* Tribune…
Illinois could soon opt into the first federal school voucher program — an initiative long-championed by private school advocates and religious conservatives — but Gov. JB Pritzker has yet to weigh in.
Under the program, part of the Republican One Big Beautiful Bill Act, donors can get a dollar-for-dollar tax credit of up to $1,700 for giving to scholarship-granting nonprofits. Those scholarships can go to private school tuition, transportation and other education-related expenses. […]
“We will evaluate the issue through a lens focused on affordability for working families and what best supports Illinois students, families, and public schools,” according to the statement [from Gov. Pritzker’s office].
In a July email, however, Pritzker’s office criticized the program, noting that it could “potentially (reduce) state and federal funding for public schools.” […]
“It’s a federal tax credit, so it doesn’t take any state or local resources,” [Andrew Broy, the president of the Illinois Network of Charter Schools] said.
* Isabel asked Pritzker about the change in response today. His answer…
Nothing’s changed. We have not seen any rules that have been put out. Remember, the federal government hasn’t put any rules around this program. Those rules when they’re issued, we’ll be able to evaluate whether that’s good for the state of Illinois and the people of Illinois or not. But until we have that right just on its face, the question is, is this just a repeat of trying to take money out of public schools and move it into private schools, which is what the Trump administration, generally speaking, has been in favor of, or is this something that could be useful? But we just don’t know, because there are no rules around it right now. […]
As far as I understood, those rules were supposed to come out before the end of the year. They still aren’t out. So we’ll take a look at those and make a decision then.
* And explanation from the US Departments of Education and Treasury…
• Using the Education Freedom Tax Credit, taxpayers can receive a credit of up to $1,700 for contributions made to Scholarship Granting Organizations (SGOs) that would otherwise have been owed to the government in Federal income taxes.
• SGOs then use these funds to provide scholarships to children to attend a school of choice or to access other education-related services and products.
• Scholarships can be used for any qualified education expense of an eligible student, which includes a broad set of expenses incurred in connection with or required by any K-12 public, private, or charter school. Examples include tuition for students to attend private schools of choice, tutoring at public schools, and support services for students with disabilities.
The tuition assistance is available to households with income “up to 300 percent of the area’s median gross income.” The Tribune reported that, in Cook County, kids in households with up to four people with annual incomes as high as $359,000 would qualify for the assistance.
The bill’s language is here.
- H-W - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 12:27 pm:
=== It’s a federal tax credit, so it doesn’t take any state or local resources ===
My contrarian comments on a previous page about protecting state and local tax revenues are less relevant.
- Mr. Middleground - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 12:27 pm:
This is an obvious “yes” for Illinois. I think Governor Pritzker will get there in the end. Ultimately, it will mean an increase in net new dollars for public schools as additional cost services (tutoring, career and technical education, etc) will be eligible to be funded from an SGO. If there is a decrease in enrollment at public schools (a very big if), then dollars per student will increase. There is no mechanism to decrease funding to public schools as a result of this change. If Illinois doesn’t participate, our students miss out.
- JS Mill - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 12:37 pm:
=This is an obvious “yes” for Illinois.=
Let me fix your error…
This is an obvious “no” for America and Illinois. As the current administration continues to erode support for public education this is just another attack on the one true democratic institution left in this coountry.
- Socially DIstant Watcher - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 12:43 pm:
This administration has many times just since swearing in attached impossible agreements to access federal dollars. If the only way real students can see real.money is to turn over control of schools to Trump, this all may vanish
- nukeguard - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 12:49 pm:
Winnebago county has an advisory question on the March ballot for it. With it being a federal tax credit for private donations to these scholarship granting organizations, it’s not necessarily like it’s deferring public school money so I think Illinois should join in.
- Niles Township - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 12:52 pm:
Reasonable minds can disagree agree about the value of the expired state program. On the other hand, there is really no reason to say no to this federal program other than it’s from trump and as a cave to the teachers unions. I say this a Democrat who believes in strong public schools. Other democratic governors like Polis and Stein seem to be on-board. Pritzker should join them.
- JS Mill - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 1:01 pm:
=ther than it’s from trump and as a cave to the teachers unions. I say this a Democrat who believes in strong public schools. Other democratic governors like Polis and Stein seem to be on-board. Pritzker should join them.=
As a member of management and not beholden to teachers unions I can say very definitively that we should not join the program. It does divert money from schools. It does not matter to me if it is federal or state.
- DuPage Saint - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 1:06 pm:
At first blush since it is federal money and does not appear to take money from the state I would say why not? However as stated in comments I would bet there will be many many strings attached to any funding
- Steve - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 1:20 pm:
-This is an obvious “no” for America and Illinois. -
26 states have already opted in. So, it’s not an obvious no for a lot of states.
https://tinyurl.com/mtb3s8hr
- Niles Township - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 2:09 pm:
-It does divert money from schools-
You’re going to have to prove that up. I agree it lowers federal tax revenue collections, but that money can be used to buy tanks too. It doesn’t take away federal education funding. It actually doesn’t seem to change the education formula at all. In addition, the way it’s structured seems like some of this money can aid public school students too (tutoring, special needs etc.). Democrats like Gov. Polis and Gov. Stein actually read the law instead of just the badgering union emails and opted their states in. Not everything needs to be political. Sometimes bad people pass good laws.
- Steve - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 2:19 pm:
Whether the argument is taking away money from public schools is beside the point. If Illinois doesn’t want to particpate they have ever right not to. In Illinois , there’s no burning desire for vouchers or students going to schools across district lines or other reforms. There might be in the other states. Not here. The voters in the Chicago, Cook County and downstate by and large like the current system.
- H-W - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 2:19 pm:
I am still a hard no on allowing citizens at any level to decide where their taxes will go. I am also opposed to this particular bill in the sense that it is part and parcel to the broader goal of reducing federal spending on education by off-setting federal fiscal support by an amount equal to those dollars which will be targeted toward private schools (cf. JS Mill, Du Page Saint, others). Reducing and eliminating federal support for public education is clearly a race to the bottom approach.
Niles Township unknowingly makes an excellent reason for saying no. Defining this as purely political is purely a political statement, Nile Township. Those who would suggest we want to emulate 26 other states are simply making a fools proposition. That we should trust and follow the pack, most of whom have lower educational quality and attainment results and are sticking their hands out rather than getting their hands dirty, is irrational thinking.
Finally, like Pritzker and others suggest, until we have seen the strings attached by the dying U.S. Department of Education, being run by an expert in selling fake wrestling, making a decision to go along is just foolishness, especially if we are following the lead of 26 states, most of whom have failing schools already.
- H-W - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 2:26 pm:
@ Niles Township
If you actually believe that decreased federal dollars will result in fewer tanks, you are naive and wrong. If you do not believe that the federal executive is already cutting funding to American schools, and do not believe the federal executive does not intend to cut additional federal spending on public schools, you are deaf, and blind.
Don’t be dumb too. This is an attempt to offset federal appropriations by an amount equal to or greater than the value of these scholarship dollars that are unavailable to the majority of children in America. All children losing a little so that a few can prosper is contrary to the promise of America.
- thechampaignlife - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 2:29 pm:
The governor gets to pick which SGOs can operate in Illinois. He just needs to pick ones that only provide funding to public schools.
- JS Mill - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 2:32 pm:
@H-W X2 +1
= I agree it lowers federal tax revenue collections, but that money can be used to buy tanks too. It doesn’t take away federal education funding=
You don’t get out much do you? This is the same admin that has frozen education funding, tried to eliminate the Dept of Ed and you think the guy who wants a battleship class named after him is going to reduce the number of tanks? You are not are serious person.
- Niles Township - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 2:34 pm:
I’m a lifelong Democrat, but I don’t believe in group think/herd following. Both parties suffer from that and it has lead us to where we are in are in the nation. Apparently, I hit a nerve here with a couple of the responses and that’s ok. Gov. Polis and Gov. Stein are solid democrats and potential future national candidates and they saw through all the nonsense on this point. Gov. Pritzker is a good man and I’m hopeful he will too. I have no doubt trump wants to do and has done a long list of terrible things. This law isn’t one of them to me (or other democrats as noted above). By the way, while I’m no educator, my mother was and wife is.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 2:36 pm:
===Gov. Polis and Gov. Stein are solid democrats and potential future national candidates===
Polis refused to support repealing Colorado’s right to work law. Labor would have something to say about a national bid.
- Jane Addams - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 3:04 pm:
Factually speaking, a few points. 1) this is federal law, it’s not up for debate, it passed and not going away for at least three years. 2) this is not cutting education funding (it is run by the treasury, not Dept of Education), rather supplementing it to PUBLIC and private schools 3) IF the Governor does not opt-in, ALL donations from Illinois taxpayers will go to students in other states (Iowa, Indiana, etc), so students in Illinois would not see any benefits from the program 4) INNOVATIVE school districts will figure out ways to capture the money to help their own students rather than object to it’s origination
- Sue - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 3:20 pm:
NEA/ AFT/IEA/IFT- that is all you need yo know what drives JB’s decision making
- old guy - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 3:28 pm:
As Grouch says “Whatever he/it is, I’m against it.”
- H-W - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 3:39 pm:
@ Niles
I get it too as a lifelong voter for democrats.
Surely you will admit, even good people make mistakes and sometimes even, bad decisions with good intent. I would suggest it is because too many good people jump into bad ideas that sound good.
Until there is a promise that all U.S. benefit equally, such a plan is not really a federal plan, but a class-based plan that the suburbs will love, and differentially benefit. The rest of downstate? The current proposal will only worsen their current circumstances. Poor rural will be guaranteed to lose in the long run.
There must be a better plan - a more thorough plan. Anything else intentionally produces harm for some (less federal funding in the long run). Jumping in now because everyone is going swimming is a losing proposition under capitalism, right?