Texas Senate Bill 2 - What is all the fun about?

By Michael P. Granata May 20, 2025 Posted in Child Support Tagged in Child Custody Share

Understanding the Texas School Voucher System: A Deep Dive

In April 2025, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed Senate Bill 2 (SB 2) into law, marking a historic shift in the state’s education policy by establishing a $1 billion Education Savings Account (ESA) program, commonly referred to as a school voucher system. Set to launch in the 2026-27 school year, this program allows families to use public funds for private school tuition and other educational expenses, positioning Texas as a major player in the national “school choice” movement. However, the voucher system has ignited fierce debate, with supporters hailing it as a victory for parental rights and critics decrying it as a threat to public education. This blog explores what the Texas school voucher system entails, how it works, its implications, why it’s so divisive, and how this Statute will inevitably make it’s way into Dallas Custody Litigation.

What Is the Texas School Voucher System?

The exact Statute isn’t finalized yet, but it’s believed it will add a new chapter or subchapter to the Education Code (probably under Title 2, which governs public education). At its core, the Texas school voucher system, enacted through SB 2 is designed to give families greater flexibility in choosing educational options for their children by redirecting public funds to private and alternative schooling. Officially termed Education Savings Accounts (ESAs), the program allows parents to access state money to cover approved educational expenses, such as private school tuition, textbooks, transportation, therapy, and homeschooling materials. The initiative reflects a broader national push for “school choice,” championed by figures like Governor Abbott and U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, who argue that competition fosters educational excellence.

How Exactly do the Vouchers work – Who receives the money?

The Education Savings Account (ESA) funds are paid directly to parents or guardians, not directly to private schools. Here's how it works:

• Mechanism: Eligible families receive funds in an ESA, which they can use for approved educational expenses, including private school tuition, homeschooling materials, textbooks, transportation, and therapy.
• Administration: The funds are managed through an online platform administered by a third-party education assistance organization contracted by the Texas Comptroller’s office. Parents access these accounts to make payments for approved expenses.
• Payment Process: Parents use the ESA funds to pay private schools or other providers directly. Private schools and other vendors must be approved by the state to receive payments from ESAs, but the funds are disbursed to parents, who then allocate them.
• Funding Details: Generally the program provides approximately $10,000 per student annually, with homeschooled students eligible for $2,000. These amounts are deposited into the ESA for parents to manage.

The program’s key features include:

• Funding: The state has allocated $1 billion over two years to fund ESAs, with projections estimating 90,000 students participating in the first year. Costs could rise to $4.5 billion annually by 2030 if participation grows.
• Voucher Amounts:
• Most students receive approximately $10,000–$10,900 per year, equivalent to 85% of the average per-student funding for public schools.
• Students with disabilities are eligible for up to $30,000 to cover specialized services.
• Homeschooled students can access $2,000 for approved expenses like curriculum materials.
• Eligibility: The program is open to most Texas schoolchildren, with priority given to low-income families (at or below 200% of the federal poverty line which is around $30k gross annual income for one person) and students with disabilities (at or below 500% of the poverty line). Notably, private schools are not obligated to accept voucher recipients, retaining discretion over admissions.
• Administration and Oversight: The Texas Comptroller manages and audits the funds, ensuring they are used for approved purposes. However, private schools accepting vouchers are exempt from administering state standardized tests (STAAR) and face fewer accountability requirements than public schools.

The voucher system is part of a broader education package that includes House Bill 2 (HB 2), a $7.7–$8 billion public school funding bill that increases per-student funding and provides teacher pay raises. However, the voucher component has overshadowed these measures due to its transformative potential and contentious nature.

How Did Texas Get Here?

Texas has long resisted school vouchers, with proposals dating back to the 1950s often tied to efforts to circumvent school integration following Brown v. Board of Education. For decades, a coalition of Democrats and rural Republicans blocked voucher legislation, citing concerns about diverting funds from public schools, which serve over 5.5 million students and are a cornerstone of community life, especially in rural areas. Texas ranks 38th nationally in per-student funding, and chronic underfunding has left districts struggling with budget deficits, outdated facilities, and teacher shortages.

Why Is the Voucher System Controversial?

The Texas school voucher system has sparked intense debate, pitting advocates of parental choice against defenders of public education. Below are the main arguments on both sides:

Arguments in Favor

1. Empowering Parental Choice: Supporters, including Abbott and Republican leaders like Sen. Bob Hall, argue that vouchers give parents the freedom to choose the best educational environment for their children, whether it’s a private school, homeschooling, or specialized programs for students with disabilities. They contend that public schools don’t always meet every child’s needs, particularly in underperforming or unsafe districts.
2. Fostering Competition: Proponents believe vouchers introduce market-driven competition, incentivizing public schools to improve academic outcomes to retain students. They point to states like Florida, where voucher programs coexist with public school systems, as evidence of potential success.
3. Supporting Vulnerable Students: The program’s higher voucher amounts for students with disabilities and priority for low-income families are touted as addressing inequities, offering access to specialized services or safer schools that public districts may lack.
4. Political Momentum: National figures like President Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz have endorsed the program, framing it as part of a broader conservative push to expand school choice. The success in Texas could bolster similar efforts nationwide.

Arguments Against

1. Draining Public School Funds: Critics, including Democrats, teachers’ unions, and groups like the Texas Freedom Network, argue that the $1 billion allocated for vouchers siphons resources from public schools, which are already underfunded. Public school funding is tied to attendance, so students leaving for private schools reduce district budgets, potentially leading to program cuts, teacher layoffs, or school closures, particularly in rural areas where schools are major employers.
2. Inequity and Accessibility Issues: The $10,000 voucher often falls short of private school tuition (averaging $11,000, with elite schools costing up to $40,000), meaning low-income families may still be priced out, while wealthier families already in private schools benefit most. Private schools’ selective admissions policies also raise concerns about discrimination against students with disabilities, LGBTQ+ students, or those from minority backgrounds, as they can deny enrollment based on any criteria.
3. Lack of Accountability: Private schools receiving voucher funds are not required to administer STAAR tests or adhere to the same transparency standards as public schools. Critics fear this could lead to inconsistent educational quality or misuse of taxpayer funds, citing Arizona’s voucher program, which ballooned from $65 million to over $700 million, largely benefiting affluent families.
4. Risk of Segregation: Opponents worry that private schools’ selective admissions could exacerbate racial, economic, or religious segregation, echoing historical voucher proposals tied to resisting integration. The exclusion of undocumented Texans from the program, added as a provision, has also drawn criticism as discriminatory.
5. Bypassing Public Input: Democrats proposed a statewide vote on the voucher program, arguing that such a significant policy change should reflect public will. The amendment failed, fueling accusations that the Legislature prioritized political agendas over community voices. Polls show mixed support: 52–65% of Texans favor vouchers, but support drops when framed as diverting public school funds.

Texas and Dallas Family Law Implications

 Disputes Over Educational Decision-Making in Custody Cases

In Dallas family law and divorce, parents with joint managing conservatorship (common in custody arrangements) generally share decision-making responsibilities, including those related to education, unless a court assigns one parent sole authority. The voucher program introduces new choices (public, private, or homeschooling) and financial considerations, which could lead to conflicts which would need to be resolved.

Right to apply and receive funds: who exactly would be able to apply for, receive and distribute the funds received from the ESA. It doesn’t seem they would fall under child support so provisions allowing a parent to collect and use child support ostensibly are inapplicable.

Parents may disagree on whether to use an ESA to enroll a child in a private school, especially if one parent prefers public school or objects to a specific private school’s religious affiliation, curriculum, or admission policies. For example, since most Texas private schools are religiously affiliated, a parent might oppose a school’s ideological or doctrinal stance.

Such disagreements could lead to motions to modify custody orders, with one parent seeking sole decision-making authority over education to control ESA fund usage. Courts may need to evaluate the “best interest of the child” under Texas Family Code § 153.002, considering factors like the child’s educational needs, the quality of the proposed school, and parental intentions.

Parents may present evidence comparing public and private school outcomes, safety, or special education services. The lack of STAAR testing requirements for private schools receiving ESA funds could complicate assessments of academic quality, potentially leading to disputes over data reliability.

• Example Scenario: A divorced couple shares joint conservatorship, and one parent wants to use the ESA to enroll their child in a private religious school, while the other prefers the local public school.

Context: The ESA program provides funds directly to parents, who then pay private schools or other approved vendors. This financial arrangement could intersect with divorce-related financial disputes, including child support and property division.

Texas child support guidelines (Texas Family Code § 154.001 et seq.) base payments on a percentage of the noncustodial parent’s income, adjusted for certain expenses. ESA funds, being public money and not parental income, are unlikely to be considered in child support calculations but they could be since the statute determining a parents resources is so broad. Disputes may arise over who controls the ESA funds and whether they offset educational expenses typically covered by child support (e.g., tutoring or extracurriculars).

Private School Tuition Costs: Since ESA funds ($10,000-$12,500) may not cover full private school tuition (average cost >$11,000), parents may litigate responsibility for the tuition gap. For example, a custodial parent might argue the noncustodial parent should pay the difference as part of child support, leading to modification hearings.

Property Division: In divorce proceedings, courts might consider ESA funds as a resource for the child’s education, potentially affecting equitable distribution of marital assets. For instance, a parent might argue that access to ESA funds reduces the need for spousal maintenance to cover educational costs.

Example Scenario: A divorcing couple disputes whether ESA funds should be used for private school tuition or reserved for other expenses (e.g., therapy). The custodial parent might seek additional child support to cover tuition gaps, prompting litigation over financial responsibilities.

Homeschooling Disputes

Context: SB 2 allows homeschooled students to receive $2,000 (or $2,500 for those with disabilities) for approved expenses. Homeschooling decisions can be contentious in custody cases, as Texas courts scrutinize whether homeschooling meets educational standards.

Potential Impact:

Approval of Homeschooling: A parent seeking homeschool using ESA funds may face opposition from the other parent, who might argue that public or private school better serves the child’s academic and social needs. Courts may require evidence of curriculum quality, socialization plans, and parental qualifications, increasing litigation.

Financial Accountability: Disputes could arise over how ESA funds are spent (e.g., on curriculum vs. non-educational items), potentially leading to contempt motions if one parent misuses funds.

Example Scenario: One parent wants to homeschool using ESA funds, while the other insists on private school enrollment. The disagreement leads to a custody modification suit, with the court evaluating the homeschooling plan’s adequacy.

Looking Ahead

As the voucher system rolls out in 2026, its success will hinge on implementation, oversight, and public response.