Committee Hearing on Senate Bill 3 in the 2017 Texas Legislature

Cost/Savings to the State: The fiscal note attached to the bill predicted a large negative fiscal impact to the state if this program was implemented. Nonetheless, advocates for the legislation focused on future savings of the program in the long-run. They highlighted potential social impacts such as higher test scores for students, which the findings to support this claim have been mixed. In addition, they advocate children will be less likely to be incarcerated as adults. On the other hand, the opposition highlighted that the negative fiscal note could be detrimental to the already lower than usual budget this session. Although the costs used to fund the program now is through a general revenue fund and not the Foundation School Program, the bill’s opponents fear the future negative fiscal impact could end up pulling much needed funds from public schools to make up the gap in costs.
Accountability: Those opposed to school choice highlighted that public schools have oversight by the state, while private schools do not have oversight, yet they would be funded with state dollars. For school choice advocates, accountability for private schools is to the parents, while for public school the accountability lies with the state then the parents. For public schools, performance measures such the state’s new A-F rating system help measure accountability of the schools. In an initial implementation of the new system, TEA found many public schools are rated low. For school choice advocates, this was specified evidence to support their claim that more educational choices are needed. The key issue is how to hold private schools accountable to the state if an education savings account was passed.
Minority support: Both Black and Latino groups testified both in favor of the legislation and against it. Minority groups in favor of the SB 3, such as Texas Libre focused on the opportunity this program would provide for minority students to have access to a more options and an overall better educational outcome. On the other hand, a large number of minority groups opposed the legislation and deemed SB 3 as a civil rights issue due to the possibility of segregation. Opponents argue that more upper class, white students, will use the program than lower income, minority students. In addition, groups are concerned that this program would defund public schools rather than create a new program or an educational market. They feel that there should be more attention and funds focused on improving the current public school system. In addition, the Mexican American and Black Texas Legislature Caucuses where highly opposed to SB 3.

Political Actors

Texas Legislators: The Senate Education Committee consists of 8 republicans and 3 Democrats. During the vote in committee, Senator Lucio (D) was the only Democrat to vote for the legislation. Senator Lucio justified his decision based on that providing more choice for parents is key to the future of education in Texas. On the other hand, Senator Seliger (R) voted against the bill due to the lack of accountability standards for schools receiving state funding. Other Senators not in favor of the legislation represent large urban areas in Dallas and San Antonio, Senator West and Senator Uresti. The legislation has passed committee (7-3) and was presented with a contrasting committee substitute of the legislation on the Senate Floor a week after receiving a vote of 18-13 to pass into engrossment. However, the chair of Public Education Representative Dan Huberty has publicly claimed that the school choice legislation will be dead on arrival in the Texas House. In the following weeks, the Texas House passed an amendment on their budget directing that no state funds will be allocated to a voucher program, such as SB 3. In the past, school choice legislation has failed to pass though both chambers. In the off chance that the House decides to debate the bill, Governor Abbott has publicly stated he will sign it into law.

Advocacy Groups: Many Texas organizations have been providing support or opposition to school choice since the legislation has been proposed.

Support: Two main supporting organizations of school choice legislation are Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF) and Texans for Education Opportunity who believe in an open market approach for education. These groups made sure that advocates from across the country attended the hearing and provided testimony in support of SB 3. Two allies in their position is the Texas Libre Initiative and academic support through the University of Arkansas research of Dr. Patrick Wolfe. The Texas Libre Initiative cited positive impacts this legislation would have on Hispanics' educational opportunities. The representative from Arkansas used selected findings on other school voucher systems to support the claim that this legislation will provide savings to the state and improve student outcomes.

Opposition: On the other end, key organizations that stand in opposition to the school choice legislation include two historic minority groups, the Texas NAACP and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. They believe that this legislation would allow for segregation due to white students being more likely to take advantage of this program over Latino and African American students and their families. Therefore, as white students leave the public schools, so does state funding from the schools to the point where Latino and African American students will be stuck in public schools that will not receive the funding needed. For these advocates, they would rather see the funding go towards improving the public schools already operating in Texas rather than opening up the educational market for private schools to receive state funding. Other opponents of the legislation are public school teacher associations and small school districts, such as Texas State Teachers Association, Texas Classroom Teachers Association, and Bastrop County School District who fear a program like this could decrease the jobs for public school teachers and hurt small rural school districts by decreasing their number of students and funding from the state. Other opposition comes from education advocacy groups such as Raise your Hand Texas and Texas Impact that echo similar concerns about the program especially one of education not being treated like capitalistic market.