of the new legislation to expand it. Forty families currently receive $1,000 to spend on approved expenses through the ClassWallet platform, the same way many state education savings accounts operate. But the group’s core mission, Toomey said, is awarding roughly 7,000 scholarships each year to students from low-income families across New York City.

Recipients receive, on average, about $2,500 toward tuition, but Toomey said the new federal program would allow the organization to increase the award and serve more families. She acknowledged that a scholarship might not help the “poorest of the poor,” but has helped push many families “into a position where they can afford private school.”

The Texas House gave initial approval early Thursday to a bill that would create a $1 billion private school voucher program, crossing a historic milestone and bringing Gov. ’s top legislative priority closer than ever to reaching his desk.

The lower chamber signed off on its voucher proposal, , on an 85-63 vote. Every present Democrat voted against the bill. They were joined by two Republicans — far short of the bipartisan coalitions that in previous legislative sessions consistently blocked proposals to let Texans use taxpayer money to pay for their children’s private schooling.

“This is an extraordinary victory for the thousands of parents who have advocated for more choices when it comes to the education of their children,” Abbott said in a statement, vowing that he would “swiftly sign this bill into law” when it reached his desk.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

The vote came more than 10 hours after the chamber gave preliminary approval to its sweeping $7.7 billion school funding package, which would give local districts more money per student and raise teacher salaries., which passed on a 144-4 vote, also aims to improve the quality of special education services by allocating funding based on the of children with disabilities.

Democrats argued the funding boost barely scratches the surface of what districts need to come back from budget deficits or to cover growing costs after years of inflation, but they ultimately supported the bill after a few hours of debate.

The more dramatic showdown came over the voucher bill, which Democrats tried to thwart with an amendment that would have put school vouchers up for a statewide vote in November. But the last-ditch maneuver attracted support from only one Republican — Rep. of Beaumont, the former House speaker — spelling the demise of Democrats’ one major play to derail the bill.

The landmark voucher vote marks the first time since 1957 that the Texas House has approved legislation making state money available for families to use on their children’s private schooling. The outcome validated Abbott’s crusade to build a pro-voucher House majority during last year’s primary by targeting Republicans who tanked his previous proposal in 2023. Now, all that is left is for Republicans in both chambers to iron out the differences between their voucher plans, leaving Abbott and his allies on the brink of victory.

The House’s plan would put $1 billion to create education savings accounts, a form of vouchers that families could use to pay for private school tuition and other school-related expenses, like textbooks, transportation and therapy. The bill would tie the voucher program’s per-student dollars to public education funding so the amount available to each participating student would increase when public schools receive more money and dip when public education funding declines.

If public demand exceeds the program’s capacity, students with disabilities and families defined by House lawmakers as low income would be prioritized — though they would not be guaranteed admission to any private school.

Democrats expressed disappointment over the House’s approval of vouchers, saying the outcome represented big money interests prevailing over those of everyday Texans.

“This bill is everything that is wrong with politics,” said Rep. Gina Hinojosa, D-Austin.

After Thursday’s vote, the House will still need to cast a final vote to approve both the voucher and school spending bills, largely a formality. The measures would then head to the Senate. At that point, members from both chambers would work to reconcile the differences in their voucher proposals in a closed-door conference committee. The biggest differences center on how much money participating students should receive, which applicants should take priority and how the program should accommodate students with disabilities.

The House debate on vouchers started Wednesday afternoon and ended early Thursday. Lawmakers changed a provision in the bill that would have limited funding for people without disabilities or from wealthier households — defined as a family of four making about $156,000 or greater — to only 20% of the program’s total budget until after the 2026-27 school year. The 20% cap would now apply to each year of the potential voucher program.

The bill now also requires private schools to have existed for at least two years before joining the program; grants the state auditor more power to review the activities of organizations contracted to administer the program; and requires the state’s annual report on the program to include dropout, expulsion and graduation data on participating students with disabilities — broken down by grade, age, sex and race or ethnicity.

Wednesday’s debate over SB 2 covered many of the talking points for and against vouchers echoed throughout the legislative session.

Republicans sought to assure their colleagues that the bill would prioritize low-income children and students with disabilities. Democrats noted that the legislation imposes no admission requirements on private schools, meaning they can deny any student, even those the state wants first in line for the program.

whose children were have primarily benefited from the large-scale voucher programs enacted in other states.

Democrats filed dozens of amendments they believed would make the Texas legislation more equitable for underserved students, but they were all dismissed. One of the rejected proposals came from Rep. Harold V. Dutton Jr., D-Houston, who sought to offer higher voucher amounts to students on the lower rungs of the income ladder. He argued that some families could not afford to send their children to a private school even with $10,000 in state support.

The average Texas private school costs , according to Private School Review.

“If you’re in a 12-foot hole and somebody sends you a 10-foot rope,” Dutton said, “that’s not much of an option.”

Rep. , the Republican chair of the House Public Education Committee, also received questions Wednesday over a provision recently added to SB 2 that would bar undocumented Texans from participating in the proposed voucher program.

SB 2 would prevent any student whose parent cannot prove that the child is a U.S. citizen or that the child lawfully resides in the country from participating in the program. Several lawmakers raised questions about what state entity would be responsible for checking the children’s citizenship, how the legislation would protect the privacy of applicants and whether it would accommodate students who may find it difficult to access certain documents.

Buckley clarified that organizations helping the state administer the voucher program would oversee applications and that the process would include protections “for all personal information.” If applicants are unable to provide proper documentation, Buckley said, they would not participate in the program. The legislation does not specify exactly which documents families would need to provide.

The Texas Senate also previously considered barring undocumented Texans from participating in the voucher program if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns those students’ constitutional right to a public education, but the change never made it into that chamber’s legislation.

Legal questions remain about the citizenship restriction in SB 2. Every student in the U.S. is entitled to a public education regardless of their immigration status, and the potential voucher program would rely on public dollars.

​The House also gave initial approval to its priority school funding legislation. Two years ago, public schools missed out on nearly $8 billion, which Abbott had made conditional on the approval of vouchers.

This year’s public education spending bill would increase schools’ base funding by $395 — from $6,160 to $6,555. That amount, known as the basic allotment, would automatically go up every two years by tying it to property value growth. Forty percent of the allotment would go to non-administrative staff salaries, with higher pay increases reserved for teachers with more than a decade of classroom experience.

In addition, the bill would limit schools’ use of educators who lack formal classroom training, core classes. It would change the current settings-based model for by providing schools money based on the individual needs of students with disabilities. Two students placed in the same classroom but who require different levels of support receive the same dollars under the current settings-based model.

Republicans, during hours of debate, celebrated the bill as a worthwhile investment in public education. Democrats also voiced support for the legislation but argued that it barely scratches the surface of what districts need. Many school districts are currently grappling with challenges ranging from budget deficits and teacher shortages to campus closures.

Rep. James Talarico, D-Austin, pressed Buckley, the bill’s author, on whether the measure’s $8 billion would be enough to solve Texas schools’ struggles, which have been fueled by stagnant funding and inflation.

Buckley did not directly acknowledge that his bill would fall short of addressing all the financial pressures facing districts. He instead focused on the multibillion-dollar funding boost the Legislature hopes to provide this session, which includes money through HB 2 and other legislation under consideration.

“I just want to emphasize, members, you have an opportunity today to cast a vote for the largest investment in public education in the history of our state, and so we will continue this process as this body returns session after session to make sure the resources are there for our schools,” Buckley said.

Members of the public viewing the debate from the House gallery erupted in laughter and applause in support of Talarico’s questioning. Talarico and those in the gallery did not appear content with Buckley’s answers.

“I’m going to take that as a no until I get a yes,” Talarico said.

The House eliminated an earlier provision of the bill that would have gotten rid of a 2023 “hold harmless” provision, which provides financial relief to school districts that lose funding due to cuts to state property taxes, a major source of revenue for public schools.

Lawmakers sparred over other aspects of the legislation — from whether the Legislature should continue to invest heavily in, which offers support to underserved students at risk of dropping out of school, to how the state should hold charter schools accountable for mismanagement.

Upon final passage, HB 2 will go to the Senate for further consideration. That chamber has already passed a number of similar proposals — though top lawmakers there have expressed opposition to increasing schools’ base funding this session.

The basic allotment offers districts flexibility to address their campuses’ unique needs, including staff salaries, utilities and maintenance. The Senate has instead advocated for more targeted funding in areas like teacher pay, school security and special education.​

This article originally appeared in at . The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at .

Now, a new analysis, exclusive to ����Ӱ��, sheds light on why he’s had so much trouble. While it’s common knowledge that in the state House have been standing in his way, homeschool parents opposed to education savings accounts have also been part of the resistance. 

Leslie Finger, a political science professor at the University of North Texas, analyzed roll call votes on 13 private school choice bills that reached the floor of either the state House or the Senate between 2013 and 2023. She found that lawmakers were more likely to vote against private school choice not only if they represented a rural area, but also if they had more homeschoolers in their districts.

“We specifically opted out of this system,” Faith Howe, president of Texans for Homeschool Freedom, said about public schools. While proponents of the voucher plan say it will be optional for families, that doesn’t satisfy Howe. “I don’t think they’re going to have a problem coming back and saying ‘Well we need more regulations on these homeschoolers.’”

Texas voters ousted the Republican holdouts in last year’s primary election after Abbott campaigned against them. He is counting on their replacements to deliver a victory this session. But even if that happens, Finger’s results point to a segment of parents who have been getting louder in recent years as ESAs, which parents can spend on tuition or homeschooling costs, have spread across red states. Many traditional homeschoolers fought for the right to educate their children at home and fear that ESA laws could erode some of those protections — even if they don’t take the funds. 

While voucher advocates dismiss many of the homeschoolers’ concerns, Finger said her findings should serve as a warning.

“The presence of big homeschooling communities could make selling private school choice challenging,” Finger said.

‘Government control’

That was certainly the case in Colorado, one of three states last November where voters defeated school choice ballot measures. 

“Government money comes with government control,” said Carolyn Martin, who monitors state legislation for Christian Home Educators of Colorado. Her group viewed the measure as a potential infringement on parents’ rights to educate their children as they see fit.  

Two issues raised red flags for them. The measure said all children should be able to “access a quality education,” which they interpreted as an opportunity for the government to define quality for homeschoolers. It also gave students, as well as parents, the right to school choice. That could spell trouble if kids and parents aren’t on the same page when it comes to education, Martin said.

“At some point the state would probably have to step in and arbitrate between the parent and the child,” she said. “That is not our worldview.”

Other homeschoolers say ESAs contradict conservative values, such as smaller government and less regulation. Gary Humble, executive director of Tennessee Stands, a Christian organization, called the state’s recently passed voucher bill “wealth redistribution.”

“This is another Tennessee entitlement program,” he said. “It’s expensive. It’s irresponsible.” 

The state is expected to spend $1 billion on the program over the next five years. While opponents weren’t able to stop the Republicans from passing the law, Humble tells homeschoolers that if they participate, they could be giving up the freedom to educate their children the way they choose.

“All they hear from special interest groups is that they get seven grand and there are no strings attached,” he said. “They’re not policy wonks, so they don’t understand the trap doors that are laid out ahead of them.”  

ESA programs often require homeschooling families to reapply for funding every year, to take annual standardized tests and to only buy approved items from specific vendors. Homeschooling families who don’t participate want to ensure such restrictions don’t eventually extend to them. 

But those worries fall under what Jeremy Newman, vice president of policy and engagement for the Texas Homeschool Coalition, calls “free-floating anxiety.” 

“They’re concerned somebody is going to do something, sometime, but they’re not sure who or when or what,” he said. 

His organization is strongly in favor of passing a voucher bill in Texas, saying that tax-paying homeschoolers should have just as much access to state education funds as parents who send their kids to public school.

He points to on “regulatory creep” from Angela Watson, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore and an expert on . She found that publicly funded school choice programs, like ESAs, don’t contribute to more government overreach. 

Not ‘a monolith’

But the fact that some homeschoolers are so opposed to them proves a point, Watson said. 

“The mistake that everyone makes when they talk about homeschooling is that they continue to think of it as a monolith,” she said. “Homeschooling is just so varied.”

Nationally, of the nation’s students are homeschooled, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. Traditional homeschoolers often chose that path for ideological or religious reasons. 

But many new converts, who left public schools during the pandemic, show support for what former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos calls “” — allowing parents to spend education dollars on any type of schooling they choose. It’s a policy that polled high in a from the National Parents Union, with 71% of parents favoring such a system. 

The split among homeschoolers over ESAs, Watson said, has created some “interesting bedfellows” — conservative parents aligning with liberal teachers unions to oppose school choice ballot measures. That’s what happened, not only in Colorado, but also in , where two-thirds of voters rejected such a proposition last year.  

Howe in Texas has heard the criticism. “We’re being accused of being leftist, Marxist and supporting the teachers unions,” she said. 

Newman, with the Texas coalition, said his group is watching out for homeschoolers’ interests. Leaders maintain a “strong presence” at the state capitol in Austin to ensure legislation doesn’t interfere with homeschoolers’ freedom to choose their own curriculum and teaching methods, he said. 

Homeschooled himself as a child, Newman sympathizes with those who recall when it was to educate children at home and not unusual for child protective services to a family when a neighbor reported children not being in school.

But Howe notes that it was a state regulation in Texas — not legislation — that treated homeschooled students as truant. After a lengthy legal fight, the state that parents who homeschool are essentially small private schools.

In Idaho, it’s the state tax commission that will be writing some of the rules for a new that Gov. Brad Little signed into law last month, despite from the public. The state also has an existing grant program targeted toward lower-income families.

Audra Talley, a board member of Homeschool Idaho, said Republican lawmakers have assured her that as long as they control the legislature and the governor’s office, homeschoolers don’t have to worry about rules encroaching on their parental rights. But that’s what she finds disturbing.

“It’s an admission that the potential exists,” she said. “Now we are relying on a certain party or a certain group of individuals to keep those regulations from coming at some future date.”

‘Don’t want to go back’

She’s not exaggerating that some Democrats would prefer to increase monitoring of families who homeschool.

A , for example, would require families to notify their local school district if they intend to homeschool. Families would have to submit teaching materials and their children’s work if authorities are concerned about their education. Hundreds of at the state capitol against the bill earlier this month.

Under another , Michigan homeschoolers would have to register with the state. Superintendent Michael Rice argues that officials should have a count of students in all types of schooling — public, private, parochial and home. and neglect involving homeschool families led to his proposal for more oversight. 

Homeschoolers opposed to ESAs often point to West Virginia — a Republican-led state — as an example of how lawmakers sometimes forget that not everyone wants the government’s money.

The state passed its Hope Scholarship ESA program in 2021, which requires homeschooled students receiving the scholarship to take annual or have their work reviewed each year by a certified teacher.  The law specifically exempted homeschoolers not in the program from the requirements, but a 2023 bill would have erased what advocates call a “carve out” if they hadn’t stepped in. 

ESA proponents use the same example to say the homeschoolers’ fears were overblown and no harm was done. Colleen Hroncich, a policy analyst with the libertarian Cato Institute’s Center for Educational Freedom, thinks the division among homeschoolers over school choice will fade over time.

“As we get further past the generation of homeschoolers that fought for the right to homeschool, it seems like most homeschoolers support funding programs,” she said. “Hopefully the bigger numbers also help push back on additional regulations down the road.”

Over the last several months, ����Ӱ�� has taken a look at some of the biggest education issues at play during the 2024 election cycle. Here’s an overview of the federal, state and local races and ballot measures that are poised to impact students, teachers and families the most. 

The White House 

In the first presidential debate of this election season between former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden, the candidates were asked a question that was top of mind for parents and child advocates:

“In your second term, what would you do to make child care more affordable?” asked Trump during that June debate. 

But rather than focus on children, many critics said the two candidates behaved like them.

Even after Biden dropped out of the race and Vice President Kamala Harris stepped in as the Democratic party’s presidential nominee and tapped Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, a former public high school teacher, as her pick for the vice presidential candidate – education and child care still did not make it to the center stage of election season conversations.

Instead, most clues about Trump’s education policy have come from The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, an ambitious Republican agenda to transform the federal bureaucracy under a second Trump presidency. While Trump has denied any involvement in the creation of Project 2025, experts say the plan reflects many of the ideologies held by the former president and, if enacted, would have considerable fallout in the world of education. 

Project 2025’s chapter on education, for example, offers prescriptions for eliminating Title I grants to high-poverty schools, revising accreditation requirements under the Higher Education Act and dismantling the Department of Education, among other things. Overall, the plan seeks to reimagine the US government as a guardian of parents’ rights and supports school choice. 

Publicly, Trump has also said that he would pull funding from any schools that teach critical race theory or support transgender rights. 

Meanwhile, Harris has not offered much in terms of her education policy. She has made it clear that she thinks Trump’s plan to eliminate the Department of Education would be a terrible idea and has criticized his attacks on curricula taught in schools.

One item that could be on the table during a Harris presidency is a pay hike for teachers. Few may remember it now, but Harris took the biggest swing on education policy of any Democrat in the 2020 presidential primary: a $315 billion to raise teacher pay and overhaul the profession. The American Federation of Teachers, the nation’s second largest teachers union, was the first group to voice their support of Harris as a presidential candidate this summer. 

While the two candidates have vastly different aims when it comes to education, there is one area both camps seem to (mostly) agree on: Expanding the Child Tax Credit. Both the Harris and Trump campaigns have embraced proposals to expand the program, which offers relief to parents of kids under 17 years old. Depending on the election outcome, neither party may hold enough power to enact its vision, however. 

National Issues

Bible teachings in public schools: Republicans have spent a lot of energy getting the Bible into public schools. Much of the spotlight has been on Oklahoma state Superintendent Ryan Walters, who mandated that schools stock classrooms with Bibles. Louisiana passed a law requiring schools to post the 10 Commandments in classrooms, the subject of , while the Texas Education Agency has proposed a Bible-infused reading curriculum that includes stories from the Old and New testaments. 

Whether those ideas will resonate with Christian voters is harder to answer. One recent poll suggests it won’t. On a long list of concerns influencing churchgoers’ views in this election, public schools ranked near the bottom as a reason why they would pick a presidential candidate. Instead, the economy and border security topped the list. 

School boards: Moms for Liberty, the conservative advocacy group, hasn’t been able to repeat its success at the polls since 2022, when its school board candidates were scoring victories across the country. Some say voters are clearly tired of what one researcher called the “politics of disruption.” Others believe the group’s leaders are more focused on adding members and mobilizing voters for Trump than winning local races. There have also been efforts to recruit moderates to run against conservative candidates like those from Moms for Liberty. 

A good indicator of who will win school board seats is whether the candidate has the endorsement of a teachers’ union. According to research out of Ohio State University and Boston College, a union endorsement increases support for candidates by as much as 20 percentage points among various voting blocs, with the effects particularly concentrated among Democrats and those who favor organized labor. Almost no group, including Republicans, responds negatively to the endorsements, the authors found.

School choice: A high-stakes political battle is brewing around school choice. GOP groups are funneling millions of dollars into state races to defeat critics of education savings accounts. In Texas, observers say, the victories by pro-ESA candidates could lead to a more conservative legislature or a potential Democratic backlash. 

It’s worth noting that voters have a history of rejecting private school choice measures at the ballot box. Recent voucher proposals garnered less than a . But advocates in three states are hoping to break that trend on Election Day. In , voters will decide whether to preserve or overturn 2023 legislation that created a private school scholarship program. Initiatives in and , if approved, could pave the way for lawmakers to create vouchers or education savings accounts in the future.

State and local races and ballot measures 

Arizona: The outcome of Arizona’s legislative races could upend what has been one of America’s most welcoming environments for school choice. Democrats, who already hold the governorship, could take control of both legislative chambers by flipping just four seats, which would make Arizona voters the first in the nation to hand over governance of an ESA program to its opponents. 

California: A single, heated school board race in Los Angeles could help decide the fate of the nation’s largest charter school sector and the LA Unified School District. Upstart vows to bring a pro-charter voice to LA Unified’s board, but faces stiff opposition from union-backed incumbent . 

Delaware: With at least eight high-level reports over the last 25 years calling for a wholesale overhaul of a Jim Crow-era school funding formula that gives more state aid to wealthy districts and shortchanges disadvantaged kids, whoever wins Delaware’s governor race will have their work cut out for them. 

Illinois: October was already destined to be a tumultuous chapter in Chicago politics, as voters prepared for the first school board elections in the city’s history. But the abrupt resignation of the city’s existing school board, and the related crisis of governance over the country’s fourth-largest school system, has magnified local divisions over finance and the role of the powerhouse Chicago Teachers Union. Now locals are wondering if the mayor can keep the district solvent — and his own administration afloat. 

Indiana: In Indiana’s governor race, GOP U.S. Senator Mike Braun, who’s been endorsed by Donald Trump, wants to expand the state’s school choice voucher program. If elected, Braun and his running mate, far-right , have pledged universal school choice for every Indiana family while focusing on parental rights and school safety. His opponent, former state schools chief Jennifer McCormick, who has the backing of the state teachers union, seeks to expand affordable child care, fight what she believes is excessive state-mandated testing and call for an equitable school funding formula. 

Massachusetts: In Massachusetts, Ballot Question 2 asks voters to decide if the MCAS exam should remain a high school graduation requirement. If it passes, Massachusetts would have no statewide graduation requirements, making it an outlier nationally. Instead, its some 300 districts would determine requirements locally. Those in favor of repealing the requirement — largely backed by the state teachers union — argue it narrows curriculum and harms students with disabilities and English language learners. Those who want to keep the test, including Gov. Maura Healey, say it’s an important accountability measure. 

Minnesota: If Kamala Harris and Tim Walz are elected in November, Minnesota’s lieutenant governor Peggy Flanagan, will become the first Indigenous woman governor in U.S. history. The daughter of a Hubert H. Humphrey campaign strategist and an Ojibwe land-rights activist — Flanagan was the youngest person elected to the Minneapolis School Board. She has promoted free school lunch and Indigenous curriculum.

North Carolina: North Carolina’s race for governor has been marked by scandal. In September, that Republican nominee Mark Robinson called himself a “Black Nazi” and posted “slavery is not bad” anonymously on a porn site. Beyond the controversies, Robinson has kept education debates centered on eradicating the presence of “politics” and “indoctrination” in schools, and . His challenger, Democratic candidate Josh Stein, told that his top priority as governor would be to improve public education. He has also supported to address the youth mental health crisis, and wants to expand access to community colleges and Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Whoever is elected as the state’s leader will appoint individuals for , subject to confirmation by the assembly. 

Another pivotal race in North Carolina will be for superintendent. Republican candidate Michele Morrow, a homeschooler who rallied outside the U.S. Capitol on Jan 6, has a history of disparaging public schools with choice words like “indoctrination centers.” She faces Democrat Maurice “Mo” Green, a lawyer and former district superintendent. Whoever wins will be responsible for more than 2,700 schools and a $13 billion education budget. 

Rhode Island: Providence, Rhode Island’s school board has been appointed by the mayor for decades, but voters will be able to pick board members again this election. The catch is that state control of the district was just extended to 2027, limiting what the new board can do. New members will still have to navigate their way out of state control as well as handle challenges with low test scores, falling enrollments, school closures and demand for more charter schools. 

EDlection 2024: Follow our analysis as winners are declared at  — and get the latest results, news and investigations delivered straight to your inbox by signing up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter.

COLUMBIA — A Pennsylvania billionaire will cover this year’s private tuition costs for South Carolina students who lost their taxpayer-funded scholarships when the state Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional.

A $900,000 donation from Jeff Yass, the co-founder of a global investment firm, will keep students impacted by last month’s ruling in their private school through at least this semester, the Palmetto Promise Institute announced Thursday.

Roughly 700 students were paying tuition with the state aid when the payments violated the state constitution’s ban on public money directly benefiting private education.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

The came after the first of four, $1,500 installments had already been deposited in parents’ accounts, leaving them scrambling on how to avoid transferring their children mid-year to their local public school. For the program’s inaugural year, only Medicaid-eligible students could participate, making it less likely their parents could pay the private tuition on their own.

“Over the last few weeks, our hearts have been broken by the stories of the low-income families who had settled into new schools that better fit their children only to have their scholarships ripped away in the middle of the school year,” said Wendy Damron, CEO of Palmetto Promise Institute, which has been the state’s leading proponent of school choice legislation since its founding over a decade ago.

The conservative think tank not only helped write and successfully pushed for the law signed last year, but it also spread the word through mailers, social media ads and other marketing to educate parents about it and help them sign up for the program.

So, when the ruling immediately ended parents’ ability to use the money for private tuition, “we felt awful, just awful about it,” Damron told the SC Daily Gazette.

So, she started making phone calls: “I didn’t know if I could raise the money, but I had to try,” she said.

Soon after the ruling, the Catholic diocese for South Carolina began separately raising money to cover tuition for the 195 students in the program who are enrolled in its 32 schools statewide.

Between the diocese’s fundraising and Yass’ donation, this semester’s tuition for all students in the program should be covered, Damron said.

The institute is working with the state Department of Education and the company it contracts with to manage parents’ accounts to pay the schools directly. The money will not go to parents.

The donation is a temporary fix. What happens next semester is unclear.

Passing another school choice law that could survive a legal challenge is a top priority for the Legislature’s GOP leaders. But even if they manage to quickly pass a new law after the session starts in January, another lawsuit is a near-certainty. Whatever happens, it’s unlikely that parents will be able to resume using their state aid for private tuition before the school year ends.

The Palmetto Promise Institute will continue pushing for a new law early in the session, while recognizing “we’ve got to raise another million for January and another million for April,” Damron said.

The ruling only banned private tuition payments. The quarterly allotments of $1,500 — for a yearly total of $6,000 — will continue flowing into parents’ accounts.

And parents can still access their accounts through the online portal to direct payments for other approved expenses, such as tutoring, speech therapy and textbooks. They just can’t use it for tuition. And they can’t access it at all if their children return to their public school.

Patrick Kelly with the Palmetto State Teachers Association applauded Yass’ donation. While he cheered the ruling, the teachers’ advocate has repeatedly said something needed to be done so students didn’t have to transfer mid-year.

“It’s impossible to do anything but celebrate someone donating funds from their own private wealth to benefit the education of a student,” Kelly said, adding that has a “more direct impact than trying to influence policy through campaign donations.”

Asking voters

In Kentucky, where school choice is on the November ballot, Yass donated $5 million last quarter to a political action committee running ads encouraging voters to approve the measure, reported this week.

As for a school choice law in South Carolina that can survive a legal challenge, proponents are counting on a new set of justices ruling differently on whatever the Legislature passes next year. And Kelly said that’s not how the legal system should work.

Both the Sept. 11 ruling and justices’ the case were 3-2 split decisions. Two justices in the majority are retired and won’t preside over a future case. The author of the dissent is now the chief justice, who made clear he believes the scholarship accounts were a constitutional workaround.

“That’s not the way the rule of law is supposed to operate, by shifting justices around,” said Kelly, who teaches advanced high school courses on government and politics. “Don’t do it by changing the judge. The words (of the constitution) are still the same. I cannot support that approach.”

As Justice Gary Hill noted in his majority opinion, Kelly said, the constitutional ban on public money directly benefiting private education could be eliminated through changing the constitution.

South Carolina doesn’t allow voter-led referendums. Only the Legislature can ask voters whether the state constitution should be amended.

“Put it before the voters,” Kelly said.

Last year, the House approved putting a school choice question on next month’s ballot. But the Senate never took up the measure.

If the Legislature approves a similar resolution next year asking voters to change the constitution, the question won’t be on ballots until November 2026. The constitution wouldn’t actually change until 2027 at the earliest, since the Legislature would have to ratify voters’ preference through legislation in the next session.

“It’s unfortunate that we continue to spend time on voucher schemes in South Carolina,” said Sherry East, president of the South Carolina Education Association, which challenged last year’s law and would likely challenge the next one.

“Wealthy people can do what they want with their money, and it’s his prerogative to help fund private schools,” she said of Yass’ donation. “I just wish in South Carolina we could focus on our public institutions. … I wish we’d stop attacking them and work on making them stronger.”

State Superintendent Ellen Weaver called the donation a “vital bridge of continuity for beleaguered” families and reiterated that she’ll work with legislators and Gov. Henry McMaster on restoring the program.

Until that happens, she said, “I pray that even more generous donors will be inspired to stand in the gap for these children.”

“I am profoundly grateful for this enormous gift of hope for students left out in the cold by the Supreme Court majority’s flawed decision,” said Weaver, who led the Palmetto Promise Institute before her 2022 election.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. SC Daily Gazette maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Seanna Adcox for questions: info@scdailygazette.com. Follow SC Daily Gazette on and .

Many public school educators and advocates saw the Texas House’s vote last month as a forceful rebuke that should signal there’s no path forward left for Gov. ’s top legislative priority this year. But pro-voucher advocates, including private and religious school educators, say they will keep fighting for vouchers — both in the Texas Legislature and at the ballot.

The House voted 84-63 on Nov. 16 to strip education savings accounts — a voucher program that would give families taxpayer dollars to pay for their children’s private schooling — from , a massive education bill that also included teacher pay raises and increased public school funding. As the current special legislative session nears its end, it seems increasingly unlikely that a voucher program will pass before time runs out.

Twenty-one Republicans, all from rural districts, voted against the program. Despite Abbott’s efforts to sway voucher skeptics in the House, the bloc of rural Republicans against the measure remained mostly firm.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

Two dozen Republicans opposed the program during a House test vote on vouchers in April. After two legislative special sessions and threats from the governor to during next year’s primary elections, in the end just four of the GOP holdouts on vouchers flipped on the issue: Reps. of Lufkin, of Odessa, of Itasca and of Jacksboro. Public school advocates also gained a new anti-voucher vote in Rep. of Pearland.

Paige Williams, legislative director for the Texas Classroom Teachers Association, said advocates felt confident about defeating vouchers after speaking to rural Republican lawmakers throughout the past few months and realizing many felt the same way they had in April.

“We were thankful for the people who took a very hard public vote and who were willing to stand up and speak,” Williams said. ”But not much had changed since the original vote was taken, with the exception of the pressure that’s been put upon all the members of the House.”

The House vote assuaged public school advocates, who that a voucher program would divert funding from public schools. But with only a few days left in the special session, the measure’s defeat also means public schools won’t get additional funds for long-awaited teacher pay raises and inflation adjustments. Abbott has said he will veto any public education funding bill that does not include vouchers.

After the Legislature failed to pass public school funding in this year’s regular session, despite a , many school districts were forced into to keep up with costs. Underfunding has forced some districts to close cafeterias, cut extracurricular activities, and in some cases, altogether.

Williams said this trend is likely to continue if public school funding has to wait for another shot until the 2025 legislative session. Some districts may even turn to parents and community members to help raise money for expenses like teacher pay raises, she said.

Jerrica Liggins, secondary curriculum director for the , said her district went into a deficit budget this year and will probably stay in one next year because the district is unwilling to cut teacher pay to make up funding gaps.

Still, Liggins said waiting another legislative cycle for increased funding was an acceptable price for the defeat of vouchers. She and her fellow public school advocates are now preparing to come out “full force” for school funding — both in the next legislative session and in supporting pro-public school candidates in next year’s primary elections, Liggins said.

“Eventually our government is going to just have to do something because this isn’t going to go away,” she said of public school funding. “We have over 5 million [public school] students in Texas. They’re not going away.”

Kristen Harris, a humanities teacher in the gifted and talented program at Walnut Grove High School in , said she was encouraged to see the number of House Republicans who voted against vouchers.

But she said it’s still frustrating to see public school funding continually stalled. And even if teacher pay raises were eventually passed, she said the state’s is about more than funding: teacher morale is lower than ever after the hardships of teaching during a pandemic, classrooms being and school funding becoming collateral damage in the political faceoff over vouchers.

Last year, Abbott assembled a task force to examine the state’s worsening teacher shortage. The group , including a salary raise, mentorship programs and more sustainable workloads to respect teachers’ time. Aside from a new , lawmakers failed to pass most of these policies.

“We have to solve the human problem,” Harris said. “It can’t just become a band-aid that we slap on like, ‘Oh, teachers, here, maybe you’ll stick around if we give you more money.’ There’s definitely more to it than that.”

Voucher advocates undeterred

Though the House’s anti-voucher coalition held strong earlier this month, voucher advocates said they’re still committing to passing education savings accounts — if not now, then the next legislative session. And they’re ready to bring the fight during next year’s primary elections.

Laura Colangelo, executive director of the Texas Private Schools Association, said her organization is ready to launch back into the debate and is just waiting for Abbott to signal his next steps. The governor floated in the past the possibility of calling a to continue pushing for vouchers, though he has not mentioned the idea since vouchers were voted out of HB 1.

Jeremy Newman, vice president of policy and engagement at the Texas Homeschool Coalition, said his group has been tracking which anti-voucher Republicans are not running for reelection and preparing to support pro-voucher candidates in those districts.

The Texas home-school community — comprising nearly 480,000 students — has on the issue, with some in support of vouchers to help pay for their home-schooling costs, and others wary of the government oversight that may come with the funding. Jube Dankworth, president of Texas Home Educators, said her network of anti-voucher home-schoolers will also be engaging in the primaries by hosting candidate forums to ask officials the “tough questions” about their stance on vouchers.

Newman said he believes the home-schooling community will continue to thrive and grow even without vouchers. But education savings accounts could be crucial for families who to home schooling and cannot fund it themselves.

“You have this category of people who… know it would be better for their child to move to a different form of education, but they don’t quite have the resources to make that jump,” Newman said. “What we’re doing by not passing the bill is we’re leaving those people there.”

Tracy Hanson, principal of Oak Creek Academy, a private special education school in Killeen, said the vote blocking vouchers was “heartbreaking” for similar reasons. Oak Creek currently has 84 students enrolled, 98% of whom have a learning disability. The school’s tuition of about $9,500 would have been covered by the approximately $10,500 per student allotment proposed by HB 1.

HB 1 capped the voucher program funding at $500 million, meaning that only about 40,000 of more than 250,000 private school students in the state would be able to participate.

Hanson said Oak Creek can take up to 41 more students and she is committed to continue pushing for vouchers so more families can have access to these spots.

“We have a number of families that come through on a weekly basis that are in need of an alternative learning environment for their children, and they are not able to afford it,” Hanson said.

Rabbi Jordan Silvestri, head of Robert M. Beren Academy in Houston, said vouchers would also be a pathway to stabilizing tuition for some private schools. Beren Academy, a private Jewish school, has raised its tuition from 1% to 3% annually to keep up with rising inflation and make up for a temporary tuition freeze the school granted during the pandemic.

Tuition at the K-12 school ranges from $10,750 in lower grades to over $27,000 in the last few years of high school. Though education savings accounts would not cover full tuition for most students, Silvestri said it would allow the school to stop raising tuition to pay for financial aid and internal scholarships.

Like other voucher advocates, Silvestri said he hopes to see the program eventually passed to increase access to alternative forms of education.

“We have families who are coming from out of the country because they’re looking for better life situations or the ability to a deeply religious life, and they’re coming from impoverished states or very poor financial situations,” Silvestri said. “This is a huge way for us to make a difference.”

Disclosure: Texas Classroom Teachers Association and the Texas Private Schools Association have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete .

This article originally appeared in , a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

The Texas Senate’s main school voucher proposal this special session, which was given in the Texas Senate on Thursday, closely resembles two of the biggest such programs in the country.

Like in Arizona and Florida, a voucher-like program known as education savings accounts. It would give families access to taxpayer money to pay for their children’s private schooling, be open to most students in the state and prioritize disabled and poor students if there are more applicants than funds available.

In some aspects, the bill’s architects took notes from those programs’ mistakes. In an effort to prevent fraud and misuse of funds, which has been a problem in Arizona, the Texas proposal doesn’t give parents direct access to the cash and requires the comptroller’s office to audit participants’ accounts.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

In other areas, Texas repeated ideas that garnered criticism in other states. Critics across the country point out that private schools receiving state funds through existing voucher programs aren’t required to show that students are succeeding academically, like public schools are. And like in other states, voucher supporters in Texas say that’s by design. Sen. , a Republican from Conroe and SB 1’s author, has argued that the market will weed out underperforming private schools.

Those voucher programs in other states also sparked vigorous debates, came with the same promises and faced similar concerns, providing a window into the impact they might have in Texas once enacted. The Arizona program, for instance, confirmed critics’ concerns that it would require increasingly larger amounts of funding as it grew — just like opponents in Texas fear. But it of students from public schools.

Here’s how education savings accounts have performed in other states.

Arizona and Florida

Education savings accounts around 2012 and currently serve more than 90,000 students across the country, according to EdChoice, a nonprofit organization that advocates for these policies.

There are 13 education savings account programs nationwide and 31 states — plus Washington, D.C. — offer some sort of voucher program that allows children to use either taxpayer money or tax-credit donations for private schooling.

To date, Arizona and Florida have the largest and most expansive education savings account programs in the country, where almost any child is eligible.

Arizona — which has “set the standard” for education savings accounts, according to EdChoice — began with a limited version of the program in 2011 that only served students with disabilities. It expanded this year and opened its doors to virtually every child in the state.

In 12 years, enrollment in the program grew from about 150 students to over 60,000. The Arizona Department of Education believes it would need $900 million by June to cover 100,000 students in the program. What once was a small program is now expected to balloon to nearly $1 billion.

Meanwhile, the state’s public school funding per student at the bottom when compared to the rest of the country.

Carrie Sampson, an assistant professor of educational leadership and innovation at Arizona State University, argued that the money being poured into this program could’ve been used to increase funding to the state’s public schools.

Earlier this year, Florida’s education savings accounts were also expanded to include virtually every child. — most already enrolled in private schools — have been admitted to the program, making it the biggest in the country.

Florida launched its program in 2014 focused on students with disabilities. The state launched another education savings accounts program that prioritized low-income families in 2019.

show that this school year about $1.5 billion will be diverted from Florida public schools to private schools as students leave.

Plenty of families have education savings accounts in both states for giving them access to other educational opportunities. But the programs have also attracted criticism for their loose financial oversight and for not requiring private schools to report student test scores or meet the same academic standards as public schools.

Arizona parents have spent on including buying chicken coops, trampolines and tickets to SeaWorld. The problems stemmed from the practice of sending program funds to participants through debit cards issued by the state, said Tom Horne, the Arizona superintendent of public instruction.

Horne, a Republican, said the program has phased out debit cards in an attempt to curb misuse of funds. Now, parents log on to a website where they can browse through pre-approved vendors and choose the services they need, which allows the state to approve the purchases.

“We want the program to be administered totally within the law and the money can only be used for educational purposes so we can prove that it’s a successful program both for Arizona and for the country, since other people are looking to us as an example,” he said.

In Florida, flat screen TVs, paddleboards and entry to Disney are . Critics there say that’s not how taxpayer money should be used; defenders of the program say education has evolved and those can be justified expenses.

Who uses the funds is also a concern for those against education savings accounts. In Arizona, as in Texas, the program was promoted as a way for low-income families who might feel confined within the public education system and want to explore other educational options for their children. But after the program expanded, the Arizona education department found that 75% of those in the program were not previously enrolled in public school, meaning they were already home-schooling, enrolled at a private school or had never entered the school system.

The Grand Canyon Institute, a non-partisan think tank, echoed those findings and that 45% of applicants were among the wealthiest quartile of students in the state.

Horne admitted that most of the money went to families already at private schools jumping into the program to get financial help from taxpayers. But he projects that the distribution of funds will eventually balance out as more families not in private schools apply.

And while program supporters promote them as a tool to help students with disabilities get a better education, only 17% of education savings accounts in Arizona have gone to students with disabilities, to the Arizona education department.

Arizona does not provide data on demographics or income for those enrolled in the program.

Texas

SB 1 would allow almost all Texas families access to $8,000 of taxpayer money to pay for private schools and other educational expenses such as uniforms, textbooks, tutoring or transportation, among other things.

Texas would become the third largest provider of education savings accounts in the country if the bill is approved with its current eligibility requirements and budget. It could serve nearly 60,000 students.

“Educating the next generation of Texans is a fundamental responsibility, and it is my belief that empowering parents with school choice will encourage competition, innovation and ensure that every student in Texas has the opportunity to find an educational path for their unique needs,” Creighton said in a statement.

SB 1 seeks to address some of the problems the Arizona and Florida programs have had.

The bill would allocate $500 million from the state’s general revenue fund for the next two years to pay for the program. The state comptroller’s office would establish and administer the savings accounts; be in charge of preventing fraud and misuse of funds; and hire a contractor to help process applications and approve vendors and participating private schools.

In addition, the bill would require the comptroller to compile an annual report that would include how many students are in the program, the number of applications received or waitlisted, feedback from users, public and private school capacity, and how many kids are considered ready for college, the military or a career after graduating in the program.

The legislation would also mirror much of what Florida and Arizona are already doing.

While almost any child is eligible for the program, SB 1 has a prioritization system if applications exceed the funding. To prioritize entry to underprivileged groups, the bill proposes that no more than 40% of spots be reserved for students who receive free or reduced lunch; no more than 30% for families who earn between 185% and 500% of the federal poverty line; no more than 20% for students with disabilities; and 10% for all other applicants who attended public, private or home-school in the last school year.

The prioritization system has garnered criticism though. Sen. , D-San Antonio, said the “no more than” language implies there will be a cap on how much funding goes to underprivileged applicants, instead of prioritizing them.

And like programs in other states, the bill does not require private school students to take a state-administered academic achievement exam, something that school voucher critics in the Texas Legislature have said an education savings account proposal should have to even consider it.

Creighton says that the program will not siphon money away from public schools — a recurring criticism of school voucher programs — as the funding comes from general revenue, not the Foundation School Program, which is the main source of funding for the state’s K-12 public schools.

But according to the bill’s financial analysis, school districts are set to receive less money as students sign up for education savings accounts and leave public schools. School districts in Texas receive funding based on student attendance.

Research

School vouchers — a term used to describe government programs like education savings accounts that provide taxpayer money to pay for children’s private schooling — have been a goal of conservative, free-market groups for decades.

Plenty of research has been produced on these programs. Creighton himself has from EdChoice that shows vouchers have a mostly positive impact on student scores.

But research on vouchers is often contentious, with studies ranging in methodologies, sample sizes and demographics. Donors advocating for and against these programs have directly funded their own research.

The Texas Tribune looked at independent research and spoke to experts who have studied voucher programs for decades. For the most part, studies suggest that test scores go down for students in such programs, especially in math. This has been the case in states like Indiana and Louisiana.

Some research from the suggests that there is a case that, as competition from voucher programs ramped up, test scores in public schools slightly improved. But there isn’t enough evidence to suggest vouchers are the main reason for improved outcomes.

Patrick Wolf, a proponent of vouchers and a distinguished professor of education policy at the University of Arkansas, said he’s found that test scores among students in voucher programs have been mixed but tend to have a slight positive tilt.

But in 2016, Wolf and his colleagues found that within two years after Louisiana expanded its limited voucher program to all students, there were “substantively large” negative effects on math scores of students in the program. Louisiana first only offered vouchers to students in low-performing public schools.

Wolf attributed the decline in academic achievement to Louisiana’s strict regulations on private schools, like requiring them to take a state assessment. In his research, he found that high-quality private schools did not want the state oversight that Louisiana proposed, leading those schools to opt out of the program.

Results “depend on policy design and context,” Wolf said.

Wolf believes voucher programs work if they start on a small scale and gradually grow and set up systems to avoid misuse of funds as best as possible.

“I don’t think many states are prepared to implement a universal school choice program instantly from the jump,” Wolf said.

Joshua Cowen, an education policy professor at Michigan State University who has studied school choice programs for more than a decade, said test scores for students in voucher programs decrease in part because of low-quality private schools. Some just open to collect tax dollars, he said, and most of the high-quality private schools cost too much money for parents to afford anyway, often leaving them with few viable options.

“They’re not these elite college, prep type environments,” Cowen said. “These are sub-prime providers.”

In Wisconsin, home of the oldest voucher program in the country, a study found that 41% of all private voucher schools operating in Milwaukee between 1991 and 2015 closed.

Cowen said Texas lawmakers should stay away from voucher-like programs because he still doesn’t believe that there is enough credible data that shows vouchers are good for student test scores.

Disclosure: EdChoice and SeaWorld have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete .

This article originally appeared in at .

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

With amounts ranging from $3,200 to $7,500 per child, depending on family income, the program is expected to be the second largest in the nation, after Florida’s. The budget that included the plan passed 26 to 17 in the Senate and 70 to 40 in the House, with five Democrats crossing the aisle. 

The bill’s passage was the culmination of years of work for Marcus Brandon, a former Democratic state representative who considered himself a progressive and once thought vouchers were “evil.”

“My constituents are the ones that led me here. They’re the ones that talked about the lack of educational opportunities,” said Brandon, who represented the Greensboro area until  2015. He’s now executive director of NorthCarolinaCAN, part of the 50CAN network, which advocates for school choice nationwide. 

With the vote, North Carolina becomes the ninth state with a universal school choice program in a year of unprecedented expansion. Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Utah and West Virginia now have ESA programs open to all. Oklahoma has a universal tax credit program. Ohio has a universal voucher program and in Indiana, the family income ceiling for a voucher is set so high that it’s . Opponents argue that universal ESAs hurt funding for public schools and largely go to families whose children never attended the public system rather than those seeking to escape failing schools. 

“If this funding was instead allocated to our public schools, the budget could more than double teacher raises” for the next two years, said Mary Ann Wolf, president and executive director of Public School Forum, an advocacy group that . “Half of our teachers do not make a livable wage.”

But advocates say the programs are giving families the freedom they need to personalize learning for their children.

“We’ve seen incredible wins for students over the past two years, and we expect to see school choice continue to grow and benefit families across the country in the coming years,” Patricia Levesque, CEO of ExcelinEd, a school reform organization, said in an email.

North Carolina has had that provides between $9,000 and $17,000 annually for students with disabilities since the 2018-19 school year. A separate voucher program supports low-income students attending private schools. Both programs have seen over the past year as the state expanded eligibility. Those programs will now be combined under the new universal ESA, which will go into effect in the 2024-25 school year. 

“The real breakthrough with this new legislation is the universality,” said Marc Porter Magee, founder and CEO of 50CAN. “We know that parents are hungry for an education system that recognizes the uniqueness of their children and ultimately, ESAs enable families to craft the education that’s right for them.” 

Brandon expects roughly 80% of the 126,000 students in the state’s private schools to take advantage of the ESA. For comparison, almost 67,000 students are using Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Account, including homeschooling families. While homeschoolers won’t be eligible in North Carolina, it would be relatively easy, Brandon said, for families in pods or microschools to qualify for an ESA. He thinks current homeschooling families would choose that route. 

“All it takes is a fire and health inspection,” he said.  

He thinks 70% of students in public schools and 30% using choice programs is a “healthy split.”

Similar to opponents of vouchers in other states, Wolf is concerned that the plan will especially hurt schools in rural areas.

“Eighty of our 100 counties are rural,” she said. “Our schools are the hub of so many of our communities.”

Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, who declared over the voucher issue and with the Republican-dominated legislature over education issues, announced that the budget would become law without his signature. it a “bad budget that seriously shortchanges our schools.” But it also includes a he wants.

Opponents want greater guardrails on how families spend the money and say students using ESAs should be required to take the same assessments as students in public schools. 

The bill would require the state superintendent to recommend a standardized test for students on vouchers in private schools. But Wolf said her concerns go beyond academic performance.

“Should our public dollars be going to private schools that can discriminate, that don’t have to be accredited, that are held only to minimal transparency?” she asked. 

Brandon said he leans toward as few restrictions as possible.

“I do not ever want to compromise the flexibility and the uniqueness of what private means,” he said. “ can spend $40,000 for his kid and understand that that is a quality education. All parents are just like him. They are able to recognize a school that’s working or is not working for their child.”