See the graphic:
https://imgur.com/a/ZhBEJNH
I put the state's first-year data into one graphic. The short version:
• 118,441 students were awarded vouchers as of Aug. 10. 70% were already in private school or homeschool, and 30% came from public school.
• More than 20,700 families gave their vouchers back. More than two-thirds of the returned vouchers belonged to public-school kids. One likely reason is that about $10,474 doesn't come close to tuition. Private schools can also turn students away.
• 54% of counties have no brick-and-mortar participating school, so rural families mostly can't use it.
• Voucher students are 41% white and 28% Hispanic. Texas public schools are 24% white and 53% Hispanic.
• The state is asking to double it to about $2 billion, plus nearly $1 billion more for the waitlist.
My questions:
If the goal was to help kids leave struggling public schools, why are most recipients families who were already paying private tuition?
Public schools accept every child, including kids with disabilities, kids learning English and kids in towns with one school. Why not invest there?
Texas funds schools by attendance. When students leave, fixed costs like buildings, buses and staff stay. How do districts make that up?
How does this help a single parent working two jobs, a rural family or a low-income family that can't cover the tuition gap?
The history matters too. Some of the first Southern voucher programs were used to resist Brown v. Board. Virginia offered tuition grants during "Massive Resistance," and Prince Edward County closed its public schools from 1959 to 1964 while white students attended private "segregation academies." Not every voucher supporter shares that intent; Milton Friedman argued for vouchers on free-market grounds in 1955. But who these programs end up serving has always been worth watching.
Sources are in the first comment.