Education funding should be given to students through their parents, not to institutions, witnesses testified before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce on April 18.
The committee hearing examined the merits of school-choice programs, one of which is currently under consideration. H.R. 531, the Educational Choice for Children Act, would create a tax credit for donations to nonprofit organizations providing education scholarships for elementary and secondary students.
“The surest remedy to accountability for these dollars is to fund students via parents rather than schools,” Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), appearing before the committee as a witness, told members.
“In K-12 education, students are assigned to a school that is closest to where their parents can afford to live, even if that school is a poor fit. It is time to break the link between housing and schooling and fund families directly just as we do in every other aspect of American life,” said Lindsey Burke, director of the Center for Education Policy at the Heritage Foundation.
Opponents of the measure, and of school choice initiatives generally, said the tactic amounts to a tax break for families who can already afford private education and drains resources from already struggling public schools.
“The history of school voucher programs is engaged, ingrained in an act of resistance to integration from white families across the south,” said Ranking Member Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.).
Bonamici noted that many voucher programs admit students who have never attended a public school, and in some states, the programs have no cap on income.
“As a result, taxpayer dollars have been used to provide tuition coupons for students already in private schools, and for wealthy families who don’t need them,” she said.
The debate about school choice followed what have become familiar talking points on both sides.
Advocates insisted that school-choice programs allow families to choose a school tailored to their child’s needs and goals and produce higher academic achievement. Also, proponents claimed that choice programs like the Educational Choice for Children Act do not drain funds from public education because they are privately funded.
Those claims are suspect, according to Bonamici, because private schools can selectively enroll higher achieving students while discouraging academically challenged or special-needs students from attending.
“Some people ... have posited that a massive, multi-billion—up to $10 billion—school choice federal tax credit would not affect public school funding, which I find a bit baffling,” Bonamici said.
“Just to clarify, a $10 billion school-choice federal tax credit would reduce federal revenue by $10 billion, isn’t that correct?” she asked committee witness Derek W. Black, director of the Constitutional Law Center at the University of South Carolina School of Law.
“That’s true,” Black said. “And if we look at the state level, any type of tax credits ... does have the effect of either directly coming out of the public education funding program or indirectly coming out.”
