Should Texas millionaires be able to cash in on the state’s proposed voucher program?
Are vouchers really a chance for kids from low- and middle-income families to finally get a seat in the absolute best schools? Or, are they just, as Rep Diego Bernal (D-San Antonio) on the Texas House Education Committee put it: “a coupon” for the affluent parents who are already sending their kids to private school?
If a low- or middle-income family wants a certain school for their child that costs $30,000 a year (St. John’s in Houston comes to mind) and they get a voucher for $10K, where are they supposed to get the rest of the money?
One thing that became extremely clear this week during a marathon session of the committee is that a lot of people who came to Austin to talk to the committee about this are very, very angry. And not necessarily buying the idea that this as a program that will ultimately save the state’s taxpayers money, that won’t damage public schools in any way and is an effective use of $1 billion rather than allocating more money to public schools.
And that voucher money would increase to $7 billion in the 2026-27 fiscal year.
In a session that started early in the morning Tuesday and extended overnight, statistics and news reports were quoted and derided on both sides. There were also those in the audience and public speakers arguing passionately for school choice/ vouchers.
Realistically, those watching online, in the meeting room or sitting in one of the three adjacent overflow rooms at the Capitol probably just dragged out with the same opinion that they trudged in with. The most critics can probably hope for is to influence the insertion of some amendments to the bill and its companion Senate Bill 2.
Confronted with reports and analyses showing that in other states such as Arkansas and Florida a huge portion of the kids helped by the voucher programs there were already enrolled in private school and that promised academic gains weren’t realized, Robert Enlow, president and CEO of EdChoice a non-profit leading advocate for private school choice, repeatedly dismissed these studies as flawed and media reports as inaccurate.
Laura Colangelo, executive director of the Texas Private Schools Association, talked about how the voucher money will supplement the already generous scholarships that private schools in the state hand out and will enable them to further diversify their student bodies. But she would not agree that individual private schools in the voucher program should commit to a certain percentage of low-income students.
Jennifer Carr Allman, executive director of the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops, talked about how the voucher amounts considered will cover tuition at their schools with room to spare. While the schools are open to all, Catholics are given preference and an extra discounted tuition. And what if a family doesn’t want their child attending a religious school?
The thing is, with universal coverage offered in the House bill, even with priorities for low income families there is absolutely no guarantee that all the money won’t all go to families in the top income tier and that are already able to send their children to private school.
Families would not only be applying to a private school for entry but to the Educational Assistance Organization for voucher money leading to the assertion that even if accepted by a school, if the families don’t get the voucher money, then certainly the low-income families won’t have much of a chance to go. Probably the middle income as well. Critics also say that even with a voucher grant, lower income families may self-disqualify because they can’t bridge the gap between voucher assistance and the total bill for tuition and books and other costs.
That, of course, opens up more slots for the higher wage earners. Millionaires would not be disqualified.
While detractors saw danger in what they believe is too vague language in House Bill 3, voucher proponents warned against too much specificity and defended the right of private schools to do what they want without too much scrutiny from the state. Red flag anyone?
The $1 billion the Legislature may approve for these vouchers: is that an absolute cap or for the first year just the starting point? Rep Gina Hinojosa (D-Austin) thinks even in the first year there’s no guarantee that this won’t grow and soar beyond belief. After all, Gov. Abbott has the ability to move money around; he’s done it before, transferring millions to finance pet projects like the border wall.
An instant fact check of both sides was needed, but in lieu of that a disinterested viewer could just admire the dogged scrutiny of fine print by some (Hinojosa stood out) and the occasional eloquent turn of phrase. Brad Buckley (R-Salado), chairman of the House’s Public Education Committee and author of HB 3, kept things moving for the most part. He needed to because hundreds of people showed up to have a word with the education committee.
Buckley maintained throughout that the voucher program as crafted by the House would finally give parents a choice in education. And that the only way it will work is to make it universal, open to everyone. And he quoted his own set of statistics that in Arizona 58 percent of the families who send their kids to private school make less than $80,000 a year.
“I know the private schools in my district. I know the kids that go there. Many families are struggling and forgoing vacations, college savings, savings for retirement to make sure their kids are in the best environment.”
In the most recent elections, Gov. Greg Abbott used his influence to dispatch Republicans who opposed Education Savings Accounts otherwise known as vouchers in their areas. Any opposition because a) there were no private schools there and/or b) they didn’t want to see public schools drained of funds, hasn’t been as effective as in the past. It looks like this is the year his prize project will finally pass.
The Republican-dominated Texas Senate was already lined up under Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick to said yes to vouchers under Senate Bill 2. If passed by the House, both bills would go to conference committee to hash out the differences which are mainly in the areas of the amount allowed per voucher and how students with disabilities would be treated.
James Talarico (D-Round Rock) has been a relentless critic of the Education Savings Accounts approach. “What I’m worried about is that this money is going to cascade to the top. That students who we say we’re prioritizing actually can’t get admitted [to a private school.] They may not have a private school in their area. The majority of counties in the state of Texas don’t have a private school in them. A lot of rural communities and small towns.
“Then will the state really be doing what it says it will? They don’t provide transportation or special ed or you can’t cover the difference between the voucher [and costs.]
“If those who are pushing this bill outside this chamber are using kids in public schools as the justification for the bill, why don’t we prioritize preference or give preference to kids who are currently in public school over kids who are currently in private school?”
If all we’re doing is setting up a “mirage” of hope for low-income families as Rep. Harold Dutton (D-Houston) put it, then the broad goals set out by proponents of this measure are nothing but smoke and mirrors, sleight of hand.
Yes, we’ll give you money to go to a private school. But it won’t be enough money to pay you for one of the most expensive schools, should you be accepted. You’ll need to settle for one of the less expensive schools. Be grateful.
Meanwhile, the rich who don’t need it, who make more than 500 percent of the poverty level, have an excellent chance of cashing in on this taxpayer money. And private schools, well they’re cashing in bigtime too. Texas could do this differently. But it seems it won’t. This isn’t education. It’s politics.
