School vouchers, also called "Education Savings Accounts (ESAs)", simply put, are a mechanism using public funds to help families pay for their children's private education when they feel that public schools are underperforming or unsafe. Support for voucher programs has its roots in (mostly Southern States') opposition to the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision of 1954. Voucher programs were then used as a mechanism to fight desegregation.
Governor Abbott's efforts to force ESAs down the legislature failed in the previous session. He then supported primary candidates to unseat those Republicans who dared oppose him, and now seems to have the votes to pass a bill. Currently, the House and Senate have bills that would have to be reconciled before they can be signed by Abbott. The House Bill (HB3) is a bit more generous than the Senate bill (SB2) in that it plans to accommodate students with disabilities and tie the voucher amount to per student spending in public education.
Our first question should be: Are private schools better than public schools? Voucher systems in other states show no consistent pattern of improvement in the standardized test scores of low-income students, who the Texas Republicans declare they want to help. The Covid pandemic has helped Abbott push the narrative that Texas schools are underperforming, as student achievement has lagged compared to previous years. Could private schools, helped by increased enrollment, be a solution? It is worth noting that the current House and Senate bills
DO NOT require private schools to administer the state's standardized test. Actually, private schools operate with very lax, if not inexistent, supervision,
DO NOT require private schools to accept students who do not meet their particular standards,
DO NOT require private schools to accept students with disabilities.
Both bills promise to prioritize students with disabilities and students from lower income families in case demand exceeds the sum the legislature is ready to put into the program. However, there is NO INCOME CAP, and voucher programs in other states, e.g. Arizona, have mostly benefited families that could afford to (and in some cases already did) send their children to private school.
The school voucher approach, in fact, treats education as a commodity in a free market, blissfully ignoring the temptations of a profit-based education system: entice parents with exotic extracurricular activities that public schools can rarely afford - while increasing tuition and decreasing costs over time.
State and local authorities are the main sources of the Texas public education system. The federal government is responsible for roughly 10% of education funding. Every district, however, is bound to observe federal law. The 6-3 Supreme Court decision in the Carson v. Makin case (June 21, 2022) states that "A State need not subsidize private education, but if it does, it may not disallow the use of vouchers to pay for tuition at religious-based private schools." In other words, the walls separating church and state would be getting even thinner if public funds were used in funding religious schools.
A major argument against the use of public funds for private tuition is that it would gradually impoverish public education. I am quoting verbatim from the Texas Tribune: "Texas is constitutionally obligated to fund public schools and that FUNDING IS PRIMARILY BASED ON ATTENDANCE [my capitals]. If a voucher program caused students to leave the public school system, schools would receive less money. Opponents worry that impact would pile onto other challenges exacerbated by A YEARSLONG LACK OF MEANINGFUL STATE FUNDING INCREASES (my capitals again). These problems include deficits, campus closures, declining enrollment, expired pandemic relief funds, inflation and teacher shortages." It is worth noting that teacher pay in Texas is lower than in states with higher rates of student achievement (Massachusetts, e. g. )
Who are the actors in the fight over ESAs?
In favor of ESAs are Abbott, Patrick, and most Republicans (after opponents lost their primaries to Abbott-endorsed candidates, including our previous state rep, Justin Holland. Also in favor are conservative and religious organizations, and some billiinaires, most notably Jeff Yass of Pennsylvania..
Opposed to ESAs are Democrats, teacher groups and many rural communities. "School choice" is moot in rural areas, where sometimes the public schools are the main employer and anchor the community. Students would face lengthy commutes if the public school system collapsed. "Lose your school, lose your town" has popped up at rallies in rural communities.
What may be the most convincing argument against ESAs: the amount proposed for the voucher is higher in SB2 than per student funding in public education ( HB3 caps it at 85% of per public school student funding) and yet does not cover tuition at most private schools. Even without factoring in the possible cost of transportation and uniforms, this makes sending a child to private school unattainable for most lower-income families, which the program purports to help. It is basically another transfer of wealth to those who need it the least. It creates even more social fissures - separating the affluent from those less fortunate, the religious from those who are not. Public education is the ferment of democracy. Before "In God We Trust", the motto of the nation was "E Pluribus Unum" - out of many, one. I wish Republican lawmakers would remember that.
Disclaimer: Marie-Anne wrote this post. I am not a specialist in education, nor a journalist. My sources for this post were an excellent and very exhaustive article in the Texas Tribune dated Jan.23, 2025. I also used recent reporting from the Dallas Morning News and statistics from the NEA.
Comments