I don't mind people being able to pay a private school with whatever % of their taxes went towards public schools.....but no vouchers. DD
That's the same thing. Pulling money out of taxes you pay your county to pay for private school weakens the school district, and de-values your community in turn. Especially if you are in a middle income school district. Only thing this is going to do in the short term is force the state to increase taxes so they can keep schools open that do not have the tax income to keep the schools open. Over time they'll have to shut down and consolidate schools which will mean overcrowding, teachers quitting even more, and communities going downhill along with teens getting in more trouble. In Texas we've always operated in a redistribution of wealth type of structure with property taxes funding the public school system. You have people pulling their taxes out of the county, and the system crumbles on itself almost overnight.... which is Abbott & Republicans goal here obviously for some sick reason. I guess if suburban Texas looked more like rural Alabama they think it would be good for them.
Teachers Unions are strong Dem backers. It's a double edged sword, but weakening their influence has always been the play.
The Senate is making a new attempt, initially limited by funding and scope. It appears that their strategy aims to introduce vouchers slowly with the intention of expanding them in the coming years. This expansion is likely to come at the expense of public education if a significant number of students choose to switch from public to private schools. I am against the unequal academic requirements. We should either eliminate standardized testing for all students or make it a requirement for all. Having standardized testing mandatory for public school students but not for private school students can be seen as a method that politicians could use to undermine and weaken public schools, as it may already be happening in Houston ISD and other places in Texas. Summary SB1 establishes an education savings account program, granting families access to $8,000 in taxpayer funds for private school tuition and other educational expenses $500 million is allocated from the general revenue for the next two years to fund SB1 The program is overseen by the state comptroller's office It does not draw funding directly away from public schools, as it is funded from general revenue Private school students are not required to take state academic achievement exams The program is open to nearly all students who were enrolled in public school the previous year Program entry is prioritized with a percentage allocation to different categories, including students from low-income families, specific income brackets, and those with disabilities SB2, a $5.2 billion public school funding bill providing for teacher raises, has also been introduced. But it is not currently on the special session agenda set by Abbott Democrats remain staunchly opposed to SB1, while Republicans still have some conflicts between the House and Senate. Their concerns include the lack of oversight, absence of standardized testing, prioritization of vouchers over teacher pay, and the impact on public school funding, despite it being funded from general revenue Texas Senate unveils its priority school voucher bill | The Texas Tribune The proposal would give families who exit the state’s public education system access to $8,000 of taxpayer money each year to pay for their children’s private schooling. BY BRIAN LOPEZ OCT. 9, 2023 The Texas Senate unveiled Monday its main bill to establish an education savings account program, a priority for Gov. Greg Abbott this special session. Senate Bill 1, authored by Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, would allow families access $8,000 of taxpayer money to pay for private schools and other educational expenses such as uniforms, textbooks, tutoring or transportation among other things. “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. The state comptroller’s office would establish and administer these education savings accounts. The bill seeks to allocate $500 million from the general revenue fund for the next two years to pay for the program. The comptroller’s office would also be in charge of preventing fraud and misuse of funds — a major area of concern for many lawmakers — as well as approving an organization to help process applications and approve vendors and participating private schools. Creighton says that the program will not siphon money away from public schools 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. 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. If passed into law, almost any student who was enrolled in a public school last year would be eligible to apply for the program, as well as any student ready to enroll in Pre-K or kindergarten. The bill includes a formula to prioritize entry to the program if there are more applicants than funds available. Forty percent of open spots would go to students who receive free or reduced lunch; 30% to families who earn between 185% and 500% of the federal poverty line; 20% to those with disabilities; and 10% to those who attended public, private or home-school in the last school year. The filing of SB 1 came hours after Creighton announced Senate Bill 2, a $5.2 billion school funding bill that would allocate most of the money to teacher raises and include a small funding increase to help schools pay their rising bills. It remains to be seen whether the funding bill can even move forward. The only education-related item in Abbott’s agenda for the special session was education savings accounts, a school voucher program that would give families access to state funds to pay for their children’s private schooling. The state constitution says lawmakers can only pass bills related to the governor's agenda items during special sessions. The governor can at any time modify the agenda. Creighton said SB 1 and SB 2 work in tandem and show that lawmakers can provide more schooling options for Texas families while also adding public school funding. During the regular session, two proposals to create an education savings account program and give teachers pay bonuses, also authored by Creighton, fizzled in the House amid disagreements over vouchers and how to give teachers raises. In a Hail Mary play at the end of the regular session, Creighton attached his education savings account proposal — similar to the one he announced Monday — to House Bill 100, a school finance bill. That bill eventually died after House members once again stood firm against school vouchers, though the move left public schools with no new funding for teacher raises and other rising expenses. The future of an education savings account program remained uncertain as this year’s third special session started Monday with Texas Republicans embroiled in intraparty fighting. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick called on House Speaker Dade Phelan to resign because the speaker demanded he return $3 million to a major backer, the Defend Texas Liberty PAC, after The Texas Tribune reported its leader had met with a white supremacist and antisemitic activist. Patrick accused Phelan of using this weekend’s Hamas attack on Israel for political gain. Meanwhile, Texas House Democrats signaled their intent to once again stand against any kind of school voucher program. Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer of San Antonio, chair of the House Democratic Caucus, told reporters his group is “very clear: no vouchers and no deals.” “A voucher scam is a poison pill that will end up taking more out of our public schools than it puts in,” said Rep. James Talarico, D-Austin. Mark Jones, a political science professor at Rice University, said he believes Abbott and the Senate are on the same page when it comes to public school funding and school vouchers. SB2 “is the main carrot Abbott is using to entice the anti-voucher Republicans and the small number of persuadable Democrats to vote for school choice legislation,” Jones said. “The quid-pro-quo is that once school choice legislation is en route to the governor’s desk, Abbott will place public school funding on the special session agenda, thereby allowing the Senate and House to quickly pass SB2 or a comparable House bill.”
Average Catholic High School Tuition is $8,583. If they are given $8,000 for school, that leaves only $583 (plus books, uniforms, etc.) to cover on average, with some percentage presumably being fully covered by the $8k. Now, theoretically, they could just increase tuition by $8,000, but is there any indication they will?
And “The average private school tuition is $10,322 for elementary schools and $11,727 for high schools”
How does that change the fact that there would clearly be affordable private schools in the $8,000 range?
Average Catholic schools in Houston in 2016, and also mentions other fees: https://thesismag.com/2016/09/06/houston-private-school-tuition-surpasses-19000/ This seems more current: https://generalacademic.com/houston-private-school-tuition-2022-2023/#:~:text=Houston-area Catholic Private Schools,to their non-Catholic counterparts. This is from 2021... https://generalacademic.com/houston-private-school-tuition-2021-2022/
The State of Texas gives school districts $6,160 per pupil. But they want to give private schools $8,000 per pupil?
Republicans/Cons traditionally like to rail against high college tuition costs as a result of government meddling with student financing and admissions. This seems like the same things repeated on the private school level but with the party positions reversed
The system will definitely work for some. Not sure how the trade-offs will be regarding future revenue deficits. https://www.azmirror.com/2023/06/01...-to-900-million-for-the-upcoming-school-year/ In many parts of rural Texas, public school is like the biggest employer and only thing around. Perhaps if this passes, private schools can just open up where old public schools close down. There's definitely a freedom vs education equality trade-off.
Many U.S. public universities were free until the 1960s' when conservatives began demonizing college students and decided to begin massively cutting funding to the schools. Their plan was to keep "those people" out of schools by making them so not everyone could attend. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ684842.pdf To me at least, it appears that they're now trying to make the same thing happen in K-12.
Are you under the impression that black people (assuming that is what you mean by "those people") would not have access to this $8,000?
When I have some time, I do a bit more research. But here are a few things to consider: The range is huge. In Houston, the average is $25.6k per year. In Dallas, it's $13.3k. In Austin, it's $12.5k. The average cost is for tuition only, as you pointed out. Besides tuition fees, there is also a need for transportation. Many working families can't afford private transportation or take time off work to provide transportation. I read that tuition is about 75% of the total yearly cost. So if that's correct, the average cost for your selected sample would be 10.7k. All in all, it looks like the vast majority of the people not yet in private school can't afford to switch. There might be some exceptions for sure, but probably not many. The people who can take advantage of this the most are the ones already in private schools.
Great point. Strictly from a taxpayer's point of view, private schools would be more expensive than public schools. This does not go into the constitutional issue of taxpayer funds going to religious private schools. Based on current SB1 text, it is 8k per child per year. There is no clear cap stated on the total amount a family can receive, so it seems there is no cap per family.
So, this version will provide money for families leaving public school, but not for families - like mine - who already left? From what I know of the private school landscape, there seems to be 3 pricing strategies. One is to try to run as cheaply as possible to make tuition affordable. The second is to pay what it costs to run a good school and expect the families to pay. And the third is to run an 'elite' school with a high sticker price and then award financial aid to families who can't pay, a price discrimination scheme that maximizes your customers' willingness to pay. Thinking of the economics of it, the cheap schools will take the voucher money, and improve their services and increase tuitions over time to fill up their customers' willingness to pay. The second type are already running a well-funded school, so they might be able to ask for more donations from their families (who will eventually be getting voucher money) for fancy new buildings. The financial-aid-awarding schools, like colleges, will raise tuitions to compete on being the most elite -- fancy buildings, special programs, distinguished professors, whatever. Meanwhile, the financial aid program first takes the voucher money and then reduces the amount of money offered to the aid family by a like amount. I suppose the 4th type is the school that doesn't exist yet. Maybe there will be additional private schools founded to court families with vouchers and a modest willingness to pay. It also might be possible to have a missional school that will take the voucher but vow not to charge any additional tuition, funding the gap with donations from wealthy donors instead (assuming they have connections -- I could imagine someone like Yellowstone Academy doing that). But, in general, I think the economic forces are such that more government money will put upward pressure on tuition because tuition levels are solved by customer willingness to pay, not by the variable cost of operating a school. Much like federal assistance at affording college has only caused the costs to go up as schools build status amenities, state assistance in k-12 private school is not going to meaningfully increase access, it will only improve the quality for families that would have access anyway.
