School Choice/Vouchers etc.

[Goslin]

“School Choice”, “Voucher Program”, whatever folks want to call it.  It’s more than just Politics though the subject is sure being used by each “side” to browbeat the “other side”.  It’s more than just Local News because it affects the whole State.  Don’t know where else to start the thread.

TX Senate recently voted to pass their version of the Bill.  Yesterday the TX House demonstrated that they have the votes, (barely but they DO have the votes locked in), to pass their version.  So it’s gonna happen.  Thoughts?

[tvc184]

3 hours ago, Goslin said:

“School Choice”, “Voucher Program”, whatever folks want to call it.  It’s more than just Politics though the subject is sure being used by each “side” to browbeat the “other side”.  It’s more than just Local News because it affects the whole State.  Don’t know where else to start the thread.

TX Senate recently voted to pass their version of the Bill.  Yesterday the TX House demonstrated that they have the votes, (barely but they DO have the votes locked in), to pass their version.  So it’s gonna happen.  Thoughts?

Who knows?

It’s a hot button topic and the issue that may be left is the conference committee and if they can iron out the differences.

A bill cannot be engrossed and sent to the governor’s desk unless the Senate and House agree word for word on the compromise bill or even no compromise at all. One side could double down and just say take it or leave it.

With such a narrow vote (I think) I could see one house or the other standing firm. 

[AggiesAreWe]

2 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Who knows?

It’s a hot button topic and the issue that may be left is the conference committee and if they can iron out the differences.

A bill cannot be engrossed and sent to the governor’s desk unless the Senate and House agree word for word on the compromise bill or even no compromise at all. One side could double down and just say take it or leave it.

With such a narrow vote (I think) I could see one house or the other standing firm. 

IMO, something of this nature should be put on the ballot for the public to vote on. But the special interest groups don't want that.

[Goslin]

42 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

IMO, something of this nature should be put on the ballot for the public to vote on. But the special interest groups don't want that.

Folks have already said that.  The reply given is usually something along the lines of “We had primaries and an election last year and TX House members who were against the Vouchers were voted out and replaced by enough new pro-Voucher members to pass the legislation.”.

I’d prefer a statewide election myself but I’d also like a winning Powerball ticket and Baytown Lee Football strong enough again to make deep playoff runs year after year.  

[SmashMouth]

13 hours ago, AggiesAreWe said:

IMO, something of this nature should be put on the ballot for the public to vote on. But the special interest groups don't want that.

Agreed. I'm on the fence on the topic. But it should be put to public vote, in my opinion. I can definitely see some harm done to the public school system with vouchers.

[thetragichippy]

I've not done a lot of research since all my kids out of school and not a big priority for me.

So school choice means I can go to any school I want to drive to? Obviously I would want the "best school" for my kids, like everyone else, so does that over-populate one school turning it from best to not so good due to amount of students? 

Could it put together a best of the best high school football team?? 

Thoughts @bullets13?

[5GallonBucket]

I don’t like it

I believe Abbott has been bought as well His wife is on a private school committee/board. Grand kids go to private school.

 

[bullets13]

On 2/28/2025 at 11:35 AM, thetragichippy said:

I've not done a lot of research since all my kids out of school and not a big priority for me.

So school choice means I can go to any school I want to drive to? Obviously I would want the "best school" for my kids, like everyone else, so does that over-populate one school turning it from best to not so good due to amount of students? 

Could it put together a best of the best high school football team?? 

Thoughts @bullets13?

Lots of issues with it. Plenty of info out there, but I’ll just leave it at “I’m against it.”

[baddog]

To my understanding, this has been put on a ballot and voted down. This is one issue where Abbott loses me. 

[Goslin]

13 hours ago, baddog said:

To my understanding, this has been put on a ballot and voted down. This is one issue where Abbott loses me. 

“Vouchers” themselves have never been put to a statewide vote.  I imagine that if it was ever put to a vote, it would never pass.

Pro-Voucher folks say that the “Voucher Election” was last Nov when enough Pro-Voucher Republicans were elected as replacements for Anti-Voucher Republicans to get a Voucher Bill passed in the Statehouse.  This was achieved by first eliminating most anti-Voucher Republicans through the Primary process.

The Senate passed its version last week.  The House has signaled that it has the votes to pass its version.  There’s gonna be negotiation between the 2 Chambers over what the final Bill that lands on Abbott’s desk is gonna look like but Vouchers in some form are guaranteed to pass into law this year.

[baddog]

17 minutes ago, Goslin said:

“Vouchers” themselves have never been put to a statewide vote.  I imagine that if it was ever put to a vote, it would never pass.

Pro-Voucher folks say that the “Voucher Election” was last Nov when enough Pro-Voucher Republicans were elected as replacements for Anti-Voucher Republicans to get a Voucher Bill passed in the Statehouse.  This was achieved by first eliminating most anti-Voucher Republicans through the Primary process.

The Senate passed its version last week.  The House has signaled that it has the votes to pass its version.  There’s gonna be negotiation between the 2 Chambers over what the final Bill that lands on Abbott’s desk is gonna look like but Vouchers in some form are guaranteed to pass into law this year.

It’s hard to keep up with everything and I stand corrected. This bill isn’t fair to public schools.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, baddog said:

It’s hard to keep up with everything and I stand corrected. This bill isn’t fair to public schools.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

What in this article shows the bill isn’t fair to public schools?

All that I saw was a vote count from the House from two years ago.

 Is it the same bill from the previous session? What if anything was changed this session? 

Who gets the money, how much and under what conditions?

I have no opinion on vouchers because I have no clue what it is. I know basically it is to fund private schools for supposedly the underprivileged but as they say, the devil is in the details.

 What are the details?

[baddog]

I think taking away money from public schools isn’t fair.

[tvc184]

3 minutes ago, baddog said:

I think taking away money from public schools isn’t fair.

Every time a student transfers, the district loses money.

Every family that decides to homeschool causes the district to lose money.

What is fair about a 9th grader who can’t read at a 3rd grade level? 

What is the incentive for some schools to correct their abysmal performance? That is where standardized testing came from but it didn’t improve the system. It only highlighted the failures.

I am assuming that the threat of a district losing money might be that carrot in front of the horse.

You don’t want a district to lose money. Neither do I but I read the stats of failing schools and hate that more.

[LumRaiderFan]

35 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

Every time a student transfers, the district loses money.

Every family that decides to homeschool causes the district to lose money.

What is fair about a 9th grader who can’t read at a 3rd grade level? 

What is the incentive for some schools to correct their abysmal performance? That is where standardized testing came from but it didn’t improve the system. It only highlighted the failures.

I am assuming that the threat of a district losing money might be that carrot in front of the horse.

You don’t want a district to lose money. Neither do I but I read the stats of failing schools and hate that more.

Agree, if a school district fails to provide a safe productive environment for kids, they don’t deserve to keep money that someone could use in a better school system.

[AggiesAreWe]

If one thinks that their child is not getting the proper education at a school district, then you currently have that CHOICE to move your child to another school district. Don't need a voucher for that.

People have the CHOICE to enroll their kids in a private school. 

State dollars should not go to a private school.

Folks pushing this bill are campaigning that it's about school choice, which is not the case. You have a choice now.

[myrecordwashorrible]

1 hour ago, AggiesAreWe said:

If one thinks that their child is not getting the proper education at a school district, then you currently have that CHOICE to move your child to another school district. Don't need a voucher for that.

People have the CHOICE to enroll their kids in a private school. 

State dollars should not go to a private school.

Folks pushing this bill are campaigning that it's about school choice, which is not the case. You have a choice now.

Having been foolish enough to spend 4 years working in BISD, I knew many parents that would have loved a way put, but didn't have the means.

Also, having worked at 4 universities and knowing the absolute crap and political agenda that comes out of teacher certification programs, I am all for the vouchers. 

Do not like how it will definitely be manipulated for school athletic programs, but will live with those consequences. 

[AggiesAreWe]

12 minutes ago, myrecordwashorrible said:

Having been foolish enough to spend 4 years working in BISD, I knew many parents that would have loved a way put, but didn't have the means.

Also, having worked at 4 universities and knowing the absolute crap and political agenda that comes out of teacher certification programs, I am all for the vouchers. 

Do not like how it will definitely be manipulated for school athletic programs, but will live with those consequences. 

The voucher will still not provide the means. Will just go to the private school or other public school of choice. Will not provide transportation or any other means. 

The private school will also just raise their tuition fees so they can still maintain an elitist status.

Vouchers really do not solve anything.

You think private schools have better teachers than public? You would be wrong. They just have better students in general.

[myrecordwashorrible]

40 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

The voucher will still not provide the means. Will just go to the private school or other public school of choice. Will not provide transportation or any other means. 

The private school will also just raise their tuition fees so they can still maintain an elitist status.

Vouchers really do not solve anything.

You think private schools have better teachers than public? You would be wrong. They just have better students in general.

We will definitely disagree on quality of teachers.  Especially in low performing schools.  Having set foot in many as a preserving teacher evaluator to say they lack quality teachers is an understatement. There was a definite reason for the certification scandal in HISD.  Those folks simply didn't have the intellect to pass the exams. 

Now, if we are looking at our local schools here in the Triangle area most public schools are likely on par or better, but a few districts simply are not. 

 

[Ty Cobb]

I look at vouchers as a way for the rich to get their children an education at a discounted price. 
The people with money, that want their children to go to a private school, are going to pay for it regardless. Vouchers give them a $10,000 discount.

My son will continue to go to public school because I can’t afford private school with or without the $10,000.

From what I understand you have school choice, as the politicians like to call it, but your money only has one choice. The moment you make your “choice” of schools your tax money stays at that school. If you decide to “choose” again, your child can go, but the money stays with your 1st choice. 

Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

[thetragichippy]

17 hours ago, AggiesAreWe said:

They just have better students in general.

After 7th grade in Lumberton my kid told me he wanted to go to Evadale. To this day he has never really said why other than he initially said the kids are jerks in Lumberton and they bully too much. He assured me he was not being bullied, and being a starting football player, I didn't doubt him. I always taught him to protect himself regardless of school policy.

Evadale was the best decision he could have made, and I reluctantly agreed because it was only a 15 minute drive. Small school, he made varsity his 9th grade year(that small of a school), started from 10th till gradation. They had small classes and the teachers cared. A-B student.....never got in trouble - watched like a hawk lol

My point is I believe Aggies is 100% correct - the surrounding of your kids in schools and influences is probably more detrimental to your child than the quality of teacher. I'm not knocking teachers, I'm just saying typically peer pressure will have more influence than the best teacher.  

 

[tvc184]

20 hours ago, Ty Cobb said:

I look at vouchers as a way for the rich to get their children an education at a discounted price. 
The people with money, that want their children to go to a private school, are going to pay for it regardless. Vouchers give them a $10,000 discount.

My son will continue to go to public school because I can’t afford private school with or without the $10,000.

From what I understand you have school choice, as the politicians like to call it, but your money only has one choice. The moment you make your “choice” of schools your tax money stays at that school. If you decide to “choose” again, your child can go, but the money stays with your 1st choice. 

Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

Is that in the law or are you guessing?

That’s why I have no opinion because I have no idea what the bill says.

 What if the bill says that the family cannot have a household income of over $50,000 to qualify? Is that for the rich or a family that could likely not even consider a private school? 
 

On the Kelly HS website they show tuition at $13,570.

If the voucher system restricts the household income, like I suggested at $50K, would a student be able to use the $10,000 as the full amount if Kelly accepts the voucher as paid in full or basically writing off $3,570 the other $3,570? Or what if the family could afford the $3,570 but not the full amount?

Is a $50,000 household income considered “people with money” as you suggested?

Again, I have no clue as to what the bill says but I have seen a lot of speculation or claims.

I only went to public schools and have never had children so I don’t have a dog in the hunt. I am curious about some of the claims that I read. 

So, IF the vouchers were only for low income families, would it matter to you if it wasn’t used by people with money? As you claim, you couldn’t afford private school with or without a voucher. If my scenario was correct that a high school might accept the voucher as a paid in full tuition, would you consider it or are you simply against the voucher concept and I know that some people are? 

[SmashMouth]

@tvc184

This is some of the discussion I posted about a year ago. I will admit, there may have been changes to the proposed legislation since I made these statements. Also, the comments jump around a bit, because it is a combination of previous posts.:

"I am a pretty conservative guy, but I am against school vouchers. Who pays for the public schools (several of which were just built in my town of Lumberton)?

I have yet to hear a comprehensive argument that pushes me to the school voucher system, and I've read quite a few.

And I really have issues with taxpayer money being given to private "for profit" schools.

With all the schools that have an open campus nowadays, there are other options for a quality education other than school vouchers. There's not usually a school bus to service private schools at this point, so the child already has to get picked up / dropped off. Folks do it all the time.

Regardless, there are plenty of reasons against it. A voucher program that allows any Texas student to use public money (I like to think of it as "my (our) money") to offset the cost of private-school tuition would divert dollars from public schools, tightening already tight public-school budgets, without a proportionate reduction in public school costs - possibly to the point of raising taxes to keep them afloat. I also think it will incentivize the private schools to raise price of tuition (to put in their own back pockets) because they are getting subsidized by, that's right, my (our) money.

I'm not saying school vouchers don't have some merit. Just not enough in my opinion.

The average annual tuition for a private-school lands between $11,000 and $14,000. The proposed voucher would give a kid approx. $8,000 dollars toward that tuition (2024 numbers). The family still has to come up with the balance.

Let's say you have a kid that goes to a private. Dad's a lawyer, banker, businessman, etc. and pays the full tuition to send his kid to the private school. With the voucher system in place, the dad will now get $8,000 towards the kid's tuition. A net savings of let's say $3,000 on the low side. No problem, right?

Meanwhile, another family who is not so fortunate who sends their kid to public school has the same opportunity to send their child to private school and pay the $3,000 difference. Awesome, right? Only problem is they can't afford it, so that kid stays in public school that is now getting less funding.

Net sum, the better off family gets a break on sending their kid to a private school for a helluva lot less, and the lesser off family is stuck in the same place they were to begin with. All to pay a privatized for-profit institution and have the quality of the public-school fall even further behind.

That struggling single mom still won’t be able to send her kids anywhere.

A voucher won’t cover rides to school (wherever that may be), uniforms, the entirety of tuition, they don’t have to have free lunch programs, etc., etc.

A voucher won’t help a mom in a rough place get her genius into a private school that doesn’t exist in that area. But it will help that guy in River Oaks with the tuition bill on his three kids that he’s already paying. 

If the schools lose a percentage of their students to private schools, they’re going to have their funding cut, right? But much of their expenses won’t go down. The only way for this to work is if we raise local taxes to subsidize them for the funds that the state is redirecting to the voucher program… that’s what no one wants to explain. 

As an example, Lumberton is not failing to provide a proper education. Neither are the majority of the schools in our area where I live.

This is a political move with the ruse of being used to keep liberal indoctrination away from our kids. While I agree with keeping our kids from being led down the happy blue path, I don't agree with the way they are trying to do it. Texas Conservatives (of which I am) are simply doing this to garner support from the right. If you think they really give two craps about your kids, my kids, any kids, then remember we are talking about politicians.

We are being given a poor solution which will raise taxes in the end and could possibly be harmful to a lot of middle-class families on down to the lower class. There can be other ways to do it than school vouchers. From a guy that doesn't like paying any more taxes than I have to, I am definitely against it. I am also against fixing one problem by causing many more problems."

[AggiesAreWe]

2 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

@tvc184

This is some of the discussion I posted about a year ago. I will admit, there may have been changes to the proposed legislation since I made these statements. Also, the comments jump around a bit, because it is a combination of previous posts.:

"I am a pretty conservative guy, but I am against school vouchers. Who pays for the public schools (several of which were just built in my town of Lumberton)?

I have yet to hear a comprehensive argument that pushes me to the school voucher system, and I've read quite a few.

And I really have issues with taxpayer money being given to private "for profit" schools.

With all the schools that have an open campus nowadays, there are other options for a quality education other than school vouchers. There's not usually a school bus to service private schools at this point, so the child already has to get picked up / dropped off. Folks do it all the time.

Regardless, there are plenty of reasons against it. A voucher program that allows any Texas student to use public money (I like to think of it as "my (our) money") to offset the cost of private-school tuition would divert dollars from public schools, tightening already tight public-school budgets, without a proportionate reduction in public school costs - possibly to the point of raising taxes to keep them afloat. I also think it will incentivize the private schools to raise price of tuition (to put in their own back pockets) because they are getting subsidized by, that's right, my (our) money.

I'm not saying school vouchers don't have some merit. Just not enough in my opinion.

The average annual tuition for a private-school lands between $11,000 and $14,000. The proposed voucher would give a kid approx. $8,000 dollars toward that tuition (2024 numbers). The family still has to come up with the balance.

Let's say you have a kid that goes to a private. Dad's a lawyer, banker, businessman, etc. and pays the full tuition to send his kid to the private school. With the voucher system in place, the dad will now get $8,000 towards the kid's tuition. A net savings of let's say $3,000 on the low side. No problem, right?

Meanwhile, another family who is not so fortunate who sends their kid to public school has the same opportunity to send their child to private school and pay the $3,000 difference. Awesome, right? Only problem is they can't afford it, so that kid stays in public school that is now getting less funding.

Net sum, the better off family gets a break on sending their kid to a private school for a helluva lot less, and the lesser off family is stuck in the same place they were to begin with. All to pay a privatized for-profit institution and have the quality of the public-school fall even further behind.

That struggling single mom still won’t be able to send her kids anywhere.

A voucher won’t cover rides to school (wherever that may be), uniforms, the entirety of tuition, they don’t have to have free lunch programs, etc., etc.

A voucher won’t help a mom in a rough place get her genius into a private school that doesn’t exist in that area. But it will help that guy in River Oaks with the tuition bill on his three kids that he’s already paying. 

If the schools lose a percentage of their students to private schools, they’re going to have their funding cut, right? But much of their expenses won’t go down. The only way for this to work is if we raise local taxes to subsidize them for the funds that the state is redirecting to the voucher program… that’s what no one wants to explain. 

As an example, Lumberton is not failing to provide a proper education. Neither are the majority of the schools in our area where I live.

This is a political move with the ruse of being used to keep liberal indoctrination away from our kids. While I agree with keeping our kids from being led down the happy blue path, I don't agree with the way they are trying to do it. Texas Conservatives (of which I am) are simply doing this to garner support from the right. If you think they really give two craps about your kids, my kids, any kids, then remember we are talking about politicians.

We are being given a poor solution which will raise taxes in the end and could possibly be harmful to a lot of middle-class families on down to the lower class. There can be other ways to do it than school vouchers. From a guy that doesn't like paying any more taxes than I have to, I am definitely against it. I am also against fixing one problem by causing many more problems."

Ditto!!!!!!! LoL 

[tvc184]

7 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

@tvc184

This is some of the discussion I posted about a year ago. I will admit, there may have been changes to the proposed legislation since I made these statements. Also, the comments jump around a bit, because it is a combination of previous posts.:

"I am a pretty conservative guy, but I am against school vouchers. Who pays for the public schools (several of which were just built in my town of Lumberton)?

I have yet to hear a comprehensive argument that pushes me to the school voucher system, and I've read quite a few.

And I really have issues with taxpayer money being given to private "for profit" schools.

With all the schools that have an open campus nowadays, there are other options for a quality education other than school vouchers. There's not usually a school bus to service private schools at this point, so the child already has to get picked up / dropped off. Folks do it all the time.

Regardless, there are plenty of reasons against it. A voucher program that allows any Texas student to use public money (I like to think of it as "my (our) money") to offset the cost of private-school tuition would divert dollars from public schools, tightening already tight public-school budgets, without a proportionate reduction in public school costs - possibly to the point of raising taxes to keep them afloat. I also think it will incentivize the private schools to raise price of tuition (to put in their own back pockets) because they are getting subsidized by, that's right, my (our) money.

I'm not saying school vouchers don't have some merit. Just not enough in my opinion.

The average annual tuition for a private-school lands between $11,000 and $14,000. The proposed voucher would give a kid approx. $8,000 dollars toward that tuition (2024 numbers). The family still has to come up with the balance.

Let's say you have a kid that goes to a private. Dad's a lawyer, banker, businessman, etc. and pays the full tuition to send his kid to the private school. With the voucher system in place, the dad will now get $8,000 towards the kid's tuition. A net savings of let's say $3,000 on the low side. No problem, right?

Meanwhile, another family who is not so fortunate who sends their kid to public school has the same opportunity to send their child to private school and pay the $3,000 difference. Awesome, right? Only problem is they can't afford it, so that kid stays in public school that is now getting less funding.

Net sum, the better off family gets a break on sending their kid to a private school for a helluva lot less, and the lesser off family is stuck in the same place they were to begin with. All to pay a privatized for-profit institution and have the quality of the public-school fall even further behind.

That struggling single mom still won’t be able to send her kids anywhere.

A voucher won’t cover rides to school (wherever that may be), uniforms, the entirety of tuition, they don’t have to have free lunch programs, etc., etc.

A voucher won’t help a mom in a rough place get her genius into a private school that doesn’t exist in that area. But it will help that guy in River Oaks with the tuition bill on his three kids that he’s already paying. 

If the schools lose a percentage of their students to private schools, they’re going to have their funding cut, right? But much of their expenses won’t go down. The only way for this to work is if we raise local taxes to subsidize them for the funds that the state is redirecting to the voucher program… that’s what no one wants to explain. 

As an example, Lumberton is not failing to provide a proper education. Neither are the majority of the schools in our area where I live.

This is a political move with the ruse of being used to keep liberal indoctrination away from our kids. While I agree with keeping our kids from being led down the happy blue path, I don't agree with the way they are trying to do it. Texas Conservatives (of which I am) are simply doing this to garner support from the right. If you think they really give two craps about your kids, my kids, any kids, then remember we are talking about politicians.

We are being given a poor solution which will raise taxes in the end and could possibly be harmful to a lot of middle-class families on down to the lower class. There can be other ways to do it than school vouchers. From a guy that doesn't like paying any more taxes than I have to, I am definitely against it. I am also against fixing one problem by causing many more problems."

Is all of your numbers facts or is it speculation?

 Like I asked, is there a cutoff for the vounchers? I gave the example of $50,000. Is it $100,000? 

You say that if a less fortunate family doesn’t take the voucher, the banker is allowed to take it? Is that true so there is no threshold of family income?

 I need to find a page that has the facts but I keep seeing political pages with proponents from both sides which is useless.