The Wyoming House of Representatives has passed a bill that would introduce universal school vouchers to the state, making all families eligible for private school grants funded by the state.
The proposal, which eliminates income and other eligibility requirements, aims to give parents the flexibility to choose where to send their children for education. However, the bill has sparked significant debate regarding its potential impacts on public education funding and concerns over constitutional issues.
Sponsored by Rep. Ocean Andrew, R-Laramie, the bill, known as House Bill 199, or the “Wyoming Freedom Scholarship Act,” seeks to expand the Education Savings Account (ESA) program by removing the family income threshold and other restrictions. Under the current ESA law, state-funded grants of $6,000 per child per year are available for families with incomes at or below 150% of the federal poverty level. The new proposal increases the amount to $7,000 per child per year but removes the income requirements, as well as the need for national assessments and certification.
Critics, including both Republican and Democratic lawmakers, argue that the universal school voucher system could drain public school funding without providing the necessary oversight. They warn that the bill could lead to waste, fraud, and abuse, given the lack of clear requirements for how the funds would be used. Rep. Steve Harshman, R-Casper, expressed concerns about the potential misuse of funds, calling the proposal a “wild, wild west” situation without proper guardrails in place.
One of the key issues with the bill is its potential fiscal impact. The universal voucher program would divert a portion of federal mineral royalties, which currently fund Wyoming’s K-12 education system. This diversion could result in a loss of approximately $44.7 million annually for the School Foundation Program (SFP) starting in 2026. While Rep. Andrew argues that the ESA program could ultimately save money for the state by reducing the burden on public schools, opponents believe the long-term costs could escalate, as seen in other states with similar voucher systems.
Additionally, some lawmakers believe the bill may violate Wyoming’s constitution, which restricts the distribution of public funds to those in need. Rep. Ken Clouston, R-Gillette, pointed out that the proposal fails to specify that the funds are for low-income families, which he argues could make it unconstitutional by offering state money to families regardless of financial need. Rep. Andrew countered that the bill is not a donation or loan but a funding mechanism for educational programs, asserting that the constitutional provisions for public funds do not apply to the proposed vouchers.
The bill was passed in the House with a 39-21 vote, but several amendments were brought forward to address concerns over funding transparency, assessment standards, and accountability. Despite this, only four amendments passed, and a proposal for a statewide assessment of the voucher program was rejected.
Polling results show that a significant portion of Wyoming’s Republican voters are opposed to universal school vouchers. A survey conducted by the Republican firm co/efficient found that 68% of respondents oppose or strongly oppose the idea. Key concerns among voters included the diversion of funds from public schools, the potential for wasteful spending, and the lack of accountability in the program.
With input from Longview News-Journal, Wyoming Tribune Eagle, and Cowboy State Daily.
