When the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) changed how it will approach the topic of school vouchers for the current legislative session, it took many by surprise. One of the more surprised people was board member Aicha Davis, a Democrat who represents District 13, which includes parts of both… When the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) changed how it will approach the topic of school vouchers for the current legislative session, it took many by surprise. One of the more surprised people was board member Aicha Davis, a Democrat who represents District 13, which includes parts of both Dallas and Tarrant counties.
“I haven’t seen this before,” she said over the phone to the Observer. “I asked some of my colleagues who have been on the board for a while and even former members if they had ever experienced anything like this, and they said no too.”
Earlier this month the SBOE announced it would not stand in the way of legislation that clears the way for school vouchers to become a reality after previously stating a firm stance against what some lawmakers have called “parental choice.” It’s worth noting that something significant has happened recently that is likely a factor in the switch. Keven Ellis, a Lufkin Republican and the new board chair appointed by Gov. Gregg Abbott, was recently sworn in after the board’s recommendations were announced in November 2022.
This latest decision to be neutral is a drastic turn from the official priorities the board published three months ago. As one of the board’s six priorities, the school funding issue was addressed with arguably the strongest wording in the document.
“The Texas State Board of Education calls on the Texas Legislature to reject all attempts to divert public dollars away from public schools in the form of vouchers, an education savings account, taxpayer savings grants, tuition-tax credits, a business franchise tax credit or an insurance premium tax credit, or any other mechanisms that have the effect of reducing funding to public schools,” the November priorities list stated.
“There’s never been a time that I am aware of when the board sets legislative priorities and then they get changed at the next board meeting,” Davis said. “It is very unique that this has happened.”
Davis says that the idea to set the rejection of school vouchers as a legislative priority was proposed by one of the Republican board members last year, and that it received Republican votes in order to be approved. She suspects that new board members came in with a different view on the matter and that some board members who remained from last year found themselves under pressure to change their vote at the most recent meeting.
When announcing the strategic change, the Texas Tribune reported that Ellis said, “There’s going to be a very rich and robust debate over this in the Legislature and because of that I’ve felt it was appropriate to reconsider this item and let that rich and robust debate happen at the Legislature.”
There’s evidence to suggest the state’s push for vouchers is now at its most fervent. Along with the SBOE’s decision to stand down as the governor and lieutenant governor vocally support the plan, it seems the Texas Education Agency is working behind the scenes to win support for vouchers.
On Feb. 12, Dallas education advocate and podcaster Lynn Davenport posted audio of Steve Lecholop, the Texas Education Agency’s deputy of governance, speaking to a parent of a special-needs student who attends a private Christian school over the phone while advocating for school vouchers. In the clip, Lechelop encourages the mother to speak to a speechwriter for Gov. Abbott and to “stick it to Joshua ISD,” before adding “yes, traditional school districts are getting less money,” as he mentions other states that have employed a voucher system.
“There’s never been a time that I am aware of when the board sets legislative priorities and then they get changed at the next board meeting.” – Aicha Davis, State Board of Education
tweet this School voucher opponents suggest what the SBOE hinted at in its November 2022 priorities – any state funds for education that go to private schools rather than public schools will hurt public schools. Gov. Abbott has recently come out strongly in favor of what he calls “education savings accounts” in which parents will receive state money to apply to private school tuition if they choose.
Along with many Republicans from across the United States, Abbott has suggested that many public schools aren’t providing children with the level of education that parents want their kids to have and a voucher-like program will help change that.
In 2022 when Abbott was touting his “school choice” plan, he suggested that it isn’t a matter of simply taking from public schools to give to private schools, and that public schools would still be fully funded under his plan. Liz Morse, government relations spokesperson for Richardson Independent School District, notes that this is really a simple math equation.
“Since school funding is largely based on the number of students who attend school, the loss of any student leaving a public school will mean less funding for schools,” she wrote in an email to the Observer. “When taxpayers pay their school district property taxes, they rightly expect that their tax dollars are going to fund their local independent school district. Any program that uses taxpayer dollars to subsidize private schools not only reduces funding for public schools, but eliminates academic and fiscal transparency so taxpayers have no way of knowing if their tax dollars are being spent effectively.”
Critics point out that school voucher programs are not designed to assist families who are poor or who live in rural areas where schooling options are already limited. Whether the voucher program is called “parental choice,” “school choice” or an “education savings account,” Davis sees this move toward school vouchers as something “from the same playbook they [some Republicans] used for critical race theory a couple years ago. It’s a narrative that gets pushed out to create a sensation.”
Davis says that giving the voucher plan a name such as “parental choice” is more than slick branding — it’s not a true representation of what it is.
“It’s just a name to make it sound like it’s not as bad as it is,” she says. “There’s no way the voucher system that’s being talked about will give true choice to all parents. There’s not going to be enough money for any and all parents to take a voucher and go to private school. It won’t work like that.”