Kids’ futures at stake in Florida Supreme Court scholarship hearing
Deaundrice Kitchen lives in Pensacola with her two children — a daughter who is a sophomore in high school and a son in the sixth grade. Kitchen does not make a lot of money and does not live in a neighborhood with a high-achieving public school. Yet because of the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship, her children attend private schools, where they excel because of the small class sizes and extracurricular opportunities that wouldn’t be available to them at larger schools. She credits the fact that both children are on the honor roll to the schools they attend.
Despite how well things are going for her children, Kitchen is worried. On Thursday, the Florida Supreme Court will hear a case challenging the constitutionality of both the FTC and the John M. McKay Scholarship Program for Students with Disabilities. Kitchen will sit in the Supreme Court chambers in Tallahassee and listen to the justices and attorneys argue over her children’s future.
The Institute for Justice has long represented parents who want more educational choices for their children. We have defended scholarship programs across the country and all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court. I am proud to be the voice of Kitchen and all the other scholarship families at Thursday’s argument.
Nearly 140,000 students across the state use these scholarship programs to attend the school of their family’s choice. Both programs are nearly two decades old; yet a broad challenge to Florida’s funding of public schools now threatens their existence.
The plaintiffs in this case are seeking a court order that would force the state to appropriate more money for education. Additionally, the group would like the courts to declare that the FTC and McKay scholarships divert money from public schools, making them unconstitutional. These arguments were rejected by the district and appeals courts. A Supreme Court ruling against these programs would be historic and unprecedented.
The FTC and McKay programs are constitutional; yet they also accomplish their intended purpose: providing greater educational opportunity for Florida students.
A new survey reveals that Kitchen is far from the only Florida parent who is pleased with the school the FTC allows her family to afford. A recently released EdChoice survey shows that 9 out of 10 participating parents were satisfied with the schools their children attend. This satisfaction breeds success. In fact, an Urban Institute study demonstrated that lowincome students using the FTC enroll in colleges at a higher rate than their publicschool counterparts.
The McKay program, open to children with a diagnosed disability and an Individual Education Program, is equally successful. A Manhattan Institute study found that this program not only benefits those who participate; it also has a positive impact on students who remain in public schools. The study found that public-school students with mild disabilities made statistically significant test-score improvements in math and reading after local private schools started participating in the McKay program.
Karen Tolbert, also from Pensacola, has seen the results firsthand. Her developmentally disabled son tried public school for ninth grade, but it was not a good fit for him. He is now enrolled in East Hill Academy, a school that specializes in teaching disabled students. Her son is in a small class with just boys, a setting that helps him focus and retain information more easily.
Moreover, striking down these programs is counter to the stated goal of the plaintiffs: providing more money for public schools. Florida’s nonpartisan Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability found that for each dollar that goes to the FTC program, state taxpayers save $1.44 in reduced expenditures. An EdChoice study found that the McKay program saved taxpayers more than $1.5 billion over the first 15 years of the program.
Kitchen and Tolbert know that these programs work for their children, and the evidence shows that they also work for the tens of thousands of other families receiving scholarships. Taking away these scholarships would mean removing children, against the will of their parents, from schools in which they are thriving.