Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to date on top Texas news.
A bill has been approved in Texas that would create a program to allow parents to use state funds to pay for private schools — a longtime conservative goal, a prime cause for Governor Greg Abbott in this legislative session and a major concern for public education advocates. The Senate on Thursday is one step closer to the House vote.
The bill now moves to the House of Representatives for a committee hearing, where it is expected to face stiff opposition. The Senate vote came the same day the House approved a budget amendment opposing school vouchers — the first indication of the difficult road ahead for the proposal.
Senate Bill 8, by Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, by 18-13 votes along party lines. Sen. Robert Nichols, a Jacksonville Republican, was the only Republican to vote against him.
“We have a commitment to giving Texas students more choice,” Creighton said in his bill. “It empowers parents to make decisions for better outcomes.”
The Senate also voted unanimously on accompanying legislation, Senate Bill 9, which will give a one-time bonus of $2,000 to teachers and a one-time bonus of $6,000 to those in districts with fewer than 20,000 students. It also identifies funding for schools to create residency programs to better prepare teachers. The bill received preliminary approval by a vote of 22-9.
The bill was unpopular with teachers’ groups, who said teachers deserved a pay increase, or at least a higher one-off bonus to offset inflation.
SB 8, also a priority for Lt. Dan Patrick, would create an educational savings account program, which would give parents who opt out of the public school system up to $8,000 in taxpayer money per student each year. This money can be used to pay for a child’s private education and other educational expenses, such as textbooks or tutoring.
SB 8 will also severely restrict classroom lessons, campus activities, and teacher guidance about sexual orientation and gender identity in public schools and charter schools through Grade 12—with very limited exceptions. Creighton previously told The Texas Tribune that the bill bundles education savings accounts and these restrictions together because the parents he spoke with view these issues as “closely related.”
On the ground, Creighton faced questions about how the program protects taxpayer money from fraud, whether the state can hold private schools accountable for students’ test scores, and how the program can be considered every parent’s choice if private schools are not required to accept every child.
Sen. Boris Miles, D-Houston, said there haven’t been enough measures to make sure funds aren’t misused and to hold private schools accountable for test scores.
In response, Creighton said the comptroller would do an audit, and if fraud was found, the attorney general would take over the case. The bill also says that the state comptroller will have jurisdiction over the accounts, and a third-party vendor will distribute the funds directly to education providers that have been approved by the Texas Education Agency.
Creighton heard dozens of amendments that would have added accountability measures to his bill, such as requiring standardized testing, a tiered system of accountability like public schools, requiring private schools to admit all students like public schools, and requiring private schools to follow the same safety rules. Protocols and Public Schools. They all failed.
Creighton has repeatedly emphasized that private schools will operate independently and that parents will be the program’s best tool of accountability. He said private schools would not be subject to state tests.
The approved amendment extended eligibility for the program. Before Thursday, children attending private schools were not eligible for an education savings account, but now 10% of enrollment in the program — which would be about 62,000 students under the proposed funding — could consist of existing private school students if they meet a certain income threshold.
The bill’s approval in the Texas Senate on Wednesday came as no surprise. Patrick, the president of that chamber, has long been a supporter of voucher-like programs.
But the big question in this session was whether such a program would get enough votes in the House, where Democrats and rural Republicans banded together against any measure that would send public dollars to private schools.
The House budget vote is a bad omen for voucher programs
The House voted 86-52 in favor of the amendment against school vouchers after a failed effort by the Republican leadership to introduce it. The vote showed that any coupon proposal still faces an uphill battle in the House, even if support has increased in the past two years.
The amendment, introduced by Rep. Abel Herrero, D. Robestown, prohibits the use of state funds for “school vouchers or other similar programs.” The modification specifically named Education Savings Accounts.
Abbott traveled to the state for more than two months promoting school choice, pouring massive political capital into the push. His office did not immediately comment on the vote, and declined to respond to reporters’ questions at an unrelated press conference in Austin held shortly after the vote on the amendment.
With the issue so high profile, the House leadership sought to block the amendment when it was brought up Thursday afternoon. Representative Brad Buckley, chairman of the House Public Education Committee, made the case to bring up the amendment, saying the chamber was putting “the cart before the horse” given that his committee prepares to hear school choice bills Tuesday. But the Chamber denied his request for the schedule, 64-71, and proceeded to vote in favor of or against the amendment.
Buckley insisted on trying to stop the edit. He said he was “quite certain” his committee would have a “deep discussion” next week about school choice bills and then decide whether to bring any to the floor.
“I think we have to respect the process and make sure that the discussions are done in the right order so that we can have a good policy leaving this body,” Buckley said.
In the end, 24 Republicans joined Democrats to pass the amendment. Several members, including Buckley, decided to remain neutral, registering as “present, not voting”. Two other members of the Public Education Committee—Rep. Harold Dutton, D-Houston, and Cody Harris, R-Palestine—also voted this way.
During the debate over the amendment, Harris, along with Buckley, seemed to consider the measure premature. Harris asked Buckley if he thought “a budget is not the place to have this debate,” and Buckley said he agreed.
Buckley voted for a similar budget amendment opposing school vouchers during the 2021 legislative session. The amendment passed 115-29 at that time.
This time, there were 29 fewer votes in favor of the amendment and another 23 against. It is now opposed by twelve House Republicans who voted for the amendment in 2021.
While this is a positive shift towards the pro-voucher stance, it does show that the room is still well short of the 76 votes needed to pass any such legislation if it comes forward.
Find middle ground with opponents
Advocates of education savings accounts have framed them as a tool to give parents more choice when deciding how and where their children will be educated. but similar programs They faced stiff opposition from rural Democrats and Republicans because they feared they could take money from their local school districts. Since Texas funds school districts based on attendance, any student who leaves a school district will result in less money.
To appease rural lawmakers, SB 8 includes a provision for districts with fewer than 20,000 students to receive $10,000 for each child who enrolls in a savings account program and leaves their district. An amendment to the bill passed on Thursday extended the time period for provinces to receive the money from two years to five years. It’s not yet clear whether the additional funding for these counties will be enough to pass the legislation through the House, which has traditionally been more skeptical of voucher-like programs.
Rural school leaders say they remain opposed to any voucher-like program, no matter how long they remain fully funded. They worry that after provisioning expires, they will be expected to provide the same services for less dollars.
“Five years still has an expiration date, right?” said Michael Lee, executive director of the Texas Association of Country Schools, a group that advocates for the needs of small areas. “So you extend it three years, you still have the same problem.”
Lee said he would prefer the legislature to prioritize funding for school safety initiatives over the School Choice Program.
The total cost of the bill will be more than $500 million for the next two years. Creighton said the program will not affect public school finances because it will be paid for with money from the state’s General Revenue Fund rather than the Foundation School Program, the primary source of state funding for Texas school districts.
JA Gonzalez, superintendent of the McAllen Independent School District, said he opposes anything that would take money from public schools that are already struggling with declining enrollment.
“If you look at what’s best for a great country, it’s the financing of public institutions,” Gonzalez said.
Concerns about the impact on LGBTQ students
While SB 8 does not explicitly target LGBT people, opponents have raised concerns that the bill’s broad scope and vague language will prevent Texas schools from recognizing the community’s existence. During Thursday’s hearing, Democratic Senators Jose Mendez of San Antonio and Sarah Eckhart of Austin said the bill could also prevent students from learning about a wide range of issues — from the women’s suffrage movement, to the landmark marriage equality ruling, to the root cause for cervical cancer.
Mendez also attempted to make it clear during the hearing that Subcommittee Eight’s proposed restrictions would cover instruction and activities related to all identities, including gender identity and gender identity. But his modification is dead.
He said, “If we are going to prevent teachers from teaching any kind of gender identity, I think it should be applied equally.” “I would like to eliminate the double standards created in this law.”
Critics of SB 8 have also said that the legislation violates constitutional protections for students’ free speech, although Creighton insists that the bill targets teaching rather than student expression.
“The Supreme Court has been very clear that students not only can engage in speech, but they also have a First Amendment right to receive information… And so even one provision doesn’t save this law,” Brian Klosterbor, an ACLU attorney from Texas, told Tribune last month.
This provision of the bill is similar to Florida’s controversial ban that critics have called the “Don’t Say Like Me” law. Florida is also now looking forward to even its limitations From third grade to twelfth grade.
In addition, SB 8 requires that schools notify parents of any changes to “the mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being of their children.” During the hearing, Menendez sought an amendment that would prevent LGBTQ students from being forced by their parents, which could put them at risk of harm in the home. This effort failed.
In opposing the amendment, Creighton said, “I certainly respect the spirit and intent behind what Senator Menendez is bringing to us today.” “But the other provisions of the bill talk about keeping children safe and also what is appropriate and inappropriate between a teacher and students.”
Pooja Salhotra contributed to this story.
We can’t wait to welcome you September 21-23 to the 2023 Texas Tribune Festival, our multi-day celebration of big, bold ideas about politics, public policy, and today’s news—all happening just steps from the Texas Capitol Building. When tickets go on sale in May, Tribune members will be saving big. Donate to join or renew today.