After hours of intense debate on Thursday, the Texas House Public Education Committee passed altered versions of its marquee education legislation this session: a bill to add $7.7 billion in new funds for the public school system and a $1 billion bill for a private school voucher program.
Most Democrats on the GOP-controlled committee voted in favor of House Bill 2, the school funding bill, while acknowledging it still came up short for public schools that are in dire financial straits and shuttering campuses across the state. Democrats focused much of their ire on the voucher bill, which as expected, was passed out of committee on a party-line vote.
“We said this was a historic funding bill but our schools are in a historic hole, and this bill does not even catch us up to 2019 funding levels,” said state Representative James Talarico, an Austin Democrat, adding that he did not want to “overpromise” what HB 2 would do. On top of that, he said, “now we’re considering a bill that’s going to send a billion dollars in the first year and perhaps $7 billion in the second biennium to kids who are in private school.”
Three weeks ago, the committee heard nearly 24 hours of public testimony on the voucher proposal from around 700 people. Talarico stated 70 percent of those who showed up testified against the voucher bill. Over 12,000 others submitted written testimony, of which he said 90 percent expressed opposition to the bill.
This time, the meeting was a more quiet affair—in part because notice was posted only the afternoon before and because the committee did not livestream the meeting. The GOP committee chairman, Representative Brad Buckley, said this was “in accordance with House rules,” though it’s highly unusual—if not an affront to government transparency—for debate on a major bill to not be broadcast online.
“There have been significant changes made to these bills, and they’re going to be heard in a closed door meeting that’s not accessible to the public. No livestream. No public comment,” Talarico said at a press conference before the meeting. While there was no official recording, the House Democratic Caucus and at least one local TV news station provided their own livestreams.
At the meeting, the public ed committee took up Senate Bill 2, the universal voucher bill that the Senate passed back in February, though it was swapped out for a committee substitute that is a slightly modified version of the House’s voucher bill, House Bill 3.
The committee substitute for SB 2 maintains the HB 3 funding formula that tethers the amount allotted for a voucher to public school funding levels. Instead of providing each program participant $10,000 to use on private school tuition, as SB 2 did, the House substitute would set the voucher amount at 85 percent of the estimated statewide average of state and local funding for students.
The Legislative Budget Board estimates that amount would be $10,330 per student in the program’s first year, growing to $10,889 by 2030. Under the House version, students with disabilities could receive up to $30,000, versus the $11,500 amount in the Senate version. Home-schooled students would be eligible for a $2,000 voucher in both the House and Senate versions. Critics of the voucher proposals have emphasized that unlike public schools, private schools are not mandated to enroll or provide services for students with disabilities.
Last week, the Texas Legislative Progressive Caucus issued a letter calling the House voucher bill a “blank check for unlimited spending,” citing language in HB 2 and the House budget bill. They warned the bill could allow the governor and the Legislative Budget Board to unilaterally transfer more money into the program in the interim without the Legislature’s approval.
The committee substitute for SB 2 now includes a cap of $1 billion in the first biennium, which would expire in September 2027. In the next legislative session, lawmakers could increase appropriations to cover every applicant on the waiting list; that may require over $6 billion, according to a fiscal analysis.
In an attempt to allay concerns that taxpayers would be subsidizing vouchers for wealthy families with children already in private school, the House version also now caps the number of participants who currently do not attend public schools at 20 percent of total program participants. That provision also expires in 2027. (Buckley dismissed Democrats’ urging to add an income cap for eligible families.)
During the March hearing, Josh Cowen, a Michigan State University professor, testified that data collected from states with a universal voucher program showed only a quarter of participants were previously in public schools. “The rest had either never been in public school because they were kindergartners, or, more commonly, were coming into the voucher system from a private school,” Cowen said.
The House’s committee substitute also added a provision that limits eligibility to students who are a “citizen or national of the United State or [were] lawfully admitted into the United States”—a nod to conservative skeptics who said the voucher program would extend the government handouts to undocumented students.
The voucher bill passed along party lines with the six Democrats on the 14-member committee voting against the bill. Only two Democrats, Representative John Bryant and Representative Alma Allen, voted against the committee substitute for HB 2, the House’s public school funding bill.
In public testimony on HB 2 last month, school district leaders and public ed advocates urged the House to do more to increase funding. Under the committee substitute, HB 2 ups the proposed basic allotment increase to $395 instead of the $220 increase originally proposed. It would also provide automatic increases to the basic allotment every biennium, tied to property values. Representative Allen, a veteran Houston lawmaker, said the amount was “certainly not enough” to help school districts catch up to 2019 pre-inflationary levels, which she said would require a $1,400 increase.
The new version of HB 2 also attempts to address concerns that proposed salary increases may not reach the most experienced teachers in the state, as well as problems with districts having to depend on inexperienced and uncertified teachers to fill staffing shortages.
According to TEA’s 2024 annual report, 56 percent of first-time teachers hired in the 2023-24 school year were uncertified. “With uncertified teachers we have lost generations of children already,” said Democratic Representative Gina Hinojosa at the committee meeting.
The amended HB 2 also adds preschool students and bilingual students to the originally proposed funding increases for students with disabilities.
Meanwhile, Representative Bryant called the bill “a catastrophe” for the largest 49 school districts who would not see as much help under the bill because of what he said was a proposed elimination of the “hold harmless provision.” That was originally added as part of the state’s previous property tax relief to cover funding losses for school districts who lose revenue from lower property tax rates. Buckley said the bill would “step it [the state aid] down as districts grow” to ensure there is “more equity between districts,” but told Bryant, “You have my commitment to find a fix.”
Now out of committee, the two bills—which House leadership have marketed as a “Texas Two Step” package—could soon be on the floor for a full debate. House Speaker Dustin Burrows previously indicated that after the committee approved a voucher bill, it would get a floor vote “very soon thereafter — and pass.”
For the first time in Texas history, there is a tentative majority of Republicans in the House who support school vouchers. If it passes, it would be up to the Senate to accept any changes, or the two chambers would negotiate the differences.
We may be past the halfway mark of the session, but there’s still a long way to go till Sine Die.
