For the People:
Education reform would provide school choice for some
April 14, 2021
Elaine Phaneuf
In an opinion editorial published in the Springfield News Leader April 9, State Treasurer Scott Fitzpatrick spoke as an advocate for school choice. He cites failing public schools, unsafe school environments, inability of public schools to meet the needs of students with developmental issues as just some of the reasons to legislate other options for students whose needs are not being met through the public school in their district.
In the News Leader opinion piece, Fitzpatrick expressed firm support of school choice, “..we have to provide Missouri children and their families with educational choice. Parents are in the best position to determine what makes sense for their children, and it’s our responsibility to make sure they have the tools to make the best decision.” He describes a parent’s current inability to take tax dollars to non-public school as ‘unacceptable and infuriating’.
Fitzpatrick ends the editorial with clear intent to find united support for education reform by stressing that the proposed school choice program will in no way take funding from public schools, and that the goal of the program is something everyone should be able to stand behind.
He writes, “Missouri can protect its existing system while helping the most vulnerable Missouri families if we renounce divisive politics and focus on a goal we all agree on - giving every child in Missouri a chance to succeed.”
Some opponents of the school choice legislation claim the program contains flaws and limits which would cause it to fall short in delivering on that promise. The school choice program - currently being debated in congress - is known as the Missouri Empowerment Scholarship Accounts Program (ESA). It would allow taxpayers to donate to the ESA fund and receive a tax credit equal to the amount of the donation. There are different versions of the ESA program being debated in both the Missouri House and Senate (HB 349 and SB 55).
The first limiting factor of the ESA program is the monetary cap. According to Treasurer Fitzpatrick, the more expansive version of the bill would allocate $100 million. With a frugal guess of 5% for administrative costs, the remainder would only provide approximately 15,000 Missouri K-12 students with $6,375 scholarships.
The next limiting factor is the amount of the scholarship in comparison to the average annual tuition of a private school. According to an article in the Barry County Advertiser, dated March 3, 2021, Cassville Schools Superintendent Dr. Richard Asbill pointed out the average private school tuition is $10,132 and the difference of $3,757 would be difficult for many families to come up with. When asked about this shortfall, Treasurer Fitzpatrick said he believed some private schools may offer reduced tuition for families without an extra $3,757 in their budget.
A third limiting factor is transportation. Public schools provide transportation to and from school for resident students in each district. Private schools do not, nor do public schools provide transportation for students coming from other districts. The ESA program is being promoted as a means to provide an educational choice for low income families and the most vulnerable, but the ESA program does not provide transportation.
A fourth limiting factor is geography. The House Bill limits participation to residents of cities with populations of 30,000 or greater, or counties with charter governments. The current version of the Senate Bill does not set forth these limitations.
In addition to such limiting factors, other opponents of the ESA program criticize the use of public funds to provide scholarships for religious schools. The Missouri Constitution - specifically what are known as the Blaine Amendments - prohibits money from the public treasury to be used “...in aid of any church, sect or denomination of religion, or in aid of any priest, preacher, minister or teacher thereof…” Proponents of the current ESA school choice program believe the new scholarship model funded by tax-payer donations - for which the taxpayer is reimbursed with an equal tax credit - provides enough separation between the public treasury and the religious institutions to circumvent the dictates of the Missouri Constitution.
Treasurer Fitzpatrick was clear in his perspective on this manner. The public funds are not being used to aid the religious institutions, the public funds are being used to aid the students and families whose needs are not being met by their local public school.
Although hesitant to make a prediction, Treasurer Fitzpatrick believes there is a good chance some version of school choice legislation could pass this year. His hope for unified support may not come to fruition. According to documentation of public hearings on HB 349, representatives of the Missouri State Teachers Association, the Missouri National Education Association, the Missouri Association of School Administrators, the American Federation of Teachers, and Dr. Clemens of the North Kansas City School District all gave testimony in opposition of the bill.
Institutions sending representatives to testify in support of the legislation included: the Missouri Century Foundation - dedicated to advancing free market initiatives; the American Federation for Children - dedicated to empowering lower-income families with the power to choose the best education for their children; and Summit Christian Academy. Several individuals also testified both for and against the bill.
Elaine Phaneuf
In an opinion editorial published in the Springfield News Leader April 9, State Treasurer Scott Fitzpatrick spoke as an advocate for school choice. He cites failing public schools, unsafe school environments, inability of public schools to meet the needs of students with developmental issues as just some of the reasons to legislate other options for students whose needs are not being met through the public school in their district.
In the News Leader opinion piece, Fitzpatrick expressed firm support of school choice, “..we have to provide Missouri children and their families with educational choice. Parents are in the best position to determine what makes sense for their children, and it’s our responsibility to make sure they have the tools to make the best decision.” He describes a parent’s current inability to take tax dollars to non-public school as ‘unacceptable and infuriating’.
Fitzpatrick ends the editorial with clear intent to find united support for education reform by stressing that the proposed school choice program will in no way take funding from public schools, and that the goal of the program is something everyone should be able to stand behind.
He writes, “Missouri can protect its existing system while helping the most vulnerable Missouri families if we renounce divisive politics and focus on a goal we all agree on - giving every child in Missouri a chance to succeed.”
Some opponents of the school choice legislation claim the program contains flaws and limits which would cause it to fall short in delivering on that promise. The school choice program - currently being debated in congress - is known as the Missouri Empowerment Scholarship Accounts Program (ESA). It would allow taxpayers to donate to the ESA fund and receive a tax credit equal to the amount of the donation. There are different versions of the ESA program being debated in both the Missouri House and Senate (HB 349 and SB 55).
The first limiting factor of the ESA program is the monetary cap. According to Treasurer Fitzpatrick, the more expansive version of the bill would allocate $100 million. With a frugal guess of 5% for administrative costs, the remainder would only provide approximately 15,000 Missouri K-12 students with $6,375 scholarships.
The next limiting factor is the amount of the scholarship in comparison to the average annual tuition of a private school. According to an article in the Barry County Advertiser, dated March 3, 2021, Cassville Schools Superintendent Dr. Richard Asbill pointed out the average private school tuition is $10,132 and the difference of $3,757 would be difficult for many families to come up with. When asked about this shortfall, Treasurer Fitzpatrick said he believed some private schools may offer reduced tuition for families without an extra $3,757 in their budget.
A third limiting factor is transportation. Public schools provide transportation to and from school for resident students in each district. Private schools do not, nor do public schools provide transportation for students coming from other districts. The ESA program is being promoted as a means to provide an educational choice for low income families and the most vulnerable, but the ESA program does not provide transportation.
A fourth limiting factor is geography. The House Bill limits participation to residents of cities with populations of 30,000 or greater, or counties with charter governments. The current version of the Senate Bill does not set forth these limitations.
In addition to such limiting factors, other opponents of the ESA program criticize the use of public funds to provide scholarships for religious schools. The Missouri Constitution - specifically what are known as the Blaine Amendments - prohibits money from the public treasury to be used “...in aid of any church, sect or denomination of religion, or in aid of any priest, preacher, minister or teacher thereof…” Proponents of the current ESA school choice program believe the new scholarship model funded by tax-payer donations - for which the taxpayer is reimbursed with an equal tax credit - provides enough separation between the public treasury and the religious institutions to circumvent the dictates of the Missouri Constitution.
Treasurer Fitzpatrick was clear in his perspective on this manner. The public funds are not being used to aid the religious institutions, the public funds are being used to aid the students and families whose needs are not being met by their local public school.
Although hesitant to make a prediction, Treasurer Fitzpatrick believes there is a good chance some version of school choice legislation could pass this year. His hope for unified support may not come to fruition. According to documentation of public hearings on HB 349, representatives of the Missouri State Teachers Association, the Missouri National Education Association, the Missouri Association of School Administrators, the American Federation of Teachers, and Dr. Clemens of the North Kansas City School District all gave testimony in opposition of the bill.
Institutions sending representatives to testify in support of the legislation included: the Missouri Century Foundation - dedicated to advancing free market initiatives; the American Federation for Children - dedicated to empowering lower-income families with the power to choose the best education for their children; and Summit Christian Academy. Several individuals also testified both for and against the bill.