We have had a lot of high-profile happenings in the House Education committee. I wanted to provide my comments from the House Education committee around voucher programs.
Today we have heard a lot of information leading up to a decision that is critical for the future of education in South Dakota: the idea of using taxpayer dollars to fund private schools and alternative learning through school vouchers. I want to be very clear that I have friends and family who homeschool and have students attending private schools, and I celebrate their ability to choose the correct setting for their children’s needs.
Perhaps helpful to level set around the idea of school choice. South Dakota already offers school choice. Parents can choose to send their children to public schools, private schools, or homeschool them. In 2021, our legislature passed SB 177, which amended language to clearly allow for school attendance options, including public, nonpublic, and alternative instruction without any interference, permission, or oversight by the school districts. The majority of homeschool families are happy with the current state, as evidenced by the large volume of emails indicating that they are not interested in either of the bills proposed. So, this debate isnt really about giving families choice or options. This is about how we fund education and how we allocate taxpayer dollars. That is a different idea entirely.
Public schools receive funding based on the number of students they enroll. So, if we decide to incentivize students to leave public school for a private institution, the public school indeed will lose funding. They will receive less funding by the sheer function of the funding formula. The consequences is then taking money away from the public schools that are serving all our students.
South Dakota has already established programs to assist students seeking private school education. Since 2016, weve had the Partners in Education Tax Credit Program, which allows insurance companies to donate to nonprofit organizations that provide scholarships for private school tuition. In 2023 alone, over 1,600 students participated in this program, receiving nearly $2,000 on average in scholarships.
This is a program that already exists, and it is targeted specifically at low-income students who are seeking access to private schools. In fact, the limit for this program was increased last year from $3 million to $5 million, a sign that we are already putting resources behind this effort. So, the question we must ask ourselves is: Do we need more scholarships and vouchers? And if so, where does it end?
We are already struggling to adequately fund public education. South Dakota ranks 48th in teacher pay in the nation. So, how can we justify diverting precious taxpayer dollars away from public schools, especially in a budget year where significant cuts are already proposed? With a fiscal note for 2026 of up to $64 million, what programs will we cut to add this new spending program? It strikes me that the outcry from the public to protect SDPB and State library could almost be funded by not supporting the creation of this new spending program.
The cost of this program will grow exponentially, as is the intended goal. We only need to look at other states that have implemented similar programs to see how that plays out. As an example, in Florida, a similar program was 519% over budget. We cannot afford to gamble with our states future in this way. How is that fiscally responsible? We have also seen in states where this program exists, public schools have increased their tuition fees after the program was implemented.
If this proposal passes, we will be growing government, adding a new spending program with little accountability or transparency which does not align with conservative values. We would be distributing public funds with no clear way to measure success, no metrics to ensure the program is working.
Let me leave you with this thought: last year, we saw a number of bills proposed and killed that would have provided a reasonable lunch for kids that did not have food and couldn’t afford it. We said no to making sure hungry kids have a school lunch, possibly their only meal that day. If I recall that was considered spending, growing government and handouts. Now, were proposing paying to send kids to private schools. How do we justify that?
We are being asked to take public dollars used for public education a system that serves all students and place it behind the selective walls of private institutions that can choose who they let in. Thats not a fair use of taxpayer dollars. We can do better for all South Dakota students. Lets focus on strengthening and supporting our public schools, ensuring every child has access to a quality education, regardless of where they live or any other disqualifying factor.
Leave a Reply