Artboardbackpack_iconblog_iconcalendar_iconchat-bubble_iconArtboardclock_iconArtboarddown-arrow-icondownload_iconfacebook-iconflickr-icongears_icongrad-hat_iconhandheart_iconinstagram-iconArtboardlaptop_iconleft-arrow-iconArtboardArtboardnews_iconArtboardpencil_iconpeople_iconpublication_iconArtboardright-arrow-iconruler_iconscroll_iconsearch_iconArtboardspeaker_icontools_icontwitter-iconup-arrow-iconyoutube-icon
‹ Back to List

House committee hears opposition testimony on voucher expansion bill
02/16/2016

 

No-to-vouchers.jpgA bill that would allow any voucher eligible student to apply for a second semester private school voucher was heard Tuesday in the House Education Committee.

 

Advocates of SB 334 focused on how the expanded window to apply for a voucher would assist expelled students or those who need an alternative education option in the second semester. However, the bill is not restricted to this narrow group of expelled and in-need students, but instead, expands vouches to all students.

 

The nonpartisan Indiana Legislative Services Agency estimates that SB 334 could cost taxpayers another $2.1 million in its first year alone, and this is if only 1,000 students took advantage of the spring-semester provision.

 

ISTA testified in opposition of the bill. The Indiana Department of Education, Indiana Coalition for Public Education, American Federation of Teachers – Indiana, Indiana Small and Rural Schools Association, Indiana Urban Schools Association, Indiana Association of Public School Superintendents and Indiana School Boards Association also testified against SB 334.

 

Several times throughout the meeting, legislators, including committee chair Rep. Bob Behning (R – Indianapolis), questioned witnesses if they would drop their opposition to the bill if the voucher window was narrowed to only drop out students and others with specific needs. 

 

SB 334 will be heard again on Thursday where the committee is expected to vote on the bill. Those in opposition to the bill are encouraged to continue telling committee members to vote “no.”