The South Carolina House has given its approval to a bill that could allow parents to use taxpayer funds for private school tuition. After a formal vote, the piece of legislation will return to the state Senate, which will have the option to accept the House’s adjustments or seek a compromise. Currently, the Senate’s version of the proposal intends to finance these vouchers with funds generated from the state lottery, whereas the House prefers to use the regular state budget.
A significant challenge is anticipated if both legislative bodies manage to reconcile their versions, as a similar bill was struck down in 2023 by the state Supreme Court. The court ruled, with a close 3-2 decision, that the state constitution prohibits public money from directly benefiting private or religious institutions. The Senate hopes that channeling funds through lottery reserves will appease legal concerns, while the House’s approach suggests placing funds with a trustee within the Education Department to manage disbursement, which proponents argue bypasses constitutional constraints.
Critics, like state Rep. Neal Collins, disagree with this interpretation, arguing that diverting funds through an intermediary does not transform them into private money. Collins, a Republican from Easley, was among a handful in his party to oppose the measure, stating that public finances should not support private schooling. Ultimately, the House passed the bill with a 79-38 vote.
South Carolina aims to join roughly 15 other states that permit public funds for private school expenses, though several states offer tax incentives for such educational costs instead. The initiative to use public money for private schooling has spanned across two decades and several gubernatorial terms, with Republicans steadily pushing for such reforms. The recently approved House bill proposes allocating $30 million toward educational scholarships, offering up to $6,000 annually per student. Eligibility is restricted to families earning no more than 300% of the federal poverty level—approximately $100,000 for a family of four. These funds could cover tuition, tutoring, or educational equipment expenses.
Amidst debate, Republicans resisted a Democratic amendment requiring private schools receiving these funds to adopt open enrollment policies, ensuring they accept students with disabilities and prohibit discrimination based on race, religion, or sexual orientation. Another rejected amendment suggested providing transportation for disadvantaged students attending private schools situated over 10 miles from their homes.
Democratic state Rep. Justin Bamberg criticized the bill, arguing that it aims to marginalize certain groups while favoring a small portion of the population at the broader community’s expense. A potential constitutional amendment requiring a public vote could bypass court challenges, but support from the Republican supermajority appears uncertain.
Republican state Rep. David Martin voiced skepticism over the bill’s approach of assisting families with six-figure incomes, stating it primarily benefits wealthier individuals. Elsewhere, states like Tennessee have recently expanded voucher availability, and Texas is contemplating the launch of its program. Furthermore, soon after taking office, President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing federal resources toward prioritizing school choice initiatives.
