Public Comment

Texas Education Freedom Accounts began funding participating students for the 2026–2027 school year. The state program provides money for approved private-school tuition and other eligible educational expenses, with different awards and participation rules for different students. In August, the Comptroller reported that more than 100,000 students were receiving funding and that more than 100,000 additional students remained on the waitlist. Demand shows that many families want the program, but it does not by itself establish academic results, access in every community or the appropriate level of public spending. Expanding funding could reach additional families; maintaining the budget would allow more time to assess the first year. Narrower eligibility could concentrate support on students with greater financial or educational needs, while opponents of the program favor using the money within public education. The next funding decision belongs to state policymakers through the appropriations process. This poll asks what principle should guide that decision. It does not assume a particular expansion bill has passed or that every waitlisted family would receive the same award. A school that works for one child may not work for another. Families on a waiting list deserve an understandable answer, and taxpayers deserve more than a count of applications. I would like the next budget discussion to show who can actually use these accounts, what they pay for and what the first year teaches us.

What should determine the next funding decision for Texas Education Freedom Accounts?

Overall results

1
72% support · excluded by 8%
7

The program is large enough to produce useful evidence without expanding immediately. Review participation, unused awards, access to suitable schools and student outcomes before setting the next budget. Demand matters, but a waiting list cannot tell us whether the program reaches the intended families or whether additional spending would improve the results.

1

A new public program should show what taxpayers are buying before its budget grows. Keeping the present commitment gives participating families stability while allowing the state to inspect costs and performance. If the review supports expansion, lawmakers can explain that decision with evidence instead of treating every eligible application as a permanent claim on future budgets.

2
47% support · excluded by 16%
1

Working families should not be left behind because navigating the program requires spare time, cash or specialist advice. Prioritize students with greater needs and make their access practical. I would rather fund transportation, application assistance and suitable placements for that group than spread the same budget thinly across families with very different resources.

1

Public support should first reach families least able to purchase an alternative themselves. A targeted program could focus on financial hardship and educational needs that are difficult to meet. That still requires scrutiny of participating schools, but it gives the next dollar a clearer purpose than funding an equally broad entitlement for every interested household.

3
43% support · excluded by 12%
7

A family’s need does not disappear because the first budget ran out. Some parents may have found a school that fits their child and still be unable to afford it. The state should expand awards for eligible families while continuing oversight, rather than make those children wait for a long evaluation process before they have another option.

1

A program cannot develop reliable capacity if families and providers expect its funding to stop at an arbitrary early limit. Expanding access could let schools plan and give more families a workable choice. I would pair growth with transparent spending records and clear eligibility rules, so expansion supports a functioning market rather than simply increasing promises.

4
31% support · excluded by 12%
1

The state has a responsibility to maintain a public school system that serves every child, including those without a nearby private alternative. I would direct the money there instead of extending tuition accounts. Individual choice is valuable, but public funding should strengthen institutions with a common duty to accept and educate the whole community.

About the author