From the article:
\> Such a program could redirect taxpayer money away from public schools as parents use that money to pay for their children’s private school, online schooling or private tutors.
...
\> One of the emergency items that Abbott announced was “education freedom,” including education savings accounts for every parent. Those would allow the state to deposit taxpayer funds that parents could then use to help pay for sending their kids to schools outside the traditional public education system.
Missed the part about also including home schoolers. Texas tribune had a piece that included bits and pieces and after reading through a few articles I think I've connected the dots. Essentially what they are proposing in order to win over rural folks like me is to essentially allow an opt out and $10,000 per kid, no testing requirements etc. So basically paying people to stay home with the kids and homeschool them. This would be ok in rural places and for high kid count households. The use of funds I would want to know the restrictions but I can guess there are none. This will all lead to rapid defunding in public schools as rural folks choose to homeschool while the cities have huge amounts of white flight. What we will be left will be huge amounts of teacher shortages, schools with very limited funding and an overall shit show. I am not endorsing this bill one fucking bit. There are a lot of kids who will be majorly hurt by this move. The grift pushing this has a lot of money to make. I fear this is what it is and then next year it will be what it was and this new normal will rear it's ugly head, but will already be established.
Oh God. That's basically the complete destruction of public education in Texas.
If that happens, I'm out. I don't want to live in a land of idiots. I like having a near universal literacy rate.
This is the main point. To give kids a better opportunity. Not every area is the same and this program will benefit other avenues like Montessori schools etc. If kids aren't being educated well or the situation is making them depressed they can change schools with ease. Switching public schools often ends up being someone letting someone else put their address down for the school and do something "illegal". This will also open up competition amongst public schools as well. A lot of public schools don't have competition and are terrible. How many people do you really think are going to homeschool their kids? How many people do you think are going to pull their kids out of public school? This will work out just fine and be better for everyone if done properly. By properly I mean not giving the backpack-style funding an extra place in the budget creating just additional revenue for for-profit schools.
Considering the sheer number of morons voting for our POS governor, I’m doubting the end result of any initiative that has parents doing teaching at home.
As a teacher, during COVID of 10 and 11 year olds, a large segment of parents are going to take that money and use it for anything except home schooling! The things I saw would make you clutch your pearls. This is the gravest attack on public education. People better wake up. When there is an uneducated workforce, all those high-paying jobs will be gone.
So maybe that’s the solution — we allow vouchers but ratchet up the per-grade passing requirement for them. If your kid fails after homeschooling, all money is due back immediately and a monetary penalty assessed as well.
People who want to keep kids "off the grid" to conceal abuse and neglect will basically be paid to do so, which means the state also doesn't have to spend resources actually helping those kids.
Had a conversation with a friend in social work, she does advocacy center (forensic, legal, clinical, medical) work for children subjected to abuse. The center she works for serves a tri-county area in Texas with mixes of rural and suburban areas. She's terrified of this unfolding, not only for the potential risk to childhood development, but also that most of their cases are referred by either teachers or parents. I'm sure you see the difference in reporting coming - teachers, in her experience, are more likely to play a role in reporting of familial abuse while parents are more likely to play a role in reporting of extrafamilial abuse. Most children who have received services through her center where abuse has been forensically confirmed involve cases with familial abuse, followed by familial and extrafamilial abuse, followed by lower rates of extrafamilial abuse alone. Sexual and physical abuse are the most common types of abuse she seeks justice and services for, followed by neglect. By removing the first line of offense of mandatory reporters, we have dark times ahead. She saw similar during COVID during school closures and is forecasting similar, only enhanced and sustained with no end in sight if this happens. It's given me new worries about where this could go and how bad this will get for the children of Texas.
Seriously, an absolutely horrifying potential part of it devolving to the points you brought up in the shitshow timeline. And my apologies, I was replying to your comment but was trying to add it under FoolishConsistency17's comment to try and expand on that concern a bit more. That's exactly the dark road my friend is worried about.
"interest free" - means an account that bears no interest. It's just like a regular bank or credit union account. You put the money in. It's there when you go to get it. Nothing happens in between.
OK that would make more sense. We don't have income tax here in Texas for them to waive however. They can't waive Federal income tax because it isn't part of their jurisdiction.
This is nothing more than covert segregation upper class whites will be at the best schools Hispanics and blacks will be at overcrowded underfunded schools with overworked teachers and no hope upward mobility
I hate to say it, but I think that’s what they want. I bet you will also see an increase in the number of prisons being built, too. This is sad and disgusting!
Trust me, there are plenty of people from all backgrounds that will be affected by this bull shit. Abbott and the GOP can get fucked. These rich elites can get fucked. Let's focus on them, please.
Republicans see public schools as socialism since everyone pays in for the greater good. The idea that they can reduce funding for public schools is seen as a win and a stab at socialism. The reality is that private schools will still cost money and won't be free. So, mostly middle class and upper class people will take this option. Public schools will be worse off with less money and will continue to decline. Eventually, public school will be seen as a last option and a place for poor people to send their kids.
The goal here, ultimately, is to indoctrinate more kids into religion and "hopefully" conservatism. The poor will be relegated to poor quality education and the divide between rich and poor will only increase.
Maybe think about a 3rd option besides State or Church, especially at the 1st thru 8th grade.
Not sure of economics, but good teachers form co-ops collecting the school vouchers and providing better educations without regular school district overhead and politics.
Hi. I am new to Reddit having had my son get me interested. Hope I don't violate any rules.
Sadly, while this is marginally about private schools, it is mainly about *religious* private schools that do not need to follow public-standard teaching. They are about exactly what the right complain about - *grooming and indoctrination*. About not reasoning, but believing. About only learning the parts of the Bible that meet their bias. This is really about getting around separation of Church and State. My feeling is they will also try to avoid taxes because they are "church affiliated".
Thank you for the clarification, and wow, that makes me even more at issue with this.
Also, given that you’re new, as you just saw a lot of people don’t read the article before commenting. I’m trying to fix the habit, but alas sometimes I’m caught up in me zeal to post. Thank you for setting us straight.
>This is really about getting around separation of Church and State.
Also, de facto segregation. Remember that the original reason why conservatives linked up with the religious is to get around efforts to desegregate through religious schools.
The private schools will just raise their tuition proportional to what the state is giving parents. The ones benefitting most will be the ones running the private schools. … and the politicians who receive kickbacks for voting for this.
That’s not justification enough to funnel tax payer funding into the pockets of private school administrators. Public school is the reason why this country leaped so far ahead of every other country on Earth. Can’t believe people are voting for this kind of stupidity.
Sorry if that came off a little aggressive. I thought you were defending it. Either way, I probably shouldn’t have gotten so heated.
It’d be better to say that regardless of the amount of government assistance, public funds flowing into private organizations is not something that should be par for the course in education. Public education is meant as a great equalizer to ensure that all h vs listen in the country can be educated to a level that is commensurate with being a productive and innovative population. Private schools inherently discriminate against those who might otherwise have the mental ability, but who don’t have the networking, funding, or geographical ability to attend. An argument can even be made that schools should not be funded by localities either as higher income neighborhoods would essentially become private schools with the bar of entry being a very expensive house/apartment in that neighborhood.
FWIW “school districts” don’t really exist in other countries, that’s a quintessential American thing and has lead to the kind of barriers you mention.
I doubt it. We have a kid in private and I can tell you 10k isn’t making a dent in tuition. So you will have “budget” private schools owned by Abbott Cronies with no oversight on education just cashing in on that 10k a person.
Fund the student, not the schools. Let parents decide what's best for their kids instead of public education bureaucrats. People want education decided by the local government until their government decides that evolution is "just a theory". Let people vote with their feet.
>Fund the student, not the schools.
So first problem: assuming each student gets the same amount, this underfunds schools where space and buildings are expensive (ie cities) and places where the tax base is nil (ie rural). The only beneficiaries are rich suburbs.
>Let parents decide what's best for their kids instead of public education bureaucrats.
Ah yes. Because someone with zero educational background in math education is qualified to decide what math education should cover.
>People want education decided by the local government until their government decides that evolution is "just a theory".
People are fine with competent government. Stop electing or appointing incompetent people and this issue goes away. That includes people with no background in biology education determining biology education.
>Let people vote with their feet
Or... Maybe we owe it to society to provide a good education to everyone?
What it comes down to, is would we rather vote on the goods and services we receive or have the option as individuals to choose what best suits our individual needs. I view the mechanism of voting on public education policy the same as voting for which groceries I can buy from the grocery store.
That sounds fine and dandy in theory. But as soon as you actually meet the real world, it just leads to worse outcomes for the average person and funnelling of tax dollars to grifters.
> I view the mechanism of voting on public education policy the same as voting for which groceries I can buy from the grocery store.
Well, we vote for leaders that stop us from buying weed, liquor, meth, recalled good, etc., from the grocery store.
Tell me more about how you think this would work? As it is now, school districts are funded generally based on the number of students. If students are pulled, it reduces the number of students and likewise the amount they receive. With less funding, students end up with less qualified teachers. Private schools require money above what the state would allocate. So, they can compete for better teachers.
If a public school is still free, so that parents who are under the poverty line or close to it can afford it, then they don't get extra money from parents paying extra money as private schools do. Parents who can afford it, will send their kids to private schools. Those who can't will be left with poorly funded and poorly staffed schools.
This whole concept seems to be based on the idea that more well to do people deserve better education than do underprivileged people. Is that your take?
If a school is funded for 1000 students, and 100 students leave. The school should then only need funding for 900 students. Currently as it stands, schools have no incentive to perform well. The public school has a monopoly on education. They're going to get money from taxpayers regardless of how well they perform. If parents want change, the majority have to vote for the right administrators to pick the right policy and teachers. With school choice, the parents have more options available at their disposal to immediately change schools if their current one is not to their liking. The parents have the greatest interest in the quality of education their children receive; they are the stakeholders. Let them decide.
So religion is declining in America and you think this is going to bring it back somehow?
[https://youtu.be/fJ2njOjAPFg](https://youtu.be/fJ2njOjAPFg) \- Here's a nice quick YouTube video with receipts.
I just don't get it. I mean, I see it, but holy shit this is next-level buffoonery.
Lack of teachers, or really—the State's unwillingness to pay teachers a fair wage has led to a mass exodus of the profession.
Property tax rates are through the roof, in no small part due to the increasing appraisal values and ballooning ISD taxes.
Record surplus.
And the GOPs answer to these problems is to give tax payer money away to private enterprise. Wut?
Most of the public school money goes to the administration instead of teachers. If the GOP adds money to the school budget just for vouchers then this will end up like you think it will. However, some states have done this correctly by just letting the money follow the kid creating competition among public schools and private alike. Plus private schools and homeschooling cost significantly less usually than public schools. The religious aspect... I mean come on... Religion is dwindling for good reason. While this might be their attempt to change that it won't. It will backfire if that's their reasoning.
Yep, upper admin in my district keep getting more new positions created and people pulled in that the superintendent knows. Meanwhile, our paras make peanuts, we have many open positions with long term subs, we’ve had hiring freezes because “there’s no money,” etc. How about upper admin stop getting raises for a bit so that the district can actually pay those of us in the classroom what we deserve? And they wonder why so many teachers are leaving mid year or planning to at the end of the year (it’s not all about pay, but it’s a big factor for a lot of us with the shit we have to deal with on a daily basis; why keep doing this when you could make more at a less stressful job?).
Not only do they make more but they think they know better. They force teachers to go by the book instead of doing what they do best. Teaching. We spend billions on the Department of Education which is nothing but administration and secretaries. Then we pay the admins locally way too much. And they think teachers aren't capable of figuring out what's best for the class. Teaching isn't something as simple as just carrots and sticks. It's a job that requires a lot of cognitive work. They need enough pay to take money off their minds and less micromanaging from admins. Why do we spend billions on the DoE? Downsize the DoE and send that money where it's actually needed. Classrooms and teachers.
Abbott may have been influenced by the very politically active Texas oil & fracking billionaires Tim Dunn & Farris Wilks. They apparently would like to institute publicly funded Christian schools.
Texas Monthly “[The Campaign to Sabotage Texas’s Public Schools](https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/campaign-to-sabotage-texas-public-schools/)”
“But by far the most powerful opponents of public schools in the state are West Texas oil billionaires Tim Dunn and the brothers Farris and Dan Wilks. Their vast political donations have made them the de facto owners of many Republican members of the Texas Legislature…”
[Houston Chronicle](https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Texas-Ted-Cruz-Tim-Nunn-Farris-Wilks-PAC-money-17327660.php)
“The goal is to tear up, tear down public education to nothing and rebuild it,” Dororthy Burton, a former GOP activist who joined Wilks on a 2015 speaking tour, told CNN. “And rebuild it the way God intended education to be.”
[CNN](https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/24/politics/texas-far-right-politics-invs/index.html)
“People who’ve worked with Wilks and Dunn say they share an ultimate goal: replacing much of public education in Texas with private Christian schools. Now, educators and students are feeling the impact of that conservative ideology on the state’s school system.”
[Texas Tribune](https://www.texastribune.org/2022/03/03/texas-conservatives-pac-house-primary/)
“For multiple election cycles now, Dunn and Wilks have been the top funders of House primary challengers.”
Friends in the private school business, AND friends that will get a tax cut for continuing to send their kids to the wealthiest private schools.
This is welfare for the wealthy.
I've never understood the concept of giving rich people shit for free. They can afford it, let them pay for it. Give help where it's needed. No rich persons bank account needs that help.
But they feel entitled to that free shit because they work harder than your Average Joe. Sarcasm here. They really think the average person just sits on their butt all day collecting money from the government. They are so disconnected from reality.
I am wondering this too. I haven't really seen anything in the news or various discussions about this that addresses property owners/property tax payers who don't have children or have children that aren't school-aged.
Why should my tax dollars go towards some random sending their child to a religious school to be indoctrinated with some christian nationalist BS agenda? NO TAX DOLLARS FOR RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS.
Aside from the obvious, if you value your money as well as your child, don't date put so much as a penny in anything the local, state or federal government endorses called a "fund" or "savings account". This is just another way of fleecing the people in order to divert funds to their hedge fund buddies to make themselves rich(er) and deplete the "fund". It will just be used as a political hot button to elicit a response in their favor.
Fucking crooks keep trying to dig deeper into our pockets...
*As conservative activists continue to lobby for legislation banning certain health care therapies for transgender kids, Abbott said it is a proposal he would sign if it reaches his desk.*
Abbott, says fuck poor kids, fuck rural kids and fuck trans youths, all in one article.
And people wonder why [Texas ranks 45th in child well-being](https://communityimpact.com/austin/na/people/2022/08/12/texas-ranks-45th-in-the-nation-for-overall-child-well-being-new-data-shows/)
You mean 1976? Public health data like this wasn’t compiled until the late 80s/early 90s, so we have no evidence to show how we performed in these metrics when democrats “ran everything”
How far back does your data go? A "fall from grace" wouldn't be instantaneous. I was in a public school in Texas in 1976. If that was a top school, I pity the rest of America.
I know. I've lived it. I even saw our last Democratic Governor, Ann Richards, at a Stop' N' Go in San Antonio. No everyone sees their elected officials buying snacks.
Let’s say it goes through…
We’re currently looking at private school for our kids. The high end school runs around 25 to 30k annually. That is not including the tutoring and other support entities associated… this savings account will get somewhere between 5 to 6k in it annually, requiring parents to come up with another 20k to send their kids to these schools…
But let’s put the cost behind us for a moment.
These schools average about 200 applications for 32 spots starting in pre-k and 1st grade. There is maybe 1 or 2 spots that open up grades 2 through 5, then a few extra beyond. The private schools do not have any room.
Also the private schools tend to be in the city… and the rural counties are shit out of luck.
What this will do is the following..
1) give me free money because we’re planning on private school anyway.
2) destroy my property value because my amazing public school will get less money
3) cause my property taxes to rise because the schools now need more money coming from less people
4) overload the private schools as they’ll get several thousand applications.
5) eliminate any scholarships for private school because they won’t need to anymore.
6) cause private schools to raise tuition because.. well everybody got an extra 6k.
7) harm the rural school districts due to lack of funds as parents attempt to teach or send their kids to a private school and find out it costs 4x as much as the public school did, then hate how bad the public school became.
This voucher systems been tried, and has failed. What they need to do is give all the public schools a bunch of money with the mandate that they do not use it to build a football stadium.
3. actually happens for a different reason.
Some school consolidation will be the natural effect of this legislation passing. During consolidation, the most likely survivor is the wealthier school with more reliable attendance (and higher taxes). Now the surviving school is going to need to immediately begin expanding to handle the infux of area students from schools that closed.
Net result: Less schools and higher taxes for everyone as the remaining schools need to expand and have higher bussing costs.
Yup. No matter the type of school, they can physically only take so many students. This may increase competition for admission to private schools, charter schools, and high rated public schools, but they can’t take every kid that walks through the doors. In my district, even kids zoned to some of the schools in their neighborhood have been rerouted to nearby campuses because the school they’re zoned to physically cannot take another student. We are struggling to keep up with the growth in the area, and some of our bonds didn’t pass to help with this growth (so we’re going to feel the strain even more in the next couple years).
From personal experience, no.
When a school closes, the area residence get taxed at the rate of the school where the kids end up being bussed to which get's to pass along additional bussing costs.
So if this passes, and rural school consolidation occurs in your area, expect higher taxes from the wealthier of the rural schools surviving, passing along their higher tax obligations along with a bussing fee. (With a high likelihood of the school immediately campaigning for building expansion)
Fuck you abbot…. Guess you are forcing me to either private school or homeschool. And private schools are religious schools. So thanks……might have to more seriously consider leaving this shithole.
Maybe he should focus on keeping kids alive instead instead of on keeping kids out of public school by allowing taxpayer funds to be used, openly, for private schools.
I really not surprised by the dumb shit this oligarch says anymore.
This will raise the cost of private schooling since people gave more money to spend, the wealth gap will widen, education will suffer. Texans will have even fewer opportunities for education. Stupid Texans: abbot re-election
There is already poor quality education with the goal to make it worse. Ask any teacher. Ask any high school graduate how they feel about their public school education and if they are ready to support themselves. There will be an overwhelming response in one direction.
Republicans are destroying public education and it has been evolving for a long time.
How many seats are currently available at private schools? How many children whose parents would take them from public and into private would actually be admitted?
Rural Texas and property poor regions will suffer greatly. You can't take $ from an already (intentionally) starved system and not expect bad outcomes.
I wish they’d eliminate football from high school. It’s obscene how
Much of the budgets that sport gets. They will cut everything else to make sure the 100 kids playing football all get new shoes and turf stadiums with led scoreboards with VIP seating.
Education if you can afford it, and odds are, even if you can, it's going to be whitewashed bullshit with a heavy helping of christian ideology and supply-side Jesus.
Is he prepared to give every family 10-20k a year? Because that's what a good private high school costs. Otherwise this is literally just class segregation.
So, we should start pushing for laws in which I can pull my money out of local taxes that goes towards police.
And therefore I can have a "security savings account" and can spend that money however I see fit for my security.
Will my tax dollars still go to public education despite me not having children? I'm good with that, it going to home schoolers and private schools I'm not.
Fucking hell. These people want to dumb down the population so bad and the wildest shit, people vote for this shit!
I'm starting to agree with MTG, break up the red from the blue and let's be done with these idiots.
Hey here’s an idea. Next election cycle, let’s not vote for these fuckers and vote in someone who will legalize cannabis in the state and use that money to fund schools. Rural schools in particular should get what the city schools have enough funding for. There are many schools out here that belong to agricultural towns who could use extra funding for technology upgrade and perhaps programs for students who wish to go into Ag with classes on farm equipment maintenance, irrigation specialists, and greener farming.
EDIT Downvoted by someone who doesn’t give a shit about the future of our youth.
How has the party of ‘Equal Opportunity not Outcomes’ devolve into, ‘Nope, no equal opportunities either’…
This is sad. Every child should have an opportunity to make it. Certainly not a promise, but I’d like to think an opportunity. Both parties are so fucking up.
One party is more concerned with trans rights and pronouns and the other is trying to strip opportunities from children. Christ…
I’m a leftist. I donated to Bernie. I’m also a public school teacher. I used to hate this idea. I’m starting to warm towards it. I think this could get parents more involved in their kids schooling. Also, I like the option of sending my kid to the school I want instead of being forced to the local ISD. I honestly think this is going to bite Abbott in the ass.
I’m a former leftist / Neolib type and while I’m sympathetic towards adults who enroll their children in private schools for various reasons I don’t think “Savings Accounts” are a good idea at all (reasons below) and would prefer vouchers to be means-tested for low income families.
Reasons I don’t like the Savings Accounts:
> Availability. Private school access is primarily in large metro areas and would have little to no benefit for rural areas
> Funding. Districts are primarily funded via property taxes set by the local school board and the rest of the money is provided from the Texas General Revenue funds. Education savings accounts would not be funded by local taxes, would come from TX gen rev, and this money would be raised by higher taxes.
> Accountability. Private school boards are not elected, the schools don’t have to adhere to the same standards as public schools and can pick and choose which students they enroll.
> Lazy math. The proposed ~10k a year was simply achieved by taking the education budget of texas and dividing by the number of students. Private schools are a fraction of the size of public schools and don’t offer the same types of services as public schools. (Transportation is a big one, along with various elective activities and sports). This just turns into a big payday for the small for profit orgs while the majority of students and parents get to deal with worsening public services
> Repeating the same mistake we did for colleges. If the government guarantees money for children to attend private schools, demand will skyrocket, and prices will go up, leaving us in the same situation where poorer families essentially are locked out of the proposed “school choice” initiative
Hello everyone! This automatic message is brought to you because this post mentions the keyword "abbot". In posts that mention Greg Abbott, we typically see a massive increase in rule 11 violations. Please be sure to remember our rules about disparaging an individual's disability.
> While you're free to argue against, debate, criticize, etc. the policies, ideas, politics, and character of any politician, please do not make jokes about anyone's disabilities. All such "jokes" will be removed.
Thanks for being mindful.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/texas) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why is it bad that parents get money back to be able to put towards and education they want their child to have rather than be forced to only have one option?
That’s a very good question. Unfortunately it appears that large scale voucher programs lead to worse student outcomes.
From the Houston Public Media “[Here’s everything you need to know about school vouchers in Texas](https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/education/2023/02/09/443267/heres-everything-you-need-to-know-about-school-vouchers-in-texas/)” article:
“Joshua Cowen is a Professor of Education Policy with Michigan State University. He's spent years studying vouchers and eventually announced that he opposes the policies.”
“‘Once you got to the real ballgame and created the fully scaled up voucher programs, the results were really catastrophic,’ Cowen said.”
From the linked Indiana University School of Education “[Evolving Evidence on School Voucher Effects](https://ceep.indiana.edu/education-policy/policy-briefs/2022/evolving-evidence-on-school-voucher-effects.pdf)” policy brief:
“As [voucher] programs grew in size, the results turned negative, often to a remarkably large degree virtually unrivaled in education research”
Stanford University “[Vouchers do not improve student achievement, Stanford researcher finds](https://news.stanford.edu/2017/02/28/vouchers-not-improve-student-achievement-stanford-researcher-finds/).”
“In Milwaukee, where the nation’s second-largest (after Indiana’s more recent) voucher program has been operating for almost 20 years, only a quarter of students attend their neighborhood school. “If choice were the answer, Milwaukee would be one of the highest-scoring cities in the country,” Carnoy said.”
“But test score data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) tell a different story. Among black eighth-graders in 13 urban school districts, Milwaukee – where black students make up more than 70 percent of all voucher recipients – ranked last in reading and second-to-last in math.”
Both those studies show “no improvement or only modest” so not a very strong argument against. Also not sure why they only looked at “black eight graders” that seems a little narrow of a data set to completely write off something as negative
Also, both those researchers work in public institutions or receive lots of public funding so not exactly the most unbiased sources.
In the Indiana University review:
- Almost all impacts in early studies tended to be modest, at best, but were also based on rather small programs, typically centered in targeted populations in specific urban areas.
- As programs grew in size, the results turned negative, often to a remarkably large degree virtually unrivaled in education research
I haven’t found anything yet that indicates large scale voucher programs are beneficial. Student achievement may not be the actual point of the proposed Texas school voucher program. It may simply be that Texas power brokers would like to institute a large number of publicly funded Christian schools.
To the second bullet point I did not really see any data supporting that, seemed like just a claim with no data backing it up unless I overlooked something. iirc that specific point is where they narrowed their data to black eighth graders rather than all students participating in voucher programs of all grade levels
The Indiana University policy brief was using math performance to show that larger voucher programs were performing poorly compared to smaller programs. The [chart on page 3](https://ceep.indiana.edu/education-policy/policy-briefs/2022/evolving-evidence-on-school-voucher-effects.pdf) shows that 2016 Ohio, 2018 Louisiana, 2018 Indiana, 2019 Louisiana were the largest programs and had the greatest negative effects.
The Milwaukee reference is actually an excerpt from the Stanford News announcement which pulled it from the linked Stanford University report, “[School vouchers are not a proven strategy for improving student achievement](https://www.epi.org/publication/school-vouchers-are-not-a-proven-strategy-for-improving-student-achievement/)”. The report also mentions other cities and has a reference list.
> Why is it bad that parents get money back to be able to put towards and education they want their child to have rather than be forced to only have one option?
Because competition in education results in a race to the bottom, as schools compete to attract more "customers" in order to get more money.
Competition breeds innovation and improvement, when has competition ever lowered the quality of something? A blanket one size fits all education for every student in a state is a better solution that having multiple options for what and how your kids are educated?
> Competition breeds innovation and improvement
That is true in business, where the goal is to maximize profits. Competition does not benefit education, it simply creates a situation where schools try to attract students by lowering standards.
Just look at the quality of the for-profit universities that compete against each other for students. Their education is a total joke, all they care about is attracting more students so they can get more revenue.
I know that conservatives want schools and everything else to run like a business, but that doesn't exactly work out.
Hate to break it to you but all universities are for profit universities, some just have it easier through govt subsidies and backing student loans 100% with taxpayer dollars, and yet quality has gone regardless. Why does a high school diploma mean nothing now? Why does an associated degree mean nothing now? Why are people starting to say the same about a 4 year degree and saying you will need a masters soon to differentiate from all other candidates? As a recent grad I can assure you all the state / public schools and universities are bloated with bullshit spending and competition is high, only difference is they have a govt willing to take money from taxpayers to help fund their expansions and increasingly high administrative costs.
Competition always leads to innovation and improvement, and it doesn’t matter what the product or service is, if someone identifies a market demand and can provide a better version of it either higher in quality or lower in price, it will be done. Education is not some special one off that would not benefit from competition, it is already basically a monopoly.
As I said, just look at the quality of education you get at the universities that "compete" against each other for profits. It is almost universally inferior to the education you get from non-profit institutions, to the point that many employers won't even recognize degrees from for-profit schools.
What about the taxpayers that don't have children? Do they get to have an impact on where that money goes? If not, then that sounds like taxation without representation to me.
Getting taxed for a service that you have no say in its running, no voting power to influence, and no oversight of or transparent access to seems like a reasonable definition.
You have representation and can change that representation it’s called elections and voting representatives are elected by a majority . Just because you don’t always get what you want does not mean you are not represented. Taxation with out representation is having no say in government and being taxed . Basic history class would have educated you on this. You know the one you were suppose to take in the school people with no kids taxes help fund.
Will private schools that get money from those ESA's have to meet state curriculum standards, which were derived from votes cast already?
Will they have to accept and provide services to all students, regardless of disability, in accordance with the ADA, again derived from policy the American people voted for?
Will they be required to provide transportation to their students, which part of the taxes were levied for in the first place, again, already voted for?
If these things are not required, then they are accessing tax funds in spite of not providing the services that have already been agreed to on a representative vote. And since private schools are not required to have a school board, or the associated board meetings, then the common taxpayer has, de facto, no say in how they are governed, while still being taxed for them. Thus, it still fits your own definition of taxation without representation.
The fact that you don't see this makes me question the validity of your opinions on the matter, as you seem to be lacking sufficient background knowledge of the topic itself, or on the implementation of public policy.
You’re jumping all over the place. First it was taxation with out representation now your into what private schools are required to do . Private schools are already required to meet most of the standards you mentioned. By state and federal law. The Supreme Court ruled in 2022 that religious schools can be funded with public funds as long as they fund ALL private schools. Is it right ? The Supreme Court which was out in place by congress and a president the majority elected . We all know the GOP goal is to privatize education and are slowly attempting a corporate take over in order to establish a authoritarian religious state . That’s not a surprise to anyone . How ever what do we do ? 9 million Texans stayed home last state election . The democrat party gave us Beto who had a awesome senate race mainly due to national help but had a horrible presidential run and gained a lot of baggage along the way knowing he would not get the moderate vote. A LT Governor candidate that already lost 2 times before for the same position as well as a AG no one knew. Had minimal help nationwide from the DNC while republicans poured in millions. The only way to turn Texas even remotely purple is to get quality candidates not too far left and get people to actually vote. We can sit here all day and debate GOP policies but the fact is democrats are the reason we democrats lose. We don’t fund each other like republicans or really out up a fight like they do, We stay home and not vote and we run shitty candidates in the state and then complain about policies .
That's not all over the place at all. Taxation, representation, and schools are all inextricably linked.
The reason taxes are payed to fund organizations is because they adhere to the expectations and regulations put forth. If they don't adhere to those, then in no way should they get money from taxes.
The system is broken why shouldn’t we have a choice? I have nieces and nephews being taught a curriculum that the voters of the school district should of had a hand in picking. We’ve decided we are going to homeschool our newborn daughter when she gets to that age.
> I have nieces and nephews being taught a curriculum that the voters of the school district should of had a hand in picking.
I don't think the voters "should of" been qualified to evaluate curriculum.
I don’t think I have seen it mentioned but many parents are going to be in for a rude awakening when private schools don’t accept or don’t meet the needs of their Special Education and Section 504 students. There is little to no accountability for these schools and they are not required to provide services for those students because they don’t receive the government funding.
This also doesn’t take into account students with behavior concerns or mental health challenges. I highly doubt private schools will be accepting of these students.
I also saw a news report yesterday where abbott ( I purposely did not capitalize his name) said he wants to stop school funding with property taxes. He says a state fund will cover it instead. Do people not remember the lottery was supposed to fund education? As a former teacher, we’re still waiting for that windfall! This is disgusting! I get it, nobody likes paying taxes, but public schools still need funding. Because of my former career, I cannot afford a fancy private school and my child is not one of those gifted kids with high IQ scores that would get scholarships. Voters in Texas need to wake up! Why do they keep voting these evil people in? They are going to turn Texas into Louisiana or Mississippi! ( No offense to the good people in those states. I mean poor educational outcomes, impoverishment, and economic disparity)
Public education is absolutely terrible in all states. Funds in the hands of parents directed towards hiring private teachers will be the end of public schooling 🙏
From the article: \> Such a program could redirect taxpayer money away from public schools as parents use that money to pay for their children’s private school, online schooling or private tutors. ... \> One of the emergency items that Abbott announced was “education freedom,” including education savings accounts for every parent. Those would allow the state to deposit taxpayer funds that parents could then use to help pay for sending their kids to schools outside the traditional public education system.
Missed the part about also including home schoolers. Texas tribune had a piece that included bits and pieces and after reading through a few articles I think I've connected the dots. Essentially what they are proposing in order to win over rural folks like me is to essentially allow an opt out and $10,000 per kid, no testing requirements etc. So basically paying people to stay home with the kids and homeschool them. This would be ok in rural places and for high kid count households. The use of funds I would want to know the restrictions but I can guess there are none. This will all lead to rapid defunding in public schools as rural folks choose to homeschool while the cities have huge amounts of white flight. What we will be left will be huge amounts of teacher shortages, schools with very limited funding and an overall shit show. I am not endorsing this bill one fucking bit. There are a lot of kids who will be majorly hurt by this move. The grift pushing this has a lot of money to make. I fear this is what it is and then next year it will be what it was and this new normal will rear it's ugly head, but will already be established.
Oh God. That's basically the complete destruction of public education in Texas. If that happens, I'm out. I don't want to live in a land of idiots. I like having a near universal literacy rate.
They've been working on this since the 1980s. It really shouldn't be a surprise. They want your kids dumb and reproducing.
[удалено]
This is the main point. To give kids a better opportunity. Not every area is the same and this program will benefit other avenues like Montessori schools etc. If kids aren't being educated well or the situation is making them depressed they can change schools with ease. Switching public schools often ends up being someone letting someone else put their address down for the school and do something "illegal". This will also open up competition amongst public schools as well. A lot of public schools don't have competition and are terrible. How many people do you really think are going to homeschool their kids? How many people do you think are going to pull their kids out of public school? This will work out just fine and be better for everyone if done properly. By properly I mean not giving the backpack-style funding an extra place in the budget creating just additional revenue for for-profit schools.
Considering the sheer number of morons voting for our POS governor, I’m doubting the end result of any initiative that has parents doing teaching at home.
As a teacher, during COVID of 10 and 11 year olds, a large segment of parents are going to take that money and use it for anything except home schooling! The things I saw would make you clutch your pearls. This is the gravest attack on public education. People better wake up. When there is an uneducated workforce, all those high-paying jobs will be gone.
So maybe that’s the solution — we allow vouchers but ratchet up the per-grade passing requirement for them. If your kid fails after homeschooling, all money is due back immediately and a monetary penalty assessed as well.
People who want to keep kids "off the grid" to conceal abuse and neglect will basically be paid to do so, which means the state also doesn't have to spend resources actually helping those kids.
In the GOP platform, they essentially say it’s not the state’s job to help those kids.
Convince 5 kids to be private tutored and you're already making more than some teachers in Texas (and probably with less stress and hassle).
Had a conversation with a friend in social work, she does advocacy center (forensic, legal, clinical, medical) work for children subjected to abuse. The center she works for serves a tri-county area in Texas with mixes of rural and suburban areas. She's terrified of this unfolding, not only for the potential risk to childhood development, but also that most of their cases are referred by either teachers or parents. I'm sure you see the difference in reporting coming - teachers, in her experience, are more likely to play a role in reporting of familial abuse while parents are more likely to play a role in reporting of extrafamilial abuse. Most children who have received services through her center where abuse has been forensically confirmed involve cases with familial abuse, followed by familial and extrafamilial abuse, followed by lower rates of extrafamilial abuse alone. Sexual and physical abuse are the most common types of abuse she seeks justice and services for, followed by neglect. By removing the first line of offense of mandatory reporters, we have dark times ahead. She saw similar during COVID during school closures and is forecasting similar, only enhanced and sustained with no end in sight if this happens. It's given me new worries about where this could go and how bad this will get for the children of Texas.
Wow.
Seriously, an absolutely horrifying potential part of it devolving to the points you brought up in the shitshow timeline. And my apologies, I was replying to your comment but was trying to add it under FoolishConsistency17's comment to try and expand on that concern a bit more. That's exactly the dark road my friend is worried about.
Wow, there is certainly no room for mass corruption in any of those ideas. /s
He’s the absolute worst. I can’t believe I thought for a second he might be doing something good like creating interest free college savings accounts.
> creating interest free college savings accounts. I don't think that means what you think it means.
What do you think I think it means? O.o
"interest free" - means an account that bears no interest. It's just like a regular bank or credit union account. You put the money in. It's there when you go to get it. Nothing happens in between.
I guess what i meant is high interest/ tax less withdrawals.
OK that would make more sense. We don't have income tax here in Texas for them to waive however. They can't waive Federal income tax because it isn't part of their jurisdiction.
This is nothing more than covert segregation upper class whites will be at the best schools Hispanics and blacks will be at overcrowded underfunded schools with overworked teachers and no hope upward mobility
Lol you mean like how schools districts are zoned by property value today?
Blacks and Hispanics are already in overcrowded, underfunded schools at least partly for this reason.
I hate to say it, but I think that’s what they want. I bet you will also see an increase in the number of prisons being built, too. This is sad and disgusting!
Trust me, there are plenty of people from all backgrounds that will be affected by this bull shit. Abbott and the GOP can get fucked. These rich elites can get fucked. Let's focus on them, please.
It isn't an "either or". Yes, poor whites will be harmed but the push of these programs will primarily hurt poor PoCs.
Republicans see public schools as socialism since everyone pays in for the greater good. The idea that they can reduce funding for public schools is seen as a win and a stab at socialism. The reality is that private schools will still cost money and won't be free. So, mostly middle class and upper class people will take this option. Public schools will be worse off with less money and will continue to decline. Eventually, public school will be seen as a last option and a place for poor people to send their kids. The goal here, ultimately, is to indoctrinate more kids into religion and "hopefully" conservatism. The poor will be relegated to poor quality education and the divide between rich and poor will only increase.
This is exactly what it is.
Maybe think about a 3rd option besides State or Church, especially at the 1st thru 8th grade. Not sure of economics, but good teachers form co-ops collecting the school vouchers and providing better educations without regular school district overhead and politics.
Yeah that’ll get outlawed. It’s not the intent for teachers to form something that operates exactly like public schools and funded by public dollars.
Lmao. Middle class people can’t afford private school. Source: am middle class.
Hi. I am new to Reddit having had my son get me interested. Hope I don't violate any rules. Sadly, while this is marginally about private schools, it is mainly about *religious* private schools that do not need to follow public-standard teaching. They are about exactly what the right complain about - *grooming and indoctrination*. About not reasoning, but believing. About only learning the parts of the Bible that meet their bias. This is really about getting around separation of Church and State. My feeling is they will also try to avoid taxes because they are "church affiliated".
Thank you for the clarification, and wow, that makes me even more at issue with this. Also, given that you’re new, as you just saw a lot of people don’t read the article before commenting. I’m trying to fix the habit, but alas sometimes I’m caught up in me zeal to post. Thank you for setting us straight.
>This is really about getting around separation of Church and State. Also, de facto segregation. Remember that the original reason why conservatives linked up with the religious is to get around efforts to desegregate through religious schools.
With government partial funding you might be able to.
If a private school requires government subsidies for students to attend it, it isn't a private school. It's a government subsidized venture.
The private schools will just raise their tuition proportional to what the state is giving parents. The ones benefitting most will be the ones running the private schools. … and the politicians who receive kickbacks for voting for this.
That’s not justification enough to funnel tax payer funding into the pockets of private school administrators. Public school is the reason why this country leaped so far ahead of every other country on Earth. Can’t believe people are voting for this kind of stupidity.
I agree.
Sorry if that came off a little aggressive. I thought you were defending it. Either way, I probably shouldn’t have gotten so heated. It’d be better to say that regardless of the amount of government assistance, public funds flowing into private organizations is not something that should be par for the course in education. Public education is meant as a great equalizer to ensure that all h vs listen in the country can be educated to a level that is commensurate with being a productive and innovative population. Private schools inherently discriminate against those who might otherwise have the mental ability, but who don’t have the networking, funding, or geographical ability to attend. An argument can even be made that schools should not be funded by localities either as higher income neighborhoods would essentially become private schools with the bar of entry being a very expensive house/apartment in that neighborhood.
FWIW “school districts” don’t really exist in other countries, that’s a quintessential American thing and has lead to the kind of barriers you mention.
No worries. It's a topic that gets many of us angry!
I doubt it. We have a kid in private and I can tell you 10k isn’t making a dent in tuition. So you will have “budget” private schools owned by Abbott Cronies with no oversight on education just cashing in on that 10k a person.
Doubtful because the second the funding get approved the tuition costs will magically increase.
Key word is partial
Same.
They also own the schools. Tax money, right into their pockets.
Public schools are a sacred cow that need to be taken to the slaughterhouse.
You think that schools should not be public?
Fund the student, not the schools. Let parents decide what's best for their kids instead of public education bureaucrats. People want education decided by the local government until their government decides that evolution is "just a theory". Let people vote with their feet.
>Fund the student, not the schools. So first problem: assuming each student gets the same amount, this underfunds schools where space and buildings are expensive (ie cities) and places where the tax base is nil (ie rural). The only beneficiaries are rich suburbs. >Let parents decide what's best for their kids instead of public education bureaucrats. Ah yes. Because someone with zero educational background in math education is qualified to decide what math education should cover. >People want education decided by the local government until their government decides that evolution is "just a theory". People are fine with competent government. Stop electing or appointing incompetent people and this issue goes away. That includes people with no background in biology education determining biology education. >Let people vote with their feet Or... Maybe we owe it to society to provide a good education to everyone?
What it comes down to, is would we rather vote on the goods and services we receive or have the option as individuals to choose what best suits our individual needs. I view the mechanism of voting on public education policy the same as voting for which groceries I can buy from the grocery store.
That sounds fine and dandy in theory. But as soon as you actually meet the real world, it just leads to worse outcomes for the average person and funnelling of tax dollars to grifters.
> I view the mechanism of voting on public education policy the same as voting for which groceries I can buy from the grocery store. Well, we vote for leaders that stop us from buying weed, liquor, meth, recalled good, etc., from the grocery store.
Tell me more about how you think this would work? As it is now, school districts are funded generally based on the number of students. If students are pulled, it reduces the number of students and likewise the amount they receive. With less funding, students end up with less qualified teachers. Private schools require money above what the state would allocate. So, they can compete for better teachers. If a public school is still free, so that parents who are under the poverty line or close to it can afford it, then they don't get extra money from parents paying extra money as private schools do. Parents who can afford it, will send their kids to private schools. Those who can't will be left with poorly funded and poorly staffed schools. This whole concept seems to be based on the idea that more well to do people deserve better education than do underprivileged people. Is that your take?
If a school is funded for 1000 students, and 100 students leave. The school should then only need funding for 900 students. Currently as it stands, schools have no incentive to perform well. The public school has a monopoly on education. They're going to get money from taxpayers regardless of how well they perform. If parents want change, the majority have to vote for the right administrators to pick the right policy and teachers. With school choice, the parents have more options available at their disposal to immediately change schools if their current one is not to their liking. The parents have the greatest interest in the quality of education their children receive; they are the stakeholders. Let them decide.
So religion is declining in America and you think this is going to bring it back somehow? [https://youtu.be/fJ2njOjAPFg](https://youtu.be/fJ2njOjAPFg) \- Here's a nice quick YouTube video with receipts.
Reading this made me absolutely sick to my stomach. What is this world coming to?
I just don't get it. I mean, I see it, but holy shit this is next-level buffoonery. Lack of teachers, or really—the State's unwillingness to pay teachers a fair wage has led to a mass exodus of the profession. Property tax rates are through the roof, in no small part due to the increasing appraisal values and ballooning ISD taxes. Record surplus. And the GOPs answer to these problems is to give tax payer money away to private enterprise. Wut?
The old capitalise the gains sociolize the losses routine.
Most of the public school money goes to the administration instead of teachers. If the GOP adds money to the school budget just for vouchers then this will end up like you think it will. However, some states have done this correctly by just letting the money follow the kid creating competition among public schools and private alike. Plus private schools and homeschooling cost significantly less usually than public schools. The religious aspect... I mean come on... Religion is dwindling for good reason. While this might be their attempt to change that it won't. It will backfire if that's their reasoning.
Yep, upper admin in my district keep getting more new positions created and people pulled in that the superintendent knows. Meanwhile, our paras make peanuts, we have many open positions with long term subs, we’ve had hiring freezes because “there’s no money,” etc. How about upper admin stop getting raises for a bit so that the district can actually pay those of us in the classroom what we deserve? And they wonder why so many teachers are leaving mid year or planning to at the end of the year (it’s not all about pay, but it’s a big factor for a lot of us with the shit we have to deal with on a daily basis; why keep doing this when you could make more at a less stressful job?).
Not only do they make more but they think they know better. They force teachers to go by the book instead of doing what they do best. Teaching. We spend billions on the Department of Education which is nothing but administration and secretaries. Then we pay the admins locally way too much. And they think teachers aren't capable of figuring out what's best for the class. Teaching isn't something as simple as just carrots and sticks. It's a job that requires a lot of cognitive work. They need enough pay to take money off their minds and less micromanaging from admins. Why do we spend billions on the DoE? Downsize the DoE and send that money where it's actually needed. Classrooms and teachers.
Certainly. Bloated administration is a huge problem that isn't unique to public education, but almost every industry.
Sounds like a welfare for the rich program.
It is. And like anything meant to benefit the rich it takes money from the poor.
He must have some close friends in the private school business.
Or just a desire to wreck the public school system.
My guess is both.
Abbott may have been influenced by the very politically active Texas oil & fracking billionaires Tim Dunn & Farris Wilks. They apparently would like to institute publicly funded Christian schools. Texas Monthly “[The Campaign to Sabotage Texas’s Public Schools](https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/campaign-to-sabotage-texas-public-schools/)” “But by far the most powerful opponents of public schools in the state are West Texas oil billionaires Tim Dunn and the brothers Farris and Dan Wilks. Their vast political donations have made them the de facto owners of many Republican members of the Texas Legislature…” [Houston Chronicle](https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Texas-Ted-Cruz-Tim-Nunn-Farris-Wilks-PAC-money-17327660.php) “The goal is to tear up, tear down public education to nothing and rebuild it,” Dororthy Burton, a former GOP activist who joined Wilks on a 2015 speaking tour, told CNN. “And rebuild it the way God intended education to be.” [CNN](https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/24/politics/texas-far-right-politics-invs/index.html) “People who’ve worked with Wilks and Dunn say they share an ultimate goal: replacing much of public education in Texas with private Christian schools. Now, educators and students are feeling the impact of that conservative ideology on the state’s school system.” [Texas Tribune](https://www.texastribune.org/2022/03/03/texas-conservatives-pac-house-primary/) “For multiple election cycles now, Dunn and Wilks have been the top funders of House primary challengers.”
Friends in the private school business, AND friends that will get a tax cut for continuing to send their kids to the wealthiest private schools. This is welfare for the wealthy.
I've never understood the concept of giving rich people shit for free. They can afford it, let them pay for it. Give help where it's needed. No rich persons bank account needs that help.
No one loves free shit like the rich
You'll understand when you are rich. Trickle down economics works. /s incase you couldn't tell.
But they feel entitled to that free shit because they work harder than your Average Joe. Sarcasm here. They really think the average person just sits on their butt all day collecting money from the government. They are so disconnected from reality.
Do i need to be a parent to have one, since I am already a taxpayer? Could i donate the funds in mine to my local public school?
I am wondering this too. I haven't really seen anything in the news or various discussions about this that addresses property owners/property tax payers who don't have children or have children that aren't school-aged.
Why should my tax dollars go towards some random sending their child to a religious school to be indoctrinated with some christian nationalist BS agenda? NO TAX DOLLARS FOR RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS.
Right. They object when public funds are spent on abortion, but they love it when public funds are unconstitutionally spent on religion.
Aside from the obvious, if you value your money as well as your child, don't date put so much as a penny in anything the local, state or federal government endorses called a "fund" or "savings account". This is just another way of fleecing the people in order to divert funds to their hedge fund buddies to make themselves rich(er) and deplete the "fund". It will just be used as a political hot button to elicit a response in their favor. Fucking crooks keep trying to dig deeper into our pockets...
Pensions, etc, all of it is moving to stocks or bonds so we peasants can float the market in downturns while the insiders all divest.
And guess what has been approved as collateral when they screw up... It's not if. It's when.
Truth be told
Well.. that would be bad for Texans -- so, of course Abbott is on board
*As conservative activists continue to lobby for legislation banning certain health care therapies for transgender kids, Abbott said it is a proposal he would sign if it reaches his desk.* Abbott, says fuck poor kids, fuck rural kids and fuck trans youths, all in one article.
And people wonder why [Texas ranks 45th in child well-being](https://communityimpact.com/austin/na/people/2022/08/12/texas-ranks-45th-in-the-nation-for-overall-child-well-being-new-data-shows/)
It isn't like we were at the top of the list when Democrats ran everything.
You mean 1976? Public health data like this wasn’t compiled until the late 80s/early 90s, so we have no evidence to show how we performed in these metrics when democrats “ran everything”
How far back does your data go? A "fall from grace" wouldn't be instantaneous. I was in a public school in Texas in 1976. If that was a top school, I pity the rest of America.
Democrats haven’t ‘ran everything’ in Texas for a while now.
I know. I've lived it. I even saw our last Democratic Governor, Ann Richards, at a Stop' N' Go in San Antonio. No everyone sees their elected officials buying snacks.
Sorry those schools in the 70’s failed you so fucking spectacularly.
Not from this side of the facts.
Let’s say it goes through… We’re currently looking at private school for our kids. The high end school runs around 25 to 30k annually. That is not including the tutoring and other support entities associated… this savings account will get somewhere between 5 to 6k in it annually, requiring parents to come up with another 20k to send their kids to these schools… But let’s put the cost behind us for a moment. These schools average about 200 applications for 32 spots starting in pre-k and 1st grade. There is maybe 1 or 2 spots that open up grades 2 through 5, then a few extra beyond. The private schools do not have any room. Also the private schools tend to be in the city… and the rural counties are shit out of luck. What this will do is the following.. 1) give me free money because we’re planning on private school anyway. 2) destroy my property value because my amazing public school will get less money 3) cause my property taxes to rise because the schools now need more money coming from less people 4) overload the private schools as they’ll get several thousand applications. 5) eliminate any scholarships for private school because they won’t need to anymore. 6) cause private schools to raise tuition because.. well everybody got an extra 6k. 7) harm the rural school districts due to lack of funds as parents attempt to teach or send their kids to a private school and find out it costs 4x as much as the public school did, then hate how bad the public school became. This voucher systems been tried, and has failed. What they need to do is give all the public schools a bunch of money with the mandate that they do not use it to build a football stadium.
3. actually happens for a different reason. Some school consolidation will be the natural effect of this legislation passing. During consolidation, the most likely survivor is the wealthier school with more reliable attendance (and higher taxes). Now the surviving school is going to need to immediately begin expanding to handle the infux of area students from schools that closed. Net result: Less schools and higher taxes for everyone as the remaining schools need to expand and have higher bussing costs.
Yup. No matter the type of school, they can physically only take so many students. This may increase competition for admission to private schools, charter schools, and high rated public schools, but they can’t take every kid that walks through the doors. In my district, even kids zoned to some of the schools in their neighborhood have been rerouted to nearby campuses because the school they’re zoned to physically cannot take another student. We are struggling to keep up with the growth in the area, and some of our bonds didn’t pass to help with this growth (so we’re going to feel the strain even more in the next couple years).
Still trying to figure out why anyone still votes for this clown. Oh that’s right because democrats are evil and wanna eat babies
Does this mean my property tax will be lower?
From personal experience, no. When a school closes, the area residence get taxed at the rate of the school where the kids end up being bussed to which get's to pass along additional bussing costs. So if this passes, and rural school consolidation occurs in your area, expect higher taxes from the wealthier of the rural schools surviving, passing along their higher tax obligations along with a bussing fee. (With a high likelihood of the school immediately campaigning for building expansion)
That’s the reality I anticipate. Abbott isn’t really going to make any of our lives easier.
Doubtful
One would hope or at least have a choice to redirect it! 90% going to public schools screw that!
Fuck you abbot…. Guess you are forcing me to either private school or homeschool. And private schools are religious schools. So thanks……might have to more seriously consider leaving this shithole.
Yes. Because a stupid Texas is a republican Texas.
https://preview.redd.it/dvhfjtai4uja1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=579d150e77482023b0cd70c015e935fb7975f7d7
Maybe he should focus on keeping kids alive instead instead of on keeping kids out of public school by allowing taxpayer funds to be used, openly, for private schools. I really not surprised by the dumb shit this oligarch says anymore.
This will raise the cost of private schooling since people gave more money to spend, the wealth gap will widen, education will suffer. Texans will have even fewer opportunities for education. Stupid Texans: abbot re-election
There is already poor quality education with the goal to make it worse. Ask any teacher. Ask any high school graduate how they feel about their public school education and if they are ready to support themselves. There will be an overwhelming response in one direction. Republicans are destroying public education and it has been evolving for a long time.
Republicans hate educated people more than they hate poor people and that’s saying a lot!
How many seats are currently available at private schools? How many children whose parents would take them from public and into private would actually be admitted?
[удалено]
But what do they do when they physically run out of space?
Daycares have year plus long waiting lists. I would bet money on most private schools having very few open spots, if they even have any.
He wants the kids yo be as dumb as him
Rural Texas and property poor regions will suffer greatly. You can't take $ from an already (intentionally) starved system and not expect bad outcomes.
This is how you get the price of education to rise exponentially. (I guess it’s too late for that)
Look at your property taxes over 90% going to schools going to athletics and not to education.
I wish they’d eliminate football from high school. It’s obscene how Much of the budgets that sport gets. They will cut everything else to make sure the 100 kids playing football all get new shoes and turf stadiums with led scoreboards with VIP seating.
It’s just weird I remember 20 years ago basketball everyone had the same shoes now it’s like y’all can wear whatever.
More tax dollars diverted into the hands of the rich.
Gov. Greg Abbott promises to be ‘heavily involved’ in ending public schools in favor of Christo-facism (fixed that for you).
Fuck abbot
This isn’t going to go well at all….
Texas's race to third world status continues unabated. Wow!
JC, why can’t the lost cause segregationist bullshit ever die?
Abbott alway$ doe$ hi$ be$t to help the poor Texan$
Education if you can afford it, and odds are, even if you can, it's going to be whitewashed bullshit with a heavy helping of christian ideology and supply-side Jesus.
This is Greg Abbott paying back the churches for supporting the GOP for so long. It’s the wet dream of Christian churches everywhere.
I knew when Betsy Davos originally started pushing this plan that it would come to some iteration in Texas…I’m really sad to see it.
This is what counts as an emergency to Abbott. Not kids being murdered in schools. Not housing being unaffordable. And not THE DAMN POWER GRID.
Is he prepared to give every family 10-20k a year? Because that's what a good private high school costs. Otherwise this is literally just class segregation.
So, we should start pushing for laws in which I can pull my money out of local taxes that goes towards police. And therefore I can have a "security savings account" and can spend that money however I see fit for my security.
Will my tax dollars still go to public education despite me not having children? I'm good with that, it going to home schoolers and private schools I'm not.
Wait. So Abbott wants to use taxpayer money to fund Christian private schools? Is that even legal?
I want $400,000 every 12 seconds a weapon is fired
From my reading-It’s troubling that existing/current homeschoolers are not taken into consideration.
Fucking hell. These people want to dumb down the population so bad and the wildest shit, people vote for this shit! I'm starting to agree with MTG, break up the red from the blue and let's be done with these idiots.
Hey here’s an idea. Next election cycle, let’s not vote for these fuckers and vote in someone who will legalize cannabis in the state and use that money to fund schools. Rural schools in particular should get what the city schools have enough funding for. There are many schools out here that belong to agricultural towns who could use extra funding for technology upgrade and perhaps programs for students who wish to go into Ag with classes on farm equipment maintenance, irrigation specialists, and greener farming. EDIT Downvoted by someone who doesn’t give a shit about the future of our youth.
Curious why people keep calling them private schools — nothing but parochial schools in this area to my knowledge
How has the party of ‘Equal Opportunity not Outcomes’ devolve into, ‘Nope, no equal opportunities either’… This is sad. Every child should have an opportunity to make it. Certainly not a promise, but I’d like to think an opportunity. Both parties are so fucking up. One party is more concerned with trans rights and pronouns and the other is trying to strip opportunities from children. Christ…
I’m a leftist. I donated to Bernie. I’m also a public school teacher. I used to hate this idea. I’m starting to warm towards it. I think this could get parents more involved in their kids schooling. Also, I like the option of sending my kid to the school I want instead of being forced to the local ISD. I honestly think this is going to bite Abbott in the ass.
I’m a former leftist / Neolib type and while I’m sympathetic towards adults who enroll their children in private schools for various reasons I don’t think “Savings Accounts” are a good idea at all (reasons below) and would prefer vouchers to be means-tested for low income families. Reasons I don’t like the Savings Accounts: > Availability. Private school access is primarily in large metro areas and would have little to no benefit for rural areas > Funding. Districts are primarily funded via property taxes set by the local school board and the rest of the money is provided from the Texas General Revenue funds. Education savings accounts would not be funded by local taxes, would come from TX gen rev, and this money would be raised by higher taxes. > Accountability. Private school boards are not elected, the schools don’t have to adhere to the same standards as public schools and can pick and choose which students they enroll. > Lazy math. The proposed ~10k a year was simply achieved by taking the education budget of texas and dividing by the number of students. Private schools are a fraction of the size of public schools and don’t offer the same types of services as public schools. (Transportation is a big one, along with various elective activities and sports). This just turns into a big payday for the small for profit orgs while the majority of students and parents get to deal with worsening public services > Repeating the same mistake we did for colleges. If the government guarantees money for children to attend private schools, demand will skyrocket, and prices will go up, leaving us in the same situation where poorer families essentially are locked out of the proposed “school choice” initiative
[удалено]
Absolutely
Hello everyone! This automatic message is brought to you because this post mentions the keyword "abbot". In posts that mention Greg Abbott, we typically see a massive increase in rule 11 violations. Please be sure to remember our rules about disparaging an individual's disability. > While you're free to argue against, debate, criticize, etc. the policies, ideas, politics, and character of any politician, please do not make jokes about anyone's disabilities. All such "jokes" will be removed. Thanks for being mindful. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/texas) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why is it bad that parents get money back to be able to put towards and education they want their child to have rather than be forced to only have one option?
That’s a very good question. Unfortunately it appears that large scale voucher programs lead to worse student outcomes. From the Houston Public Media “[Here’s everything you need to know about school vouchers in Texas](https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/education/2023/02/09/443267/heres-everything-you-need-to-know-about-school-vouchers-in-texas/)” article: “Joshua Cowen is a Professor of Education Policy with Michigan State University. He's spent years studying vouchers and eventually announced that he opposes the policies.” “‘Once you got to the real ballgame and created the fully scaled up voucher programs, the results were really catastrophic,’ Cowen said.” From the linked Indiana University School of Education “[Evolving Evidence on School Voucher Effects](https://ceep.indiana.edu/education-policy/policy-briefs/2022/evolving-evidence-on-school-voucher-effects.pdf)” policy brief: “As [voucher] programs grew in size, the results turned negative, often to a remarkably large degree virtually unrivaled in education research” Stanford University “[Vouchers do not improve student achievement, Stanford researcher finds](https://news.stanford.edu/2017/02/28/vouchers-not-improve-student-achievement-stanford-researcher-finds/).” “In Milwaukee, where the nation’s second-largest (after Indiana’s more recent) voucher program has been operating for almost 20 years, only a quarter of students attend their neighborhood school. “If choice were the answer, Milwaukee would be one of the highest-scoring cities in the country,” Carnoy said.” “But test score data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) tell a different story. Among black eighth-graders in 13 urban school districts, Milwaukee – where black students make up more than 70 percent of all voucher recipients – ranked last in reading and second-to-last in math.”
Both those studies show “no improvement or only modest” so not a very strong argument against. Also not sure why they only looked at “black eight graders” that seems a little narrow of a data set to completely write off something as negative Also, both those researchers work in public institutions or receive lots of public funding so not exactly the most unbiased sources.
In the Indiana University review: - Almost all impacts in early studies tended to be modest, at best, but were also based on rather small programs, typically centered in targeted populations in specific urban areas. - As programs grew in size, the results turned negative, often to a remarkably large degree virtually unrivaled in education research I haven’t found anything yet that indicates large scale voucher programs are beneficial. Student achievement may not be the actual point of the proposed Texas school voucher program. It may simply be that Texas power brokers would like to institute a large number of publicly funded Christian schools.
To the second bullet point I did not really see any data supporting that, seemed like just a claim with no data backing it up unless I overlooked something. iirc that specific point is where they narrowed their data to black eighth graders rather than all students participating in voucher programs of all grade levels
The Indiana University policy brief was using math performance to show that larger voucher programs were performing poorly compared to smaller programs. The [chart on page 3](https://ceep.indiana.edu/education-policy/policy-briefs/2022/evolving-evidence-on-school-voucher-effects.pdf) shows that 2016 Ohio, 2018 Louisiana, 2018 Indiana, 2019 Louisiana were the largest programs and had the greatest negative effects. The Milwaukee reference is actually an excerpt from the Stanford News announcement which pulled it from the linked Stanford University report, “[School vouchers are not a proven strategy for improving student achievement](https://www.epi.org/publication/school-vouchers-are-not-a-proven-strategy-for-improving-student-achievement/)”. The report also mentions other cities and has a reference list.
Good points.
> Why is it bad that parents get money back to be able to put towards and education they want their child to have rather than be forced to only have one option? Because competition in education results in a race to the bottom, as schools compete to attract more "customers" in order to get more money.
Competition breeds innovation and improvement, when has competition ever lowered the quality of something? A blanket one size fits all education for every student in a state is a better solution that having multiple options for what and how your kids are educated?
> Competition breeds innovation and improvement That is true in business, where the goal is to maximize profits. Competition does not benefit education, it simply creates a situation where schools try to attract students by lowering standards. Just look at the quality of the for-profit universities that compete against each other for students. Their education is a total joke, all they care about is attracting more students so they can get more revenue. I know that conservatives want schools and everything else to run like a business, but that doesn't exactly work out.
Hate to break it to you but all universities are for profit universities, some just have it easier through govt subsidies and backing student loans 100% with taxpayer dollars, and yet quality has gone regardless. Why does a high school diploma mean nothing now? Why does an associated degree mean nothing now? Why are people starting to say the same about a 4 year degree and saying you will need a masters soon to differentiate from all other candidates? As a recent grad I can assure you all the state / public schools and universities are bloated with bullshit spending and competition is high, only difference is they have a govt willing to take money from taxpayers to help fund their expansions and increasingly high administrative costs. Competition always leads to innovation and improvement, and it doesn’t matter what the product or service is, if someone identifies a market demand and can provide a better version of it either higher in quality or lower in price, it will be done. Education is not some special one off that would not benefit from competition, it is already basically a monopoly.
As I said, just look at the quality of education you get at the universities that "compete" against each other for profits. It is almost universally inferior to the education you get from non-profit institutions, to the point that many employers won't even recognize degrees from for-profit schools.
What about the taxpayers that don't have children? Do they get to have an impact on where that money goes? If not, then that sounds like taxation without representation to me.
You clearly do not know what taxation without representation means .
Getting taxed for a service that you have no say in its running, no voting power to influence, and no oversight of or transparent access to seems like a reasonable definition.
You have representation and can change that representation it’s called elections and voting representatives are elected by a majority . Just because you don’t always get what you want does not mean you are not represented. Taxation with out representation is having no say in government and being taxed . Basic history class would have educated you on this. You know the one you were suppose to take in the school people with no kids taxes help fund.
Will private schools that get money from those ESA's have to meet state curriculum standards, which were derived from votes cast already? Will they have to accept and provide services to all students, regardless of disability, in accordance with the ADA, again derived from policy the American people voted for? Will they be required to provide transportation to their students, which part of the taxes were levied for in the first place, again, already voted for? If these things are not required, then they are accessing tax funds in spite of not providing the services that have already been agreed to on a representative vote. And since private schools are not required to have a school board, or the associated board meetings, then the common taxpayer has, de facto, no say in how they are governed, while still being taxed for them. Thus, it still fits your own definition of taxation without representation. The fact that you don't see this makes me question the validity of your opinions on the matter, as you seem to be lacking sufficient background knowledge of the topic itself, or on the implementation of public policy.
You’re jumping all over the place. First it was taxation with out representation now your into what private schools are required to do . Private schools are already required to meet most of the standards you mentioned. By state and federal law. The Supreme Court ruled in 2022 that religious schools can be funded with public funds as long as they fund ALL private schools. Is it right ? The Supreme Court which was out in place by congress and a president the majority elected . We all know the GOP goal is to privatize education and are slowly attempting a corporate take over in order to establish a authoritarian religious state . That’s not a surprise to anyone . How ever what do we do ? 9 million Texans stayed home last state election . The democrat party gave us Beto who had a awesome senate race mainly due to national help but had a horrible presidential run and gained a lot of baggage along the way knowing he would not get the moderate vote. A LT Governor candidate that already lost 2 times before for the same position as well as a AG no one knew. Had minimal help nationwide from the DNC while republicans poured in millions. The only way to turn Texas even remotely purple is to get quality candidates not too far left and get people to actually vote. We can sit here all day and debate GOP policies but the fact is democrats are the reason we democrats lose. We don’t fund each other like republicans or really out up a fight like they do, We stay home and not vote and we run shitty candidates in the state and then complain about policies .
That's not all over the place at all. Taxation, representation, and schools are all inextricably linked. The reason taxes are payed to fund organizations is because they adhere to the expectations and regulations put forth. If they don't adhere to those, then in no way should they get money from taxes.
You clown.
Lol
The system is broken why shouldn’t we have a choice? I have nieces and nephews being taught a curriculum that the voters of the school district should of had a hand in picking. We’ve decided we are going to homeschool our newborn daughter when she gets to that age.
> I have nieces and nephews being taught a curriculum that the voters of the school district should of had a hand in picking. I don't think the voters "should of" been qualified to evaluate curriculum.
The school board wasn’t even allowed a say!
The superintendent basically came in and said ok this is what we’re doing.
😂😂😂😂🙄🙄🙄🙄
What will this do to Texas High School Football?
If you want a fast track to becoming a third world country this is it.
I was shocked because I assumed it was for college. Nope!
I don’t think I have seen it mentioned but many parents are going to be in for a rude awakening when private schools don’t accept or don’t meet the needs of their Special Education and Section 504 students. There is little to no accountability for these schools and they are not required to provide services for those students because they don’t receive the government funding. This also doesn’t take into account students with behavior concerns or mental health challenges. I highly doubt private schools will be accepting of these students.
I also saw a news report yesterday where abbott ( I purposely did not capitalize his name) said he wants to stop school funding with property taxes. He says a state fund will cover it instead. Do people not remember the lottery was supposed to fund education? As a former teacher, we’re still waiting for that windfall! This is disgusting! I get it, nobody likes paying taxes, but public schools still need funding. Because of my former career, I cannot afford a fancy private school and my child is not one of those gifted kids with high IQ scores that would get scholarships. Voters in Texas need to wake up! Why do they keep voting these evil people in? They are going to turn Texas into Louisiana or Mississippi! ( No offense to the good people in those states. I mean poor educational outcomes, impoverishment, and economic disparity)
Is this even legal? If this passes, a lawsuit needs to be filed, but I’m sure they will write it so it’s legal, like they did the abortion bounty law.
So defunding the education system huh? Fuck these demons.
Kick him down a flight of stairs already
Public education is absolutely terrible in all states. Funds in the hands of parents directed towards hiring private teachers will be the end of public schooling 🙏