This has been a historic year for the ongoing project to expand parental choice in education. In April, Texas became the latest state to establish parental choice using K-12 education savings accounts. In July, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act became law establishing a new federal tax credit for scholarship donations, an initiative that could bring choice to millions of children across the United States. This law also included major reforms expanding the allowable uses of 529 accounts.
As we wrote in the Wall Street Journal in August:
The latest amendments to 529 plans are transformative, expanding them into tax-free savings accounts for a range of K-12 expenses, job-training, workforce-development and even disability-related costs. Under the One Big Beautiful Bill, these accounts can be used to cover tutoring, vocational training in skilled trades such as plumbing and welding, professional licensing, credential programs and continuing education.
Altogether, the ongoing expansion of state-funded K-12 ESA programs and new federal reforms will make education choice a reality for nearly half of the elementary and secondary students across the United States. But additional reforms are needed to ensure that all children have the opportunity to maximize the time and resources spent on their K-12 schooling.
In a new article for The Hill, we highlight the growing inequality in educational opportunities available to children with disabilities.
Despite a well-intentioned federal law that provides baseline rights for parents of special needs children across all states, a stark divide has emerged in education opportunities for children with disabilities, based on whether they live in states with school choice.
Students with disabilities in choice states have significantly more options than their peers in non-choice states. Congress needs to update the law to expand choice nationwide for students with disabilities.
The centerpiece of federal special education law — the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act — was passed 50 years ago at a time when ascendant reform-minded activists were redefining liberalism to rely less on the redistribution of wealth through federal agencies and more on the expansion of due process rights through compliance regimes hashed out by federal judges and special-interest legal organizations.
The law provides a right to an Individualized Education Program, a plan negotiated between the public school system and the child’s parents, but not a right to a high-quality education of the parents’ choice.
Without a parental right to exit the public school system, school administrators are frequently compelled to ration access to scarce special education resources. As a result, while the law greatly expanded access to public education for children with disabilities, students whose parents cannot afford to hire lawyers or who are unable to navigate the Individualized Education Program bureaucracy struggle to receive needed services.
School choice programs give parents another option. They can now opt out of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act compliance regime altogether and use scholarships or education savings accounts to pay for the schools and services that best meet their children’s individual needs. Special-needs families in choice states are doing just that. By conservative estimates, 184,450 students with disabilities currently participate in school choice programs. Expect this number to grow with latest wave of new education savings account programs that prioritize children with disabilities. The massive education savings account program launching next year in Texas, for example, allocates up to $30,000 annually for special needs children.
…
The success of choice for students with disabilities points to how Congress can reform the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Lawmakers should provide additional funding to states that offer special education students a right-of-exit from their public schools using a scholarship or education savings accounts. This would ensure that more parents can choose the right learning environment for their children without hiring a lawyer. Establishing this incentive may also spur non-choice states to enact education savings accounts limited to special-needs children, helping millions of families.
A bipartisan approach to reform is possible. For decades, congressional Democrats have called for full funding for special education, since Individuals with Disabilities Education Act committed the federal government to pay 40 percent of special education costs. But that original promise has never been fulfilled. Significantly increasing federal funding for special education in exchange for school choice incentives may be a compromise lawmakers in both parties can support.
Read the entire article at The Hill.