Wyoming conservatives tout school choice while aiming to dismantle public education

The Wyoming Legislature convenes on Feb. 9

The issues you care about are up for debate at the legislative session. Keep tabs on Wyoming politics and policy with our free morning newsletter.

Sign up ✉️

When Wyoming lawmakers pushing for “universal school choice” ran into a political roadblock last year that stymied their progress, the legislators knew exactly what to do: slap the word “freedom” onto a new bill and shoot for the moon.

That’s the ticket! How could any patriotic person possibly vote against the “Wyoming Freedom Scholarship Act,” which would give public money to all families to send their kids to private or religious schools?

Of course, many of us think the Legislature’s current school voucher program — called “education savings accounts” — has absolutely nothing to do with educational freedom no matter what it’s named. ESAs are clearly unconstitutional because the program violates the state’s prohibition on using public funds for private and religious schools. 

Greatly expanding an already illegal program to allow much more money to be spent — and even subsidize wealthy families who already send their kids to parochial schools — will further weaken public schools already reeling from budget cuts and teacher shortages.

There are many reasons to reject House Bill 199, “Wyoming Freedom Scholarship Act,” but No. 1 in my book is that the state already has universal school choice. 

Families aren’t limited to sending their children to the free, high-quality public schools that provide equal educational opportunities for all, as mandated in the Wyoming Constitution. Parents here have always had the right to make other school choices, as long as they pay the bill.

Last year, lawmakers approved a school voucher bill that would have offered $6,000 to each K-12 student whose family earned up to $156,000 per year. In addition to private and religious schools, the money could be spent on pre-K and homeschool expenses.

The hard-line Freedom Caucus that now controls the House celebrated, but then the nearly universal school choice bill ran into an obstacle it didn’t see coming: objections from Gov. Mark Gordon.

The caucus has always held Gordon in low esteem for his sometimes more moderate views, but it likely didn’t think the governor would dare to veto a bill that overwhelmingly passed the House and Senate. The bill was finalized late in the session after a parade of amendments, and after it landed on Gordon’s desk the lawmakers went home.

The governor finally signed the bill, but vetoed the higher-level income provisions. Gordon attempted to circumvent the prohibition on funding private and religious schools by limiting the eligible income to about $45,000 for a family of four.

Gordon reasoned the move would make the law less likely to be legally challenged, because the Wyoming Constitution also prohibits the state from giving money to individuals “except for the necessary support of the poor.”

The Freedom Caucus and its allies went bonkers and demanded a special session to override that veto and another on a popular property tax relief bill. Traditional conservatives in the competing Wyoming Caucus, however, balked at calling lawmakers back to work.

Universal school choice was a campaign rallying cry for the Freedom Caucus, and with control of the House after the 2024 election, it’s greasing the wheels for HB 199. New House Speaker Chip Neiman stacked the deck by appointing only GOP school voucher supporters to the House Education Committee, effectively silencing Democratic opponents.

House Bill 199 makes several major changes, most notably removing all income requirements and making the “freedom scholarships” available to every student. It would hike the per-student amount to $7,000, and raise the allocation from $20 million to $50 million.

Education savings accounts are now available for pre-K, a concession to early childhood education advocates in 2024 to increase support. But that component, the only one I liked, would be eliminated.

The bill also removes the requirement that private schools submit standardized test results to the Wyoming Department of Education. If supporters truly believe private schools give students a greater chance to succeed, why do they insist there be no accountability for how they use public funds?

The Freedom Scholarship bill is just one piece of the Freedom Caucus’ multi-pronged effort to undermine public education. This plan has the rabid support of Superintendent of Public Instruction Megan Degenfelder, whose job is to oversee public education. How can she not care that public schools will take a huge hit as funds dwindle and programs are cut?

“Our future is under attack by extreme ideologies and federal overreach that have no place in Wyoming,” Degenfelder said in a statement laying out her policy priorities for the general session. “This legislative agenda is about standing firm against this assault, protecting our families and resources, empowering parents, and every student is equipped to succeed with the values that make Wyoming strong.”

I’ve seen many different agendas promoted by Wyoming’s GOP and Democratic education chiefs since the mid-1970s, but I never thought I would hear the state’s top education official claim “protecting” school resources means taking funds away from public schools that would directly benefit the students we have a duty to invest in.

Wyoming has a severe shortage of teachers, thanks to its inability to keep up with salaries neighboring states pay. Instead of paying teachers more, the Legislature’s absurd solution is to consider a bill that would allow schools to hire teachers and staff who aren’t accredited or certified professionals.

Here’s something else that blows my mind: Why are so many supposedly freedom-loving conservatives hell-bent on dictating what can be taught in public schools and how certain students are treated?

The Freedom Caucus is obsessed with banning transgender students from sports competitions and restrooms that align with their gender identity. They want all sex education and LGBTQ-themed books removed from school libraries. The nation’s institutional racism and gender equity are singled out as forbidden classroom topics. Mental health providers in public schools to help address bullying, suicide prevention and other vital youth issues? Too expensive, we’re told.

The far right’s call for universal school choice has long been a key part of its misguided mission to privatize education. But its frenetic campaign to manufacture mistrust in public schools has caught on in recent years, mostly in red states like Wyoming where people are conditioned to blame everything they don’t like on so-called “woke” policies they can’t define.

For decades Arizona’s school voucher initiatives were limited to certain poor students in failing public schools. But in 2022, Arizona passed America’s largest universal school choice program. The state’s public school system is crumbling under the weight of its disastrous fiscal decision.

Arizona, which provides parents tens of thousands of dollars for private school tuition, estimated a $65 million voucher budget. It ballooned to $332 million, with $430 million expected to be added this year. The spending contributed to the state’s $1.4 billion budget shortfall, which led to cutting many critical programs, including $333 million for water infrastructure and hundreds of millions of dollars for highways.

In his veto letter last year, Gordon said while vouchers may pose challenges to public schools, they “may also bring benefits associated with increased competition.”

That’s the kind of malarkey Arizona legislators peddled to downplay the impact on public schools and sell universal school choice. Here’s the reality: According to ProPublica, Arizona is now 49th in the nation in per-pupil public school funding. Schools in lower-income areas have some of the country’s worst staffing ratios and largest class sizes.

I hope that’s not the fate of Wyoming. But if it is, I can already hear the reaction from school voucher proponents: “public schools just couldn’t stand the competition.”