PA: Mastriano's Latest Voucher Bill

Pennsylvania States Senator Doug Mastriano, Trump-annointed failed gubernatorial candidate, has floated yet another in the state's long line of bad voucher legislation.

The one thing we can say about SB 969 is that it's at least short.  Beyond that, it's a waste of the small amount of space it takes up. But there's plenty of assorted baloney in its six pages.

The main thrust is the Educational Freedom for Families Account, an education savings account version of vouchery that has just a few features. 

Eligibility-- any family that meets the household income requirement of the state's existing voucher program, and who lives within the attendance area of a school in the bottom 15% of state metrics. The money can be spent on the usual list of items, from private school to homeschooling expenses. 

This bill comes with a justification for its own existence. Its purpose is to

(1) Provide access to education savings accounts for eligible students. 

(2) Increase flexibility for parents in determining appropriate educational options. 

(3) Improve educational outcomes and equity across school districts.

The first, sure. Second-- "increase" is doing a lot of work here, as school choice continues to rest not on what parents want, but what private schools are willing to give them. And at this point, we know that the third is not a real thing. Plenty of research shows that choice increases segregation and kneecaps educational outcomes. 

Mastriano proposes a different sort of funding set-up.

Each fiscal year, money shall be appropriated from the General Fund to the department in an amount not less than the average per-pupil State subsidy for basic education funding, as calculated by the most recent data published by the department.

"Average" is a scary word here, because state per-pupil spending varies wildly from district to district.  Funding the vouchers from the general fund is likely an attempt to placate Governor Shapiro, who is voucher-friendly, but has made clear he won't support a program that drains money from public schools. But it leaves the question of where this money is going to come from, exactly, or what is going to be cut from the general fund to pay for it. Don't get me wrong-- I am happy to finally after all these years open up a conversation about the true cost of school choice and how we can't have it without making education overall more expensive. 

But this will be expensive. Particularly since the bill calls for the state to set up an account for every eligible student. Not every family that has asked for it, but every eligible student. Maybe that's not wbat they actually meant.

There's language to say that the money shall follow the child, not the school, which the bill already makes clear, but I guess someone wanted to get that rhetoric in their. They did stop short of saying that the students should be given backpacks full of cash. 

There's a part about "misuse and audit" which says if families are caught misusing the money, they may be disqualified. How often? How many recipients? The Department of Education is supposed to perform annual audits, which seems like a great deal of work if they are supposed to audit every single family, but that's not clear.

Meanwhile, the Department of Education would also be responsible for maintaining a list of eligible vendors and providers. What safeties would be in place to make sure a vendor was qualified and legit? Nothing is mentioned in the bill.

One thing homeschoolers are not going to love--the bill calls for each voucher recipient to file "an annual education report, including attendance records and student progress evaluations, to the department." For homeschoolers who wanted to escape the state's big pokey eyeballs, this doesn't seem like a great fit.

The bill also calls to "streamline" the application process for charters and cyber charters; since one of the adverttised aims of the bill is to increase the number of such schools I assume that "streamline" means "lower the requirements."

Also, no "infringement" on the rights of lawful homeschoolers. Not sure why the bill's creator left out language requiring the state not to interfere with voucher schools, as is common in most new voucher bills. But it also promises that the state will "make available" various STEM stuff for home schoolers. What does "make available" mean? Drop it off at the house? Send clipped-out coupons for materials? Open a special state home school store?

Finally, this bill offers "Teacher performance incentives," sort of. "The Teacher Excellence Incentive Fund is established in the State Treasury" and funded with any federal funds for that purpose, private donations and grants, any "dormant" funds just kind of lying around unused in Harrisburg, and "other measures" determined by some imagined future law. That money (all $1.95 of it) will be used for "salary supplements, bonuses or student loan forgiveness." Awarding that pile of cash will be based on "objective improvements" in PSSA, SAT, or ACT scores, "year-over-year" student growth, schoolwide average grade point average increase,  or improved graduation/college admission rates. 

I have so many questions. Will the incentives be paid to individuals or to schools (the bill suggests the answer is "yes"). Do they mean improvements in one student's SAT score, or are they talking about when this year's group scores higher than last years? Will we be measuring a student's year-over-year growth in raw scores or inches or liters?

This bill reads like the barest outline of an idea for a bill, and if it had come from somebody else, I might not have paid attention. Since Mastriano has a memey promo for this bill, I'm not sure whether this is an actual attempt at creating policy or just a play for attention. Either way, it can go throw itself on the scrapheap of Pennsylvania voucher bill history.

In his press, Mastriano touts the bill as "a comprehensive, student-first solution that empowers parents, encourages school improvement and guarantees that every child has access to the best possible education." It does none of those things, and it especially, spectacularly not comprehensive. “For too long, Pennsylvania families have been denied the right to choose the best education for their children," he whinges. But in fact Pennsylvania families have had vouchers available since 2001. 

Mastriano announced this turkey back in February; it doesn't seem to have attracted a becy of co-sponsors, and was just sent to the Senate Education Committee. Let's hope it languishes and dies there.