IBJNews

Indiana House education panel OKs voucher expansion

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The Indiana House Education Committee signed off Thursday on a large expansion of the Republican-backed school voucher system.

The measure would remove a one-year waiting period students have to spend in public school before qualifying for a voucher and qualify wealthier families for the program in certain cases. In some cases, it would allow a family of four earning up to roughly $128,000 to qualify for a batch of vouchers which cover 50 percent of the cost of schooling.

The panel voted 9-3 Thursday afternoon to send the measure to the full House of Representatives. The vote split along party lines just as the issue has for much of the last two years.

Gov. Mike Pence announced this week he was supporting the bill and it has the backing of the Republican leadership in the House. But the prospects of an expanded voucher system passing the Senate this year aren't clear.

At the heart of the battle is whether state dollars are spent on private or public schools. In one exchange, emblematic of the innumerable debates which have taken place between Republicans and Democrats over the last two years, Rep. Kreg Battles, D-Vincennes, and House Education Chairman Robert Behning, R-Indianapolis, scrapped over whether raising the amount of each voucher would become a handout for private schools.

Battles, the top Democrat on the education committee, argued that raising the cap on each voucher from $4,500 to $6,500 could turn into a giveaway for private schools that charge any less than the new limit.

"If they've established a $4,500 fee, they obviously think they can provide those services for $4,500," Battles said. "I think this is just wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars, in my opinion, to let someone charge us a fee just because we're willing to pay it."

But Behning, the author of the voucher expansion, told Battles he was ignoring a number of safeguards already in place that prevent any group from fleecing the state via the voucher program.

"The voucher bill will not allow the institution to charge voucher children more than they charge non-voucher children," he said. He added that the 2011 law also limits voucher recipients to receiving 90 percent of what public school students get from the state.

"At no time does the voucher ever exceed more than 90 percent of the state general fund support. They're never getting as much as a traditional public school or charter school would get. So there are always caps for it."

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT