MaxPower said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

DD88 said:

---

Close to 30 states now have some form of school choice.

Show us where anyone is forced to give up their "freedoms".

---

I want to stop being forced to give up my freedom from paying for other people's individual family expenses.

---

How does this bill accomplish that?

---

It doesn't!

It actually makes it worse.

Now I get to pay for them to go to my kids school and have my tax dollars competing against my own money.

I would rather the status quo than this bill. The ideal option is to completely privatize education past 6th grade.

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

SociallyConditionedAg said:

---

fightingfarmer09 said:

---

SociallyConditionedAg said:

---

fightingfarmer09 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

I don't have kids in school. Lots of kids are trapped in failing schools because they don't have the money for private education. Vouchers will give them an opportunity to get out of those schools.

I can give you stats going back for decades on spending versus test scores. Illegals are not helping, but that's not the root issue.

The only reform id be willing to entertain in public schools is eliminating traditional school for 50% of students after 8th grade and sending them to votech or to a detention center until they reach the age of 18. Traditional education is nothing but a gigantic babysitting service for half the students.

---

Then we should be using a voucher program to move kids in successful public districts that are already in the area. That is the only way to hit the numbers required to make an impact. Nothing about this bill does anything except help a select few.

There is 1 private school for k-8 within a 45 min drive of us. But there are 4 good ISDs that I could pick from. Make that easier rather than a private school that MAY have the ability to take in 4-5 more kids a year.

---

Why do you need vouchers for that? Just ape any student in Texas to attend the public school of their choice.

---

Exactly my point. Certain districts, if you live outside their boundaries, will often charge additional fees on students to make up the differences in tax dollars. Determine a dollar amount that incentivizes districts to accept transfer students and make that the standard value for the voucher. If a private school accepts a voucher they should accept the same rules on attendance and college/graduate readiness testing.

The problem is students getting to pick an ISD that is a 3A and overwhelms their ability to serve the student base will need the ability to turn students away for capacity and to gain additional resources to expand if they want to serve the out of boundary students.

As stated above if you accept a voucher for homeschool, coop, or private school then you cannot participate in the public school athletic programs. There is too much room for abuse to avoid UIL academic performance mandates.

---

Why should parents be denied the right to UIL programs when they've paid taxes? That's why i support the defunding of public schools. They provide an inferior product, indoctrinate students, and exclude taxpayers from the programs they've paid for. Government education sucks and there's no fix for it.

---

Because if you take a voucher you're getting back the school taxes you paid; you're no longer contributing to the public school system.

---

Exactly this. By accepting the voucher you have chosen to remove yourself from the benefits from the taxpayer system so you should not have forfeited access to the benefits of the system.

Except many people will get far more in vouchers than they ever paid in taxes. How many people are paying $20 or $30k a year in Texas taxes?

lmao at the thought that private schools won't just increase current tuition by exactly the voucher amounts

it's not gonna make private school any more accessible to anyone. cost will remain the same and private school owners will get richer.

get ready for government subsidized private school loans for elementary school students!

bubblesthechimp said:

---

lmao at the thought that private schools won't just increase current tuition by exactly the voucher amounts

it's not gonna make private school any more accessible to anyone. cost will remain the same and private school owners will get richer.

get ready for government subsidized private school loans for elementary school students!

---

If they care about making money, they will not do that because there's a much better way to capitalize on that money, and that is by expanding and taking on more students with either a fractional or no increase in tuition.

Quote:

---

lmao at the thought that private schools won't just increase current tuition by exactly the voucher amounts

---

many will raise, but many won't.

Quote:

---

it's not gonna make private school any more accessible to anyone. cost will remain the same and private school owners will get rich

---

this is a a lie pushed by the leftists with their teachers unions.

there a great number of private schools serving poor communities that are not going to raise their tuition costs.

Find me one where the proposed vouchers will cover 100% of the cost of attendance

Most of those schools are already subsidized in a variety of ways

Totally cool with vouchers. Just don't say it's a school choice thing. Those who had choice will still have choice. It's unlikely to increase choice for those who didn't have it.

flashplayer said:

---

bubblesthechimp said:

---

lmao at the thought that private schools won't just increase current tuition by exactly the voucher amounts

it's not gonna make private school any more accessible to anyone. cost will remain the same and private school owners will get richer.

get ready for government subsidized private school loans for elementary school students!

---

If they care about making money, they will not do that because there's a much better way to capitalize on that money, and that is by expanding and taking on more students with either a fractional or no increase in tuition.

---

For big city privates schools this may be true, but a majority of the rural ones in TX are purposely built by people with already big pockets who don't need the money, or care about making money. They are started for the sole purpose of staying small and having class sizes small. The majority will 1000% increase tuition to keep the poors out.

I just don't understand how people who say they want vouchers because the government screwed up public school expect the government to do a better job with private education…just like with the UIL ("Tebow") bill, this bill WILL expand, and I don't mean by "helping" more people.

Homeschoolers who want the money - do you realize that by agreeing to an assessment you are acknowledging that your ability to determine your child's success is not good enough? This acknowledgment already occurred with the UIL bill, now you want to further drive home that point with this bill? It's truly absurd.

You think you're doing well to be one of the very "lucky" few to get $2k, $10k, or $11.5k going to your PRE-APPROVED vendors of choice, but it's the vendors that are benefiting. This is a vendor bill - a pocket lining bill.

AustinCountyAg said:

---

flashplayer said:

---

bubblesthechimp said:

---

lmao at the thought that private schools won't just increase current tuition by exactly the voucher amounts

it's not gonna make private school any more accessible to anyone. cost will remain the same and private school owners will get richer.

get ready for government subsidized private school loans for elementary school students!

---

If they care about making money, they will not do that because there's a much better way to capitalize on that money, and that is by expanding and taking on more students with either a fractional or no increase in tuition.

---

For big city privates schools this may be true, but a majority of the rural ones in TX are purposely built by people with already big pockets who don't need the money, or care about making money. They are started for the sole purpose of staying small and having class sizes small. The majority will 1000% increase tuition to keep the poors out.

---

What point are you making here?

If they were already set up as high cost to keep the classes small, thus indirectly "keep the poors out", then using the argument that they will increase tuition as a negative against vouchers seems like a moot point. They were already doing that and the vouchers will give the ability for other private schools to take in the "poors" or for other private schools to pop up.

The notion that affordable quality options will just pop up seems too optimistic to me given how difficult it is already to find affordable quality daycare/childcare these days despite overwhelming need.

This bill has been bought and paid for by out of state members.

This all stems back to property tax relief, and LT. Dan's fight on schools, this goes back to the beginning, lt dan and wheelie man have had their eyes on this for a long time.

As an educator (and a fiscal conservative....maybe libertarian??) i am firmly against SB2, yes there are problems in public education but this does not benefit kids, this benefits pocket books of rich investors ready to get rich at your tax dollars. If you don't think we will have our own walmart brand of private schools totaling 10,000 a semester. Your nuts, and the good private schools will sky rocket to 40k a semester.

MaxPower said:

---

Except many people will get far more in vouchers than they ever paid in taxes. How many people are paying $20 or $30k a year in Texas taxes?

---

The vast majority of people who send kids to public school "get more" in terms of how much money follows their kid than they pay in to the system.

Tea Party said:

---

AustinCountyAg said:

---

flashplayer said:

---

bubblesthechimp said:

---

lmao at the thought that private schools won't just increase current tuition by exactly the voucher amounts

it's not gonna make private school any more accessible to anyone. cost will remain the same and private school owners will get richer.

get ready for government subsidized private school loans for elementary school students!

---

If they care about making money, they will not do that because there's a much better way to capitalize on that money, and that is by expanding and taking on more students with either a fractional or no increase in tuition.

---

For big city privates schools this may be true, but a majority of the rural ones in TX are purposely built by people with already big pockets who don't need the money, or care about making money. They are started for the sole purpose of staying small and having class sizes small. The majority will 1000% increase tuition to keep the poors out.

---

What point are you making here?

If they were already set up as high cost to keep the classes small, thus indirectly "keep the poors out", then using the argument that they will increase tuition as a negative against vouchers seems like a moot point. They were already doing that and the vouchers will give the ability for other private schools to take in the "poors" or for other private schools to pop up.

---

my point is that what I bolded in your text WONT happen. Most rural areas don't even have private school options to begin with, and if they do they normally only have one option to choose from. Other private school won't just "pop up" because of this. Sure, in the big cities your point may be valid, but for the majority of Texans it isn't.

AustinCountyAg said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

AustinCountyAg said:

---

flashplayer said:

---

bubblesthechimp said:

---

lmao at the thought that private schools won't just increase current tuition by exactly the voucher amounts

it's not gonna make private school any more accessible to anyone. cost will remain the same and private school owners will get richer.

get ready for government subsidized private school loans for elementary school students!

---

If they care about making money, they will not do that because there's a much better way to capitalize on that money, and that is by expanding and taking on more students with either a fractional or no increase in tuition.

---

For big city privates schools this may be true, but a majority of the rural ones in TX are purposely built by people with already big pockets who don't need the money, or care about making money. They are started for the sole purpose of staying small and having class sizes small. The majority will 1000% increase tuition to keep the poors out.

---

What point are you making here?

If they were already set up as high cost to keep the classes small, thus indirectly "keep the poors out", then using the argument that they will increase tuition as a negative against vouchers seems like a moot point. They were already doing that and the vouchers will give the ability for other private schools to take in the "poors" or for other private schools to pop up.

---

my point is that what I bolded in your text WONT happen. Most rural areas don't even have private school options to begin with, and if they do they normally only have one option to choose from. Other private school won't just "pop up" because of this. Sure, in the big cities your point may be valid, but for the majority of Texans it isn't.

---

1) Big cities is where the majority of Texans live. So yeah, any system that impacts the big cities is by definition going to impact the majority of Texans.
2) My small town had multiple private schools when I was a kid and we were 2A. My town was not poor even then so that probably plays a factor but I'm not sure I'm buying the idea that private schools simply don't exist in smaller communities without some sort of substantiation.

Ihatefallscounty said:

---

This bill has been bought and paid for by out of state members.

This all stems back to property tax relief, and LT. Dan's fight on schools, this goes back to the beginning, lt dan and wheelie man have had their eyes on this for a long time.

As an educator (and a fiscal conservative....maybe libertarian??) i am firmly against SB2, yes there are problems in public education but this does not benefit kids, this benefits pocket books of rich investors ready to get rich at your tax dollars. If you don't think we will have our own walmart brand of private schools totaling 10,000 a semester. Your nuts, and the good private schools will sky rocket to 40k a semester.

---

I hope you are not an economics educator.

Fenrir said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Except many people will get far more in vouchers than they ever paid in taxes. How many people are paying $20 or $30k a year in Texas taxes?

---

The vast majority of people who send kids to public school "get more" in terms of how much money follows their kid than they pay in to the system.

---

Yes but arguably that's to the benefit of society as a whole. You getting to take more than you pay and saying, "Eff you I'm not gonna have any accountability for how it's spent" is in no way an arguable benefit to society.

MaxPower said:

---

Fenrir said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Except many people will get far more in vouchers than they ever paid in taxes. How many people are paying $20 or $30k a year in Texas taxes?

---

The vast majority of people who send kids to public school "get more" in terms of how much money follows their kid than they pay in to the system.

---

Yes but arguably that's to the benefit of society as a whole. You getting to take more than you pay and saying, "Eff you I'm not gonna have any accountability for how it's spent" is in no way an arguable benefit to society.

---

As far as I'm aware schools would have to be accredited in order to accept the vouchers. I'm not sure how that is having zero accountability in how it is spent.

I'm not even a fan of the proposal but so many of the public school defender arguments just fall so flat or are cherry picking and using inaccurate or misleading figures.

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

ts5641 said:

---

Forgive me if this has already been posted, but is the money portable to other public schools as well?

---

No, it is not.

---

Well that is stupid then.

Fenrir said:

---

AustinCountyAg said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

AustinCountyAg said:

---

flashplayer said:

---

bubblesthechimp said:

---

lmao at the thought that private schools won't just increase current tuition by exactly the voucher amounts

it's not gonna make private school any more accessible to anyone. cost will remain the same and private school owners will get richer.

get ready for government subsidized private school loans for elementary school students!

---

If they care about making money, they will not do that because there's a much better way to capitalize on that money, and that is by expanding and taking on more students with either a fractional or no increase in tuition.

---

For big city privates schools this may be true, but a majority of the rural ones in TX are purposely built by people with already big pockets who don't need the money, or care about making money. They are started for the sole purpose of staying small and having class sizes small. The majority will 1000% increase tuition to keep the poors out.

---

What point are you making here?

If they were already set up as high cost to keep the classes small, thus indirectly "keep the poors out", then using the argument that they will increase tuition as a negative against vouchers seems like a moot point. They were already doing that and the vouchers will give the ability for other private schools to take in the "poors" or for other private schools to pop up.

---

my point is that what I bolded in your text WONT happen. Most rural areas don't even have private school options to begin with, and if they do they normally only have one option to choose from. Other private school won't just "pop up" because of this. Sure, in the big cities your point may be valid, but for the majority of Texans it isn't.

---

1) Big cities is where the majority of Texans live. So yeah, any system that impacts the big cities is by definition going to impact the majority of Texans.
2) My small town had multiple private schools when I was a kid and we were 2A. My town was not poor even then so that probably plays a factor but I'm not sure I'm buying the idea that private schools simply don't exist in smaller communities without some sort of substantiation.

---

curious what "small town" you lived in thats big enough to support three schools?

I'm well aware big cities is where most Texans live, my point was that the majority of TX isn't a city and the little towns all west of I-35 shouldn't be forgotten. How do you feel about the electoral college?

AustinCountyAg said:

---

Fenrir said:

---

AustinCountyAg said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

AustinCountyAg said:

---

flashplayer said:

---

bubblesthechimp said:

---

lmao at the thought that private schools won't just increase current tuition by exactly the voucher amounts

it's not gonna make private school any more accessible to anyone. cost will remain the same and private school owners will get richer.

get ready for government subsidized private school loans for elementary school students!

---

If they care about making money, they will not do that because there's a much better way to capitalize on that money, and that is by expanding and taking on more students with either a fractional or no increase in tuition.

---

For big city privates schools this may be true, but a majority of the rural ones in TX are purposely built by people with already big pockets who don't need the money, or care about making money. They are started for the sole purpose of staying small and having class sizes small. The majority will 1000% increase tuition to keep the poors out.

---

What point are you making here?

If they were already set up as high cost to keep the classes small, thus indirectly "keep the poors out", then using the argument that they will increase tuition as a negative against vouchers seems like a moot point. They were already doing that and the vouchers will give the ability for other private schools to take in the "poors" or for other private schools to pop up.

---

my point is that what I bolded in your text WONT happen. Most rural areas don't even have private school options to begin with, and if they do they normally only have one option to choose from. Other private school won't just "pop up" because of this. Sure, in the big cities your point may be valid, but for the majority of Texans it isn't.

---

1) Big cities is where the majority of Texans live. So yeah, any system that impacts the big cities is by definition going to impact the majority of Texans.
2) My small town had multiple private schools when I was a kid and we were 2A. My town was not poor even then so that probably plays a factor but I'm not sure I'm buying the idea that private schools simply don't exist in smaller communities without some sort of substantiation.

---

curious what "small town" you lived in thats big enough to support three schools?

I'm well aware big cities is where most Texans live, my point was that the majority of TX isn't a city and the little towns all west of I-35 shouldn't be forgotten. How do you feel about the electoral college?

---

I'm not into doxxing myself. I'll just say there were at least 3 private Christian schools within 15 minutes of my house growing up that I can think of. Several more now. Where I live now, I drive past several private schools to take my kids to the one we want them at which is 20 minutes away. As I have said before on this thread and others, I lean heavily towards not wanting this bill because (1) it almost for sure won't benefit me at all due to the income restrictions and limited slots available and (2) I dislike the idea of state getting any form of influence over private schools. We went the private school route because we disliked the response of governments and schools to Covid. Last thing I want is to invite the ****heads to influence private institutions.

As for the bolded, you plainly stated "the majority of Texans". That has nothing to do with land area (land doesn't go to school). Of course rural communities shouldn't be forgotten but everyone gets pretty even representation at the state level as it is. Like I've said elsewhere in this thread, most of the public school defender arguments boil down to misrepresentation and cherry picking. The argument that ~15% of the population may not see the same potential benefit as the other ~85% so therefore a law should not be enacted is in and of itself not particularly substantive. If private schools don't pop up in the rural areas, the rural schools are not losing funding since the kids are still going to be going there. I have yet to see anyone demonstrate what detriment the bill is directly to rural schools in particular.

There are definitely arguments against these bills, but for some reason people seem to congregate around arguments that are shallow or nonsensical.

If you think there are private schools accessible to rural students west of I-35, you are simply wrong. Here's an example. I opened Google maps, picked a town in our local area (Seymour) and asked Google to search for nearby private schools. Here's what it found:



There are private schools in Wichita Falls (population 104,000) 50 miles away, and there is a private school in Graham (population 8,700), about 59 miles away. That's it. You could do this same search across West Texas and get similar results.

The whole voucher thing is just suburban welfare. It's not about school choice.

Yeah I'm not saying there's not a 2A town in Texas with two private schools but to act like that's not the exception is laughable. I'd be shocked if there are more than one or two like that in the entire state and there's probably less than 10 of those towns that even have one private school (and I feel like 10 is being generous).

twk said:

---

If you think there are private schools accessible to rural students west of I-35, you are simply wrong. Here's an example. I opened Google maps, picked a town in our local area (Seymour) and asked Google to search for nearby private schools. Here's what it found:



There are private schools in Wichita Falls (population 104,000) 50 miles away, and there is a private school in Graham (population 8,700), about 59 miles away. That's it. You could do this same search across West Texas and get similar results.

The whole voucher thing is just suburban welfare. It's not about school choice.

---

This is disingenuous. Are you saying no one would or could start one, and thus it's forever guaranteed that there won't be one? People respond to incentives. If they didn't, there'd be no debate. That's the whole reason public educators are up in arms isn't it? People will respond.

I'm willing to accept there may be a lack of private schools. I asked for proof and twk provided some. What I struggle with is "so what?" Is there harm being done to these rural schools by this bill? Doesn't seem like it would really change anything for them. If no private schools pop up isn't the status quo essentially maintained in these areas?

I don't think we need to do something simply to do something and I question how well it will actually accomplish any meaningful goal, however there has been a lot of fear mongering about these bills that I just get tired of it.

Quote:

---

This is disingenuous

---

Tha sums up the entire anti-school choice movement!


I'm a "rural republican" with adult kids! So spare me the "suburban welfare" line. (Not you AGC)

Quote:

---

there harm being done to these rural schools by this bill? Doesn't seem like it would really change anything for them. If no private schools pop up isn't the status quo essentially maintained in these areas?

---

Exactly!

Stive said:

---

Yeah I'm not saying there's not a 2A town in Texas with two private schools but to act like that's not the exception is laughable. I'd be shocked if there are more than one or two like that in the entire state and there's probably less than 10 of those towns that even have one private school (and I feel like 10 is being generous).

---

I think most people's conception of a private school is one that's maybe 20-30% the size of a public school with major facilities or a parochial school, and my experience is, that's an outdated paradigm for people wanting to exit public school. Throw up a finished out prefab metal building and some landscaping and you can run a university model, small Christian school, homeschool co-op, etc. with well educated focused parents running it. This is accessible even in rural areas.

ts5641 said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

ts5641 said:

---

Forgive me if this has already been posted, but is the money portable to other public schools as well?

---

No, it is not.

---

Well that is stupid then.

---

I support the concept of school choice, but I have serious concerns about this particular bill. While I believe in expanding options for families, this bill's limitations undermine its potential. Restricting choices to private schools or homeschooling while excluding other public school districts doesn't address the core issues facing underperforming public schools. While some students and families may opt out, I doubt it will create the kind of widespread change needed to incentivize improvement within the public school system.

My preferred approach would be to empower families to direct their allocated education tax dollars to the school of their choice, regardless of district boundaries. If a family chooses a school outside their district and can provide transportation, they should be able to do so. Furthermore, the $10,000 figure seems arbitrary. The funding amount should be tied to the actual per-pupil allocation within each district, ensuring a more equitable and transparent distribution of resources.

Just cut the property taxes and then let people do with their own money what they want instead of paying the govt the money and then them deciding if you can have some back if you spend it now they want.

Just so insane that the "conservatives" don't get that

These school admins wantonly spending your tax money also think they know what is best for your kiddos.

the same could be said for private schools, no?

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

there harm being done to these rural schools by this bill? Doesn't seem like it would really change anything for them. If no private schools pop up isn't the status quo essentially maintained in these areas?

---

Exactly!

---

Only the people living in big cities have to give up their guns. It doesn't apply to people living in rural areas. What's the big deal? Doesn't seem like a law like that changes anything for you.

The System said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

there harm being done to these rural schools by this bill? Doesn't seem like it would really change anything for them. If no private schools pop up isn't the status quo essentially maintained in these areas?

---

Exactly!

---

Only the people living in big cities have to give up their guns. It doesn't apply to people living in rural areas. What's the big deal? Doesn't seem like a law like that changes anything for you.

---

Since you went with this analogy, what right is the voucher bill taking away from rural people? Your analogy has something being taken away from a group of people. What does the voucher bill remove from rural people?

double b said:

---

ts5641 said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

ts5641 said:

---

Forgive me if this has already been posted, but is the money portable to other public schools as well?

---

No, it is not.

---

Well that is stupid then.

---

I support the concept of school choice, but I have serious concerns about this particular bill. While I believe in expanding options for families, this bill's limitations undermine its potential. Restricting choices to private schools or homeschooling while excluding other public school districts doesn't address the core issues facing underperforming public schools. While some students and families may opt out, I doubt it will create the kind of widespread change needed to incentivize improvement within the public school system.

My preferred approach would be to empower families to direct their allocated education tax dollars to the school of their choice, regardless of district boundaries. If a family chooses a school outside their district and can provide transportation, they should be able to do so. Furthermore, the $10,000 figure seems arbitrary. The funding amount should be tied to the actual per-pupil allocation within each district, ensuring a more equitable and transparent distribution of resources.

---

You said in 4 sentences what I've been trying to type in 4 paragraphs, so I can stop now.