Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.
Questions about how a voucher program would — or wouldn’t — serve children with disabilities took center stage at a Texas Senate education committee hearing Tuesday to discuss the main school voucher bill on the table during the Legislature’s latest special session.
Senate Bill 1, authored by Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, would use taxpayer dollars to create education savings accounts, a voucher-like program that would give families access to $8,000 a year to pay for private school tuition and other educational expenses.
Supporters of vouchers claim that education savings accounts would provide students with disabilities the opportunity to attend specialized schools if public schools fail to meet their requirements. Conversely, critics have emphasized that private schools are not legally obliged to offer special education services, unlike public schools.
Steven Aleman, a policy specialist at Disability Rights Texas, has expressed concerns raised by disability advocates regarding the allocation of public funds towards private schools. These concerns arise due to the underfunding of Texas’ public school system, which primarily caters to the majority of special needs students in the state. Aleman further highlights that there has been a significant increase of 200,000 students with disabilities in Texas over the past five years.
On Tuesday, Aleman testified that the enrollment in our public schools is on the rise, along with an increase in the special education population. Aleman emphasized the need to prioritize support for this system above all else, stating that education savings accounts are essentially an extravagance that we simply cannot afford.
According to Sabrina Gonzalez Saucedo, a public policy analyst for the Texas Council for Developmental Disabilities, SB 1 highlights the fact that private schools are exempt from the regulations outlined in the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. This act mandates that public schools must offer essential services to students with disabilities.
Gonzalez Saucedo expressed concern that if parents and students opt for a voucher system, they might forfeit crucial rights such as access to free and suitable public education, evaluation and review of findings by a diagnostician, individualized education programs, and other significant legal protections.
According to Gonzalez Saucedo, whose sister has an intellectual disability, another issue to consider is the potential creation of a “segregated education” system if vouchers are implemented. She believes that students with disabilities derive immense benefits from learning and playing alongside their non-disabled peers. The introduction of vouchers might encourage parents to separate their children, which could undermine this inclusive environment.
Contrary to this viewpoint, Mandy Drogin, the campaign director for an education initiative at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, presented a different perspective. Drogin shared the story of a concerned mother who revealed that her son, who has Asperger’s syndrome, faced persistent bullying in a public school due to his disability, which tragically led him to contemplate suicide.
Drogin expressed that he has listened to countless parents pleading for the chance to advocate on behalf of their children and liberate them from an unsatisfactory educational institution.
However, disability rights advocates have expressed concerns that even if offered the opportunity to attend a private school, children with disabilities may face difficulties in gaining admission. Additionally, private schools catering specifically to students with disabilities are primarily located in urban areas and often require annual tuition fees exceeding $20,000, as stated by Jacquie Benestante, executive director of the Autism Society of Texas.
During his elementary school years, Benestante’s son, who is autistic, faced rejection from a private school in Austin when attempting to enroll in their summer camp.
“He requires minimal support,” she mentioned. “He is exceptionally well-mannered, and they even advised me to ‘contact us again in May. If we have a shortage of typical students, we’ll consider him.'”
Sen. José Menéndez, D-San Antonio, said private schools’ ability to deny applicants at their discretion could affect all voucher recipients, even those who are not disabled.
Menéndez expressed his concern about the use of tax dollars when a constituent, possibly belonging to the economically disadvantaged group in need of free or reduced lunch, is rejected by a private school due to their religion or race after getting their hopes up and applying.
Creighton proposed addressing concerns regarding discrimination in private school admission through a distinct legislation.
Creighton added that while he acknowledges concerns about private schools having the power to accept or reject students based on their own criteria, he believes that parents will make more informed decisions than senators when it comes to choosing the most suitable school for their child.
Concerns were also expressed by Democratic lawmakers on the committee regarding the prioritization tiers of the bill.
In order to give priority to underprivileged groups, the bill suggests allocating a maximum of 40% of spots for students benefiting from free or reduced lunch programs. Additionally, up to 30% of spots would be reserved for families whose income falls between 185% and 500% of the federal poverty line. Students with disabilities would be allotted no more than 20% of spots, while the remaining 10% would be open to all other applicants who attended public, private, or home-school in the previous school year.
Menéndez argued that the use of the phrase “no more than” suggests a limitation on the funding allocated to underprivileged applicants, rather than giving them priority.
Laura Colangelo, the executive director of the Texas Private Schools Association, and Jennifer Carr Allmon, the executive director of the Texas Catholic Conference on Bishops, who are proponents of vouchers, also backed the modification of this language to ensure that the program would allocate maximum funding to economically disadvantaged or disabled students.
Disclosure: Texas Private Schools Association and Texas Public Policy Foundation have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
