Real Education Choice

Back in the 1990s we had neighbors who homeschooled; this was in another state that is not the bastion of homeschooling freedom that Texas is. In that state they were required to meet regularly with a certified teacher. They had a homeschooling family friend with a teaching certificate, so they got together regularly to meet the state requirement. There’s no such requirement here in Texas.

But those parents were able to put a child (or two or three) into a public school classroom—just for a particular class. Math, or music. I don’t remember what classes they used the schools for. I do remember that they were able to do it with one child in two different high schools—in two adjacent but separate districts.

Here we are, nearly 30 years later, in the “free state of Texas,” and that option is completely off the table, never considered, and impossible. We have had problems getting even UIL participation for anyone but public school students—even though UIL was created at a time (1913 or so) when the vast majority of Texas students were homeschooled and/or private schooled. Public schools came in later and took over control, which is what government institutions do.

school choice advocates at the state capitol, image from Texas Scorecard

Currently the state conversation (by that I mean the resulting language in the Republican Party of Texas Platform) about school choice is limited to public, charter, private, or homeschool. For any given child, it’s one of these four choices, and one choice only. Two of these, public and charter schools, are already paid for with taxpayer dollars. Charter schools, however, are not available to all; they are usually provided by lottery. Private school means a family pays full tuition out of pocket, so that’s not available to anyone who can’t afford the tuition, unless they find a private scholarship. Homeschool means, usually, that at least one parent gives up income opportunities to handle the education of their children. Out-of-pocket expenses for homeschoolers are considerably lower. A refund of that family’s tax going to education would cover it. But, again, this isn’t available to families that can’t sacrifice a parent’s income. So the choice conversation has been about expanding “free” education to families whose needs are not met by public or charter schools to include using a voucher for a seat in a private school or to homeschool (although there’s not really a good description of how a voucher could be used for homeschooling).

Why are the options that limited? Why not various combinations of the four options? And why not add in a whole lot of other options: private tutors, online courses, private lessons, therapies (equine therapy comes to mind), apprenticeships, skills certification programs?

The first time I heard about Education Savings Accounts (ESAs), back in 2016, they included all of these options. Very much like a health savings account—which can only be used for healthcare purposes—an ESA would be a fund attached to the child (meeting thereby the state requirement to provide free education to all) that could be used for any combination of those educational purposes. Families have an incentive for getting a good deal, because the money could be rolled over to the next year for that child, or eventually toward college tuition.

It would require an involved parent. But a parent who is aware that their child is being underserved and is looking for a way out and not finding it—that is a parent who’s already involved and is motivated. It’s not going to be enough to endanger the monolithic government institution.

So, our battle for school choice continues in Texas. And it’s divided into multiple battles; there's a battle between school choice and no school choice, as well as essentially between school vouchers and ESAs.

If it were up to the parents, we would have school choice already. And ESAs are the preferred way for the money to follow the child. I believe it would also be the best way of introducing the free market into the otherwise socialist public school monopoly—giving us better quality at a lower cost, as the free market does. But it would also have the bonus of being the best way to prevent government intrusion and indoctrination, which is one reason conservative opponents give against money following the child.

from UH and TSC study on school choice

A recent study done by University of Houston’s Public Administration program and Texas Southern University’s masters program in Public Affairs, shows that every demographic and party affiliation favors school choice—and particularly ESAs—with the lowest support among white Democrats, who come in at 58%. The highest proponents were black Republicans, at 86%. [Full report here.] Texas Scorecard has a story here. The Houston Chronicle has a story here. 

With numbers like these, you’d think it would be a slam dunk to get legislation passed. It has been a governor’s priority, with multiple special sessions in 2023 to get it done, after it didn’t pass in the regular session. But it was never even given a vote. As a result, the obstructionist House Speaker, nominally Republican Dade Phelan, was challenged and nearly beaten in the Primary (it is believed Democrat crossover voters kept his candidacy alive, just barely). It looks likely he will not get the speakership again, we can hope.

While Texas was an early leader in homeschooling freedom, it lags badly behind many other states in school choice. Right now—well ahead of the 2025 legislative session—is the time for bills to get written. We didn’t get what we wanted in any bill last time. This time, with maybe more chance for debate and passage, we ought to insist on a bill that offers real education choice, not a nominal choice between public school or a seat in a better nearby public school, or failing that a seat in a private school. We want a bill that offers any and all combinations of educational options, all chosen by the parents for their individual child.

This is from a 2022 Hoover Institution article on school choice.
The original is interactive. They identify the various types of choices
available in each state, and a glossary defining the terms.

Then comes the question of how to fund it. There are people who spend all their time on this question, deem it impossible, and therefore oppose school choice, even for low-income students trapped in failing schools. That’s not acceptable. Let’s just note that, adding health savings accounts to a person’s insurance benefits didn’t have the outcome of bankrupting insurance companies. And, as an even more apt example, we have multiple states who have tried ESAs, and we can learn from them.

No more excuses. This year needs to be the year the power of education gets put back into the hands of parents.