Indiana panel backs private school voucher bill

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A contentious proposal to use taxpayer money to help Indiana parents send their children to private schools cleared its first legislative hurdle Wednesday.

The Republican-controlled House Education Committee voted 8-5 along party lines to advance the bill after hearing more than nine hours of comments about the idea over two days. The voucher bill, which now moves to the full GOP-led House, is a priority for Gov. Mitch Daniels, a Republican.

Supporters said vouchers allow low- and middle-income families to have the same educational options as wealthier Hoosiers.

Committee Chairman Rep. Robert Behning, R-Indianapolis, said some Indiana students are not getting the best services they can get in public schools and deserve the ability to choose a better option. But he said the bill was not aimed at undermining Indiana's public school system.

"This is not an indictment of schools," he said. "This is not an indictment of educators."

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett, a Republican who backs Daniels agenda, said in a statement that the vote Wednesday sends a message to Indiana families.

"All students — no matter their parents' income or ZIP code — deserve the chance to make educational decisions that best suit the needs of their children," he said. "Opportunity scholarships, like all proposals that increase educational options, provide hope for families and children who previously may have had very little."

Critics say vouchers siphon money away from public schools and that private schools can pick and choose their students while public schools accept everyone.

"It's very hard for me to sit here and not become emotional," said Rep. Greg Porter, D-Indianapolis. "When will it stop? When will we really look at education holistically and not just for a few?"

Under the proposal, families of four making up to $81,000 a year could receive a scholarship to a private school through the voucher program. Some Democrats said that was far too high of an income limit, and that the proposal would be less onerous if it were directed only at families that truly need help, such as those who qualify for the federal free and reduced lunch program and have children attending failing public schools.

"It infuriates me that we can have this discussion about kids and they're not in that group of free and reduced lunch," said Rep. Shelli VanDenburgh, D-Crown Point. "We're opening this up so much."

Opponents also question whether needy families would actually be able to use the vouchers to send their children to private schools since they would have to cover any remaining tuition costs and find transportation to get their children to school every day.

Rep. Dave Cheatham, D-North Vernon, said the state would ideally have enough money to adequately fund public schools before trying a voucher program.

"We don't live in a perfect world," he said. "It's a shame that we have to hurt students to help students. That's not good public policy."

Under the proposal:

— Only children currently attending public schools would be eligible for vouchers.

— Families that qualify for the reduced lunch program — those earning about $40,000 for a family of four — would be eligible for vouchers worth up to 90 percent of the per-student funding their current public school district receives. That amount varies by district, but the statewide average is about $5,500. That means those families would get vouchers worth up to about $4,950, and the school district would no longer get the money since it would no longer be educating that student.

— Families earning up to twice the reduced lunch program limits — about $80,000 for a family of four — would qualify for vouchers up to 50 percent of their district's per-pupil funding. Using the statewide average, those vouchers would be worth up to about $2,750.

— The maximum voucher amount for students in grade kindergarten through 8th grade would be $4,500.

— Private schools participating in the program would have to take statewide ISTEP exams as public schools do and would fall under state academic accountability laws.

— Because the scholarship amounts are only a percentage of public school per-student funding, the state could save money from the program. Any savings would be redistributed to public schools statewide.


  • WHY NOT?
    Why shouldnt the children receive the education they deserve? We are eligin=ble for the vouchers and are sending 2 of 3 to a private school. Most public schools are so large that children get thrown through the cracks and at least with smaller class sizes they have some oppurtunity and I can gaurantee they are just as qualified as public school teachers!! We should be more concerned about the quality of education not all the politics of education!!
  • not fair
    i am sorry and by no means do i mean any disrespect to those who are having a difficult time financially....but....my husband and i work very hard and sacrifice to PAY for a private education and it seems a little unfair that parents can just get a voucher and send theirs for free. So now we continue to bust our behinds and pay while other sit back, relax, and just receive. So because we scrape up enough to pay we don't get any assistance but those who don't get a full ride. I am sure that some other paying parents feel the same.
  • thank goodness
    Where do we fill the application me and my husband are intrested in sending our childern to the private school we have been praying alot for this to go threw
    I am SO happy this has passed. My husband and I have wanted to send our children to a private school since they began, but we just could not afford it! The representative from Crown Point who thinks middle class (80,000 for a family of 4) should not be included is just out of touch. We barely make ends meet with groceries and electricity and gas at nearly $4 a gallon, not to mention property taxes. We don't have a satellite dish or cable. We don't drive new cars. Why shouldn't OUR tax dollars go to the school we WANT our children to go to? Why should only the wealthy or very poor get the chance? People who think this will ruin public education are just fear mongers. I was a public school teacher. THIS IS JUST WHAT PUBLIC EDUCATION NEEDS TO IMPROVE AND MOVE FORWARD! Why should my tax dollars not go to the school I want my children to attend? We could not be happier to finally have a choice!
  • Yes we do!
    We may not be leagally obligated to accept kids that have learning disabilities but we are MORALLY OBLIGATED!! And by the way-- we do accept children with learning disabilites as long as we have the facilities and personnel to provide a solid educational experience experience for them. Get your facts straight first before you slam the private schools.
  • Smells fishy
    I don't know - they've already said it was never meant for the poorest kids. How are they supposed to get to school if they can't afford a car for themselves? And private schools aren't legally obligated to accept kids with learning disabilities, so of COURSE their scores will improve. Looks to me like elitism. Those with a choice will get more. Those with little choice will have less.
  • Completely Agree
    I completely agree with your comment. Very well said.
  • Finally
    Perhaps we should consider if public schools some competition for dollars they will improve their product. Afterall, they already receive funding for students that attend private school in the form of tax dollars they still collect for these students. How well are they spending this surplus. Not very well if you look at some of the results.

    Post a comment to this story

    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

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
    thisissue1-092914.jpg 092914

    Subscribe to IBJ