{{Short description|Government funding of non-public schools}} {{Use mdy dates|date=September 2014}}

A '''school voucher''', also called an '''education voucher''', is a certificate of government funding for students at a chosen school. Funding is usually for a particular year, term, or semester. Depending on jurisdiction, a voucher may be used for home schooling expenses or exclusively for private schools, charter schools, or publicly funded schools.

Milton Friedman argued for the modern economic concept of vouchers in the 1950s, stating that free market competition among private schools would improve schools, cost less and yield superior educational outcomes than publicly funded schools. Proponents of school vouchers, including Friedrich Hayek, also argue that voucher systems provide consumer sovereignty, thus increasing school performance and accountability. Friedman's argument has nonetheless been criticised for promoting cream-skimming among students, the random nature of lottery-style voucher allocation systems, the inherent inequality in some students having to attend less preferred schools, and the diversion of public funding away from public education.

Research on the empirical effects of school vouchers has produced mixed results. On one hand, some studies find that, after adjusting for demographic factors, private and public schools performed similarly, and that voucher programs can contribute to segregation. Other studies show that increased competition indeed leads to better educational outcomes across the board and actually reduces racial and socio-economic division.

==Definition== School vouchers are often distributed to enable students to attend private schools,<ref>{{Cite web |date=February 2, 2017 |title=If appointed, Betsy DeVos' views likely to affect public, private schools {{!}} LaGrange Daily News |url=http://www.lagrangenews.com/2017/02/02/if-appointed-betsy-devos-views-likely-to-affect-public-private-schools/ |access-date=2017-02-28 |website=www.lagrangenews.com}}</ref> charter schools,<ref>{{Cite web |title=US Charter Schools Home |url=http://www.uscharterschools.org |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Uscharterschools.org}}</ref><ref name="What is a Charter School">{{Cite web |date=December 4, 2007 |title=What is a Charter School? |url=http://www.publicschoolreview.com/articles/3 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Public School Review}}</ref><ref name="ISR">{{Cite journal |last=Knopp |first=Sarah |year=2008 |title=Charter schools and the attack on public education |url=http://www.isreview.org/issues/62/feat-charterschools.shtml |journal=International Socialist Review |issue=62 |access-date=January 28, 2011}}</ref> and publicly funded schools.<ref name=":8">{{Cite web |title=What is an Education Savings Account? - EdChoice |url=https://www.edchoice.org/school-choice/types-of-school-choice/education-savings-account/ |access-date=2016-08-03 |language=en-US}}</ref> Educational subsidies can also take the form of comprise government-created bank accounts,<ref name=":8" /> whose funds are specifically used for educational purposes, and education tax credits.<ref name="NeoVouchers">{{Cite book |last=Welner |first=Kevin Grant |title=NeoVouchers : the emergence of tuition tax credits for private schooling |date=2008 |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |isbn=978-0-7425-4079-8 |location=Lanham |oclc=232656284}}</ref><ref name="NYTBD">{{Cite news |last=Stephanie Saul |date=May 21, 2012 |title=Public Money Finds Back Door to Private Schools |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/22/education/scholarship-funds-meant-for-needy-benefit-private-schools.html |url-access=limited |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220101/https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/22/education/scholarship-funds-meant-for-needy-benefit-private-schools.html |archive-date=2022-01-01 |access-date=May 22, 2012 |work=The New York Times}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

Government intervention in education typically takes two forms. The first approach is broad, comprising the institution of charter schools, magnet schools, or for-profit schools, and increasing competition. The second approach is individually focused and comprises providing subsidies or loans for individuals.<ref name="Gruber, Jonathan 2015">{{Cite book |last=Gruber |first=Jonathan |title=Public Finance and Public Policy |publisher=Worth Publishers |year=2015 |edition=5 |location=London}}</ref>

==Economics== Milton Friedman argued for the modern economic concept of vouchers in the 1950s,<ref>{{Cite book |last=Friedman |first=Milton |url=http://la.utexas.edu/users/hcleaver/330T/350kPEEFriedmanRoleOfGovttable.pdf |title=Economics and the Public Interest |publisher=Rutgers University Press |year=1955 |editor-last=Solo |editor-first=Robert A. |pages=123–144 |chapter=The Role of Government in Education |access-date=February 14, 2017}}</ref> stating that free market competition among private schools would improve schools, cost less and yield superior educational outcomes than publicly funded schools.<ref name="chap06">{{Cite web |title=chap06.choice |url=http://www.allianceforschoolchoice.org/UploadedFiles/ResearchResources/Competition-%20Hoxby.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110809100251/http://www.allianceforschoolchoice.org/UploadedFiles/ResearchResources/Competition-%20Hoxby.pdf |archive-date=August 9, 2011 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> Further, proponents of Friedman's theory, including Friedrich Hayek,<ref>(F. A. Hayek, in his 1960 book The Constitution of Liberty, section 24.3)</ref> argue that voucher systems provide consumer sovereignty, thus increasing school performance and accountability.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Roads, Education, and Waterways: The Case Against Public Services - Mises Media |url=https://mises.org/media/2349/Roads-Education-and-Waterways-The-Case-Against-Public-Services |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110922044340/http://mises.org/media/2349/Roads-Education-and-Waterways-The-Case-Against-Public-Services |archive-date=September 22, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Dollar Voting |url=http://ingrimayne.com/econ/AllocatingRationing/DollarVoting.html |website=ingrimayne.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Majority Rule |url=http://ingrimayne.com/econ/government/MajorityRule.html |website=ingrimayne.com}}</ref> The free-market theory of school vouchers has been analogised to the competition between universities and the provision of government aid or scholarships for university students, which has arguably had a positive impact on research and teaching in higher education.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Our Legacy |url=https://www.edchoice.org/who-we-are/our-legacy/ |website=EdChoice}}</ref><ref name="PELL">{{Cite web |title=Federal Pell Grants are usually awarded only to undergraduate students. |url=https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/types/grants-scholarships/pell |access-date=March 10, 2017}}</ref><ref name="HowCalculated">{{Cite web |title=Wondering how the amount of your federal student aid is determined? |url=https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/fafsa/next-steps/how-calculated |access-date=March 10, 2017}}</ref> Major proponents of Friedman's theory include Friedman's own non-governmental organisation EdChoice and the Sutherland Institute.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Sutherland Institute &#124; Vouchers Vows & Vexations |url=http://www.sutherlandinstitute.org/uploads/vouchersvows.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110728075042/http://www.sutherlandinstitute.org/uploads/vouchersvows.pdf |archive-date=July 28, 2011 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Removing Classrooms from the Battlefield: Liberty, Paternalism, and the Redemptive Promise of Educational Choice, 2008 BYU Law Review 377 |url=http://www.sutherlandinstitute.org/uploads/lawreview2008witte.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090325045207/http://www.sutherlandinstitute.org/uploads/lawreview2008witte.pdf |archive-date=March 25, 2009 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=BYU Law Review &#124; Brigham Young University Law Review &#124; Brigham Young University Law School |url=https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110719155328/http://lawreview.byu.edu/archives/2008_2.htm |archive-date=July 19, 2011 |website=digitalcommons.law.byu.edu}}</ref>

Friedman's reasoning in favor of vouchers gained additional attention in 1980 with the broadcast of his ten-part television series ''Free to Choose'' and the publication of its companion book of the same name.<ref>{{Cite AV media |url=http://www.freetochoose.tv/broadcasts/ftc80.php |title=Free to Choose TV |type=Television |publisher=Public Broadcasting Service |year=1980 |people=Milton Friedman}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last1=Friedman |first1=Milton |url=https://archive.org/details/freetochoosepers00frie |title=Free to Choose: A Personal Statement |last2=Friedman |first2=Rose |publisher=Harcourt Brace & Company |year=1980 |isbn=978-0156334600 |edition=1990 |url-access=registration}}</ref><ref>{{Cite AV media |url=http://www.freetochoose.tv/program.php?id=ftc1980_6&series=ftc80 |title=Free to Choose |type=Television |publisher=Public Broadcasting Service |year=1980 |people=Milton Friedman |chapter=6. What's Wrong with Our Schools}}</ref> Friedman's argument has been criticised for its implicit assumption that the prices of private schools are competitive owing to differences in teaching and administration, rather than its cream-skimming approach to selecting only students who come from wealthy or otherwise advantaged backgrounds.<ref>{{Cite web |title=What Would A School Voucher Buy The Real Cost Of Private Schools |url=http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-025.html |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Cato.org}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=October 28, 2007 |title=Are Private Schools More Cost Effective Than Public Ones? |url=http://economics.about.com/b/2007/10/28/are-private-schools-more-cost-effective-than-public-ones.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110807101339/http://economics.about.com/b/2007/10/28/are-private-schools-more-cost-effective-than-public-ones.htm |archive-date=August 7, 2011 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Economics.about.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last1=Goodkin |first1=Susan |last2=Gold |first2=David G. |date=August 27, 2007 |title=The Gifted Children Left Behind |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/26/AR2007082600909.html |access-date=August 27, 2007 |newspaper=Washington Post}}</ref>

In contrast, the United States's National Education Association has criticised the random nature of lottery-style voucher allocation systems, the inherent inequality in some students having to attend less preferred and less competitive schools, and the diversion of public funding away from public education, which may in turn weaken public schooling standards.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Pons |first=Michael |title=School Vouchers: The Emerging Track Record |url=http://www.nea.org/home/16970.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130304095505/http://www.nea.org/home/16970.htm |archive-date=March 4, 2013 |access-date=November 20, 2012 |publisher=National Education Association}}</ref><ref name=":7">{{Cite news |title=The Case Against Vouchers |url=http://www.nea.org/home/19133.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090419231358/http://www.nea.org/home/19133.htm |archive-date=April 19, 2009 |access-date=2018-04-25 |work=NEA |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Bender |first=Michael C. |date=June 13, 2008 |title=Local News: West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Martin & St. Lucie Counties |url=http://www.palmbeachpost.com/state/content/state/epaper/2008/06/13/0613constitutionalamendments.html |access-date=August 11, 2011 |work=The Palm Beach Post}}</ref>

A random survey of 210 economists of the American Economic Association, found that over two-thirds support giving parents educational vouchers that can be used at government-operated or privately operated schools, particularly for low-income students or students in poorly performing schools.<ref name="auto">{{Cite journal |last=Whaples |first=Robert |date=2006 |title=Do Economists Agree on Anything? Yes! |url=http://ew-econ.typepad.fr/articleAEAsurvey.pdf |journal=The Economists' Voice |volume=3 |issue=9 |pages=1–6 |doi=10.2202/1553-3832.1156 |s2cid=201123406 |access-date=January 6, 2016}}</ref>thumb|Basic School Voucher Utility Maximization Picture

===Background=== Governments have multiple incentives for intervention in and improvement of public education, including human capital accumulation,<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Freire-Seren |first=Maria Jesus |year=2001 |title=Human Capital Accumulation and Economic Growth |journal=Investigaciones Economicas |volume=25 |issue=3 |pages=585–602}}</ref> the promotion of societal values and norms, and positive externalities such as the reduction of crime and economic development.<ref>McMahon, Walter. "Externalities in Education". ''Bureau of Economic and Business Research'' Working Paper, no. 877 (1982):1-7.</ref> Families face a bundle of consumption choices that determine how much they will spend on education and private consumption, with the corresponding indifference curve representing how much education an individual will want to consume versus how much private consumption an individual will want to consume.<ref name="Gruber, Jonathan 2015" /> Vouchers are thus typically instituted for two broad economic reasons: to enable consumer choice; and to increase market competition among schools.<ref name="Gruber, Jonathan 2015" />

thumb|Education Consumption Choices

thumb|Family consumption bundles with vouchers

===Empirical effects=== Research has produced mixed results.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Forster, Greg. (2007) Monopoly Versus Markets |url=http://www.friedmanfoundation.org/friedman/downloadFile.do?id=255 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Friedmanfoundation.org}}</ref><ref name=":6">{{Cite news |date=2017-07-27 |title=Arguments For and Against School Choice in 2017 |url=https://www.edchoice.org/blog/arguments-for-and-against-school-choice-2017/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180425183601/https://www.edchoice.org/blog/arguments-for-and-against-school-choice-2017/ |archive-date=April 25, 2018 |access-date=2018-04-25 |work=EdChoice |language=en-US}}</ref> A 2017 review of the economics literature on school vouchers concluded that "the evidence to date is not sufficient to warrant recommending that vouchers be adopted on a widespread basis; however, multiple positive findings support continued exploration".<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Epple |first1=Dennis |last2=Romano |first2=Richard E. |last3=Urquiola |first3=Miguel |year=2017 |title=School Vouchers: A Survey of the Economics Literature |journal=Journal of Economic Literature |volume=55 |issue=2 |pages=441–492 |doi=10.1257/jel.20150679 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Some studies, including a 2006 United States Department of Education report, conclude that, after adjusting for demographic factors, private and public schools performed similarly.<ref>{{Cite web |date=July 14, 2006 |title=Comparing Private Schools and Public Schools Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling |url=http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006461 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Nces.ed.gov}}</ref><ref>{{Cite magazine |title=Here's Why Researchers Say Betsy DeVos' Proposed School Voucher Program Won't Work |url=https://time.com/4832923/betsy-devos-trump-administration-school-choice-vouchers/ |access-date=2018-04-25 |magazine=Time |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=August 2008 |title=School Vouchers and Student Achievement: Recent Evidence, Remaining Questions |url=http://www.chicagofed.org/digital_assets/publications/working_papers/2008/wp2008_08.pdf |website=Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago}}</ref> At the same time, a 2021 meta-analysis found "moderate evidence of positive achievement impacts of private school vouchers, with substantial effect heterogeneity across programs and outcome years" as well as evidence suggesting that "voucher interventions may be cost-effective even for null achievement impacts."<ref name="2021Study">{{Cite journal |last1=Shakeel |first1=M. Danish |last2=Anderson |first2=Kaitlin P. |last3=Wolf |first3=Patrick J. |date=2021-10-02 |title=The participant effects of private school vouchers around the globe: a meta-analytic and systematic review |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09243453.2021.1906283 |journal=School Effectiveness and School Improvement |language=en |volume=32 |issue=4 |pages=509–542 |doi=10.1080/09243453.2021.1906283 |issn=0924-3453 |s2cid=233527235 |url-access=subscription}}</ref>

Other studies suggest that voucher programs can contribute to segregation and lack accountability for taxpayer funds.<ref name="Suzanne E 2016">{{Cite journal |last1=Eckes |first1=Suzanne E. |last2=Mead |first2=Julie |last3=Ulm |first3=Jessica |date=29 June 2016 |title=Dollars to Discriminate: The (Un)intended Consequences of School Vouchers |journal=Peabody Journal of Education |volume=91 |issue=4 |pages=537–558 |doi=10.1080/0161956X.2016.1207446 |s2cid=156577104}}</ref><ref name="Mark A 2016">{{Cite journal |last1=Gooden |first1=Mark A. |last2=Jabbar |first2=Huriya |last3=Torres, Jr. |first3=Mario S. |date=29 June 2016 |title=Race and school vouchers: legal, historical, and political contexts |journal=Peabody Journal of Education |volume=91 |issue=4 |pages=522–536 |doi=10.1080/0161956X.2016.1207445 |s2cid=147762358}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Brunner |first1=Eric J. |last2=Imazeki |first2=Jennifer |last3=Ross |first3=Stephen L. |display-authors=1 |year=2010 |title=Universal Vouchers and Racial and Ethnic Segregation |journal=Review of Economics and Statistics |volume=92 |issue=4 |pages=912–927 |doi=10.1162/REST_a_00037 |s2cid=57566240}}</ref> Nonetheless, other research has also shown that under certain circumstances, income and racial segregation can be reduced indirectly by increasing school choice.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Nechyba |first=Thomas |year=2003 |title=School Finance, spatial income segregation, and the nature of communities |journal=Journal of Urban Economics |volume=54 |issue=1 |pages=61–88 |citeseerx=10.1.1.197.8436 |doi=10.1016/S0094-1190(03)00041-X}}</ref> Additionally, it is possible that private school vouchers may offset the overall budget by way of public school cost savings from lower enrollments.<ref name=":4">{{Cite web |last=Committee |first=United States Joint Economic |title=The Fiscal Effect of Private-School Vouchers - Analysis - United States Joint Economic Committee |url=https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/2017/12/the-fiscal-effect-of-private-school-vouchers |access-date=2018-04-25 |website=www.jec.senate.gov |language=en}}</ref> Resulting job losses in the public sector may also, potentially, be offset by the increased demand for jobs in the private sector.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Forster |first=Greg |title=Lost Opportunity: An Empirical Analysis of How Vouchers Affected Florida Public Schools |url=https://www.edchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Lost-Opportunity-How-Vouchers-Affected-Florida-Public-Schools.pdf |access-date=30 August 2022}}</ref>

A 2018 study by Abdulkadiroğlu et al. found that disadvantaged students who won a lottery to get vouchers to attend private schools had worse education outcomes than disadvantaged students who did not win vouchers.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Abdulkadiroğlu |first1=Atila |last2=Pathak |first2=Parag A. |last3=Walters |first3=Christopher R. |date=2018 |title=Free to Choose: Can School Choice Reduce Student Achievement? |journal=American Economic Journal: Applied Economics |volume=10 |issue=1 |pages=175–206 |doi=10.1257/app.20160634 |hdl=1721.1/114167 |doi-access=free |hdl-access=free}}</ref>

==== Colombia ==== Studies of Colombia's PACES voucher program indicate the program increased private school attendance and academic outcomes. After three years, lottery winners were 15 percentage points more likely to attend private schools, completed 0.1 more years of schooling on average, and were 10 percentage points more likely to complete eighth grade.<ref name="Angrist2002">{{Cite journal |last1=Angrist |first1=Joshua |last2=Bettinger |first2=Eric |last3=Bloom |first3=Erik |last4=King |first4=Elizabeth |last5=Kremer |first5=Michael |year=2002 |title=Vouchers for private schooling in Colombia: Evidence from a randomized natural experiment |journal=American Economic Review |volume=92 |issue=5 |pages=1535–1558 |citeseerx=10.1.1.160.1325 |doi=10.1257/000282802762024629}}</ref> Test scores for voucher recipients were 0.2 standard deviations higher than non-recipients, with stronger effects in mathematics for boys compared to girls.<ref name="Angrist2006" /> The program had no significant effect on dropout rates but was associated with reduced teenage employment and lower likelihood of early marriage or cohabitation among lottery winners.<ref name="Angrist2002" />

==== Sweden ==== A 2004 study found that competition from independent schools improved public school performance.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Sandström |first1=F. Mikael |last2=Bergström |first2=Fredrik |date=February 2005 |title=School vouchers in practice: Competition will not hurt you |journal=Journal of Public Economics |volume=89 |issue=2–3 |pages=351–380 |doi=10.1016/j.jpubeco.2004.03.004}}</ref> However, Sweden's PISA rankings declined in the 2000s, though some attribute this to factors unrelated to the voucher system.<ref name="guardian.co.uk">{{Cite news |last=Shepherd |first=Jessica |date=February 9, 2010 |title=Swedish-style 'free schools won't improve standards' |url=https://www.theguardian.com/education/2010/feb/09/swedish-style-schools-wont-raise-standards |access-date=May 23, 2010 |work=The Guardian |location=London}}</ref> A 2015 study reported that a higher share of independent school students correlated with improved educational outcomes, largely due to increased competition.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Böhlmark |first1=Anders |last2=Lindahl |first2=Mikael |date=2015 |title=Independent schools and long-run educational outcomes: Evidence from Sweden's large-scale voucher reform |journal=Economica |volume=82 |issue=327 |pages=508–551 |doi=10.1111/ecca.12130}}</ref> According to Susanne Wiborg, Sweden's voucher system introduced in 1992 has "augmented social and ethnic segregation, particularly in relation to schools in deprived areas".<ref>{{Cite news |last=Richardson |first=Hannah |date=July 22, 2010 |title=Free schools 'could widen social divide' |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-10725724 |work=BBC News Online}}</ref>

==== United States ==== A 2003 study by the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research concludes that public schools located near private schools that were eligible to accept voucher students made significantly more improvements, including in academic test scores, than similar schools not located near eligible private schools.<ref>{{Cite web |date=March 14, 2001 |title=Education Working Paper 2 &#124; When Schools Compete: The Effects of Vouchers on Florida Public School Achievement |url=http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_02.htm |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Manhattan-institute.org}}</ref> Caroline Hoxby studied the effects of vouchers in Milwaukee and of charter schools in Arizona and Michigan on nearby public schools, finding that public schools forced to compete made greater test-score gains than schools not faced with such competition,<ref name="hoxby2001">Hoxby, Caroline, "Rising Tide" Education Next, Winter, 2001.</ref> and that the so-called effect of cream skimming did not exist in any of the voucher districts examined.<ref name="hoxby1998">Hoxby, Caroline "Analyzing School Choice Reforms that Use America's Traditional Forms of Parental Choice" in Paul E. Peterson and Bryan C. Hassel eds., Learning from School Choice, Brookings Institution, 1998.</ref><ref name="hoxby2001" /><ref name="chap06" />

A CATO Institute study of public and private school per pupil spending in Phoenix, Los Angeles, D.C., Chicago, New York City, and Houston found that public schools spend 93% more than the estimated median private schools.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Schaeffer |first=Adam |year=2010 |title=They Spend WHAT? (The Real Cost of Public Schools) |url=http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11432 |publisher=Cato Institute}}</ref>

A 2013 study of Milwaukee's Parental Choice Program, which funds vouchers for both religious and nonreligious private institutions,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Vouchers to Pass $100 Million Mark, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, November 21, 2006 |url=http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=533306 |access-date=November 21, 2006}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Carlson |first1=D. D. |last2=Cowen |first2=O. J. |year=2015 |title=School Vouchers and Student Neighborhoods: Evidence from the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program |journal=Education Policy Analysis Archives |volume=23 |issue=60/61 |pages=1–24 |doi=10.14507/epaa.v23.1930 |doi-access=free}}</ref> posited that the use of vouchers increased the probability that a student would graduate from high school, go to college, and stay in college.<ref name="EdWeek">{{Cite news |date=August 11, 2011 |title=Vouchers |url=http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/vouchers/ |access-date=July 17, 2015 |work=Education Week}}</ref> A 2015 paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that participation in Louisiana's voucher program "substantially reduces academic achievement", which may reflect the poor quality of private schools in the program.<ref name="EdWeek" /> A 2014 analysis of the competitive effects of school vouchers in Florida suggests that more competition improves performance in regular public schools.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Figlio |first1=David |last2=Hart |first2=Cassandra M. D. |year=2014 |title=Competitive Effects of Means-Tested School Vouchers |url=http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/app/0601/2012-0019_app.pdf |journal=American Economic Journal: Applied Economics |volume=6 |issue=1 |pages=133–56 |doi=10.1257/app.6.1.133 |s2cid=16232262}}</ref>

Historically, data suggests that voucher programs have been used to further segregate Americans.<ref name="Mark A 2016"/> Further, some data has shown that the effects of voucher programs such as the New York City School Choice Scholarship Program, are marginal when it comes to increasing student achievement.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Bitler |first1=Marianne |last2=Domina |first2=Thurston |last3=Penner |first3=Emily |last4=Hoynes |first4=Hilary |date=24 July 2014 |title=Distributional analysis in educational evaluation: a case study from the New York City Voucher Program |journal=Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness |volume=8 |issue=3 |pages=419–450 |doi=10.1080/19345747.2014.921259 |pmc=4507830 |pmid=26207158}}</ref>

==History== When France lost the Franco-Prussian War (1870–1871) many blamed the loss on its inferior military education system. Following this defeat, the French Assembly proposed a voucher that they hoped would improve schools by allowing students to seek out the best. This proposal never moved forward due to the reluctance of the French to subsidize religious education. Despite its failure, this proposal closely resembles voucher systems proposed or used in many modern countries.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Molnar |first=Alex |title=Vouchers, Class Size Reduction, and Student Achievement: Considering the Evidence |publisher=Phi Beta Kappa Educational Foundation |year=2000 |location=Bloomington}}</ref>

The oldest extant school voucher programs in the United States are the Town Tuitioning programs in Vermont and Maine, respectively beginning in 1869<ref>{{Cite web |title=Vermont - Town Tuitioning Program |url=https://www.edchoice.org/school-choice/programs/vermont-town-tuitioning-program/ |access-date=2016-08-03 |language=en-US}}</ref><ref name="Vermont">{{Cite web|url=http://www.friedmanfoundation.org/friedman/schoolchoice/ShowProgramItem.do?id=32|title=Friedman Foundation - Vermont: Town Tuitioning Program}}</ref> and 1873.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Maine - Town Tuitioning Program |url=https://www.edchoice.org/school-choice/programs/maine-town-tuitioning-program/ |access-date=2016-08-03 |language=en-US}}</ref><ref name="maine">{{Cite web|url=http://www.friedmanfoundation.org/friedman/schoolchoice/ShowProgramItem.do?id=23|title=Friedman Foundation - Maine: Town Tuitioning Program}}</ref> Because some towns in these states operate neither local high schools nor elementary schools, vouchers provide for students in these towns to attend either public schools in other towns or secular private schools.<ref name="Vermont" /><ref name="maine" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Legislatures |first=National Conference of State |title=School Choice: Vouchers |url=http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/school-choice-vouchers.aspx |access-date=2017-01-23 |website=www.ncsl.org |language=en-US |archive-date=March 5, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170305013550/http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/school-choice-vouchers.aspx |url-status=dead }}</ref>

A system of educational vouchers was introduced in the Netherlands in 1917. {{as of|1997}}, more than 70% of pupils attend privately run but publicly funded schools, mostly split along denominational lines.<ref name="RDV 1997">{{Cite journal |last=Jozef M. M. Ritzen, Jan van Dommelen and Frans J. De Vijlder |date=June 1997 |title=School finance and school choice in the Netherlands |journal=Economics of Education Review |volume=16 |issue=3 |pages=329–335 |doi=10.1016/S0272-7757(96)00078-7}}</ref>

In some Southern states during the 1960s, school vouchers were used as a way to perpetuate segregation. In a few instances, public schools were closed outright and vouchers were issued to parents. Many of the vouchers were only good at new, private and segregated schools, known as segregation academies.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Vergakis |first=Brock |date=June 4, 2007 |title=Deseret Morning News - Do vouchers equal segregation? |url=http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,660226540,00.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070918215251/http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,660226540,00.html |archive-date=September 18, 2007 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Deseretnews.com}}</ref>

==Implementations== ===Colombia=== The Colombian government launched the PACES voucher program in 1991 to support low-income secondary school students in neighborhoods within the two lowest socioeconomic strata. From 1991 to 1997, the program distributed 125,000 vouchers, valued at approximately US$190 in 1998, though students typically incurred additional costs averaging US$340 for private school fees.<ref name="Angrist2006">{{Cite journal |last1=Angrist |first1=Joshua |last2=Bettinger |first2=Eric |last3=Kremer |first3=Michael |year=2006 |title=Long-term consequences of secondary school vouchers: Evidence from administrative records in Colombia |journal=American Economic Review |volume=96 |issue=3 |pages=847–862 |doi=10.1257/aer.96.3.847}}</ref> Students were selected by lottery, with vouchers renewable annually based on satisfactory academic progress.<ref name="Angrist2006" />

===Chile=== In 1981, Chile introduced a universal school voucher system for elementary and secondary students, leading to the establishment of over 1,000 private schools and a 20–40% increase in private school enrollment by 1998, exceeding 50% in some urban areas.<ref name="Hsieh2006">{{Cite journal |last1=Hsieh |first1=Chang-Tai |last2=Urquiola |first2=Miguel |year=2006 |title=The effects of generalized school choice on achievement and stratification: Evidence from Chile's voucher program |journal=Journal of Public Economics |volume=90 |issue=8–9 |pages=1477–1503 |doi=10.1016/j.jpubeco.2005.11.002}}</ref> Urban private school enrollment grew 11% faster than in rural areas from 1981 to 1988.<ref name="Hsieh2006" /> Unlike public schools, which accepted all students, private voucher schools could be selective, and voucher values were not income-based.<ref name="Hsieh2006" /> Low international test scores prompted major educational reforms in 2008, including changes to the voucher system.<ref name="Murnane2017">{{Cite journal |last1=Murnane |first1=Richard J. |last2=Waldman |first2=Marcus R. |last3=Willett |first3=John B. |last4=Bos |first4=Maria Soledad |last5=Vegas |first5=Emiliana |date=June 2017 |title=The consequences of educational voucher reform in Chile |journal=NBER Working Paper No. 23550 |doi=10.3386/w23550 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

The 2008 Preferential School Subsidy Law adjusted vouchers to account for family income, providing 50% higher vouchers to students from the lowest 40% income bracket, deemed "priority students."<ref name="Murnane2017" /> Schools with more priority students received additional per-student bonuses.<ref name="Murnane2017" /> The program initially covered preschool through fourth grade, expanding annually. Most public schools and two-thirds of private subsidized elementary schools participated in 2008.<ref name="Murnane2017" /> Participating schools could not charge fees to priority students, select students based on academic ability, or expel them for academic reasons, and they were required to join an accountability system monitoring financial and academic performance.<ref name="Murnane2017" />

===Europe=== In most European countries, education for all primary and secondary schools is fully subsidized. In some countries (e.g., Belgium or France), parents are free to choose which school their child attends.

====France==== {{See also|Education in France}} In France, parents can choose between public and private schools, with about 20% of students attending private institutions.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=The French education system: a guide for expat parents |url=https://www.expatica.com/fr/education/children-education/french-education-system-101147/ |website=Expat Guide to France &#124; Expatica}}</ref> Most private schools operate under contract with the government, which covers teachers' salaries and requires adherence to the national curriculum. These schools charge low fees for other costs. Non-contracted private schools have more curricular flexibility but charge higher fees, as they fund teacher salaries independently.<ref name=":1" /> Homeschooling is permitted but tightly regulated,<ref>{{cite web |title=Legal status and resources on homeschooling in France |url=https://hslda.org/post/france |accessdate=29 November 2022 |work=Home School Legal Defense Association}}</ref> with restrictions tightened in 2022 to limit it to specific cases, such as for students with disabilities or those in nomadic communities.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Sous-section 3 bis : Modalités de délivrance de l'autorisation d'instruction dans la famille (Articles R131-11 à D131-11-13) - Légifrance |url=https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000006071191/LEGISCTA000045175564/ |access-date=2024-01-03 |website=www.legifrance.gouv.fr}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2021-08-27 |title="La limitation drastique de l'école à la maison est un coup porté aux libertés" |url=https://www.lefigaro.fr/vox/societe/la-limitation-drastique-de-l-ecole-a-la-maison-est-un-coup-porte-aux-libertes-20210827 |access-date=2024-01-03 |website=Le Figaro |language=fr}}</ref>

====Ireland==== {{See also|Education in the Republic of Ireland}} In Ireland, most schools are state-aided Catholic parish schools, funded through government grants and per-student fees, regardless of whether schools charge additional fees.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Irish Government Department of Education website |url=http://www.education.ie/home/home.jsp?maincat=&pcategory=17216&ecategory=20658&sectionpage=12251&language=EN&link=link001&page=1&doc=18626 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Education.ie}}</ref> A minority of fee-paying schools receive state aid, prompting criticism for perceived unfair advantages.{{Citation needed|date=August 2025}} Parents and students may choose their schools, and schools failing to attract students risk losing funding and teaching posts. Multi-denominational schools, organized by parents as non-profit entities, have grown in popularity.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |title=Microsoft Word - Irish report 02_04_07.doc |url=http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/35/44/38574871.pdf |access-date=August 11, 2011}}</ref> Free third-level education, introduced in 1995, increased overall university attendance, particularly among lower-income students, though debates persist about reintroducing fees.{{Citation needed|date=August 2025}} The system is perceived to have achieved very successful outcomes for most Irish children.<ref name=":2" />

====Sweden==== {{Further|Education in Sweden}} Sweden introduced a school vouchers system (''skolpeng'') in 1992, allowing parents to choose between public and privately run independent schools (''fristående skolor''). Both school types receive public funding from the local municipality solely based on student enrollment. By 2008, over 10% of students attended independent schools, with enrollment rising rapidly.<ref name="swedishmodeleconomist">{{Cite news |date=June 12, 2008 |title=Making money from schools: The Swedish model |url=http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11535645 |newspaper=The Economist}}</ref><ref>{{Cite magazine |year=2008 |title=Made in Sweden: the new Tory education revolution |url=http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/526631/made-in-sweden-the-new-tory-education-revolution.thtml |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090627082940/http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/526631/made-in-sweden-the-new-tory-education-revolution.thtml |archive-date=June 27, 2009 |magazine=The Spectator |df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Baker |first=Mike |date=October 5, 2004 |title=Swedish parents enjoy school choice |url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/3717744.stm |access-date=May 23, 2010 |publisher=BBC |location=London}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |year=2008 |title=Embracing private schools: Sweden lets companies use taxes for cost-efficient alternatives |url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/aug/11/embracing-private-schools/ |work=Washington Times}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Munkhammar |first=Johnny |date=May 25, 2007 |title=How choice has transformed education in Sweden |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1435386/How-choice-has-transformed-education-in-Sweden.html |access-date=May 23, 2010 |work=The Telegraph |location=London}}</ref>

===Hong Kong=== In 2007, Hong Kong implemented a voucher system for children aged three to six attending non-profit kindergartens, providing HK$13,000 per student annually. Of this, HK$10,000 subsidizes school fees, and HK$3,000 supports teacher training. Vouchers are restricted to non-profit kindergartens with annual fees below HK$24,000. The program was later extended to children who were enrolled in for-profit kindergartens before September 2007, with subsidies up to HK$30,000 offered to for-profit kindergartens converting to non-profit status.{{Citation needed|date=August 2025}}

Milton Friedman criticised the system, arguing that the point of a voucher system is to provide a competitive marketplace, and thus should not be limited to non-profit kindergartens.{{Citation needed|date=August 2025}}

===Philippines=== In 2015, the Philippines introduced a senior high school voucher program that provides qualifications for students in grades 11–12.<ref>{{cite news |author=Chi, Christina |title=DepEd finds one school with 98% possible 'ghost students' in voucher program |url=https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2025/03/20/2429810/deped-finds-one-school-98-possible-ghost-students-voucher-program |access-date=20 October 2025 |newspaper=The Philippine Star |date=March 20, 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author1=Rita, Joviland |title=Senior High School Voucher Program's fate uncertain amid limited budget |url=https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/743825/senior-high-school-voucher-program-s-fate-uncertain-amid-limited-budget/story/ |website=GMA News |access-date=20 October 2025 |date=June 23, 2020}}</ref> the Department of Education (DepED) implements senior high school voucher program in 2016.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Chi |first1=Cristina |title=COA: Why were senior high vouchers given to students in 'high-tuition' schools? |url=https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2025/12/26/2496870/coa-why-were-senior-high-vouchers-given-students-high-tuition-schools |access-date=23 May 2026 |newspaper=The Philippine Star |date=December 26, 2025}}</ref> The value of the voucher attends in private schools costs P22,500 (National Capital Region), P20,000 (Highly Urbanized Cities), and P17,500 (outside) from public schools, P18,000 (National Capital Region), P16,000 (Highly Urbanized Cities), and P14,000 (outside) from private schools.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Geronimo |first1=Jee Y. |title=Applications until May 6: Who qualifies for senior high school vouchers |url=https://www.rappler.com/philippines/131052-senior-high-school-voucher-program/ |website=Rappler |access-date=30 May 2026 |date=April 29, 2016}}</ref>

=== United States === {{Education in the U.S.}} In the 1980s, the Reagan administration promoted school vouchers, as did the George W. Bush administration in its initial education reform proposals leading up to the No Child Left Behind Act. As of December 2016, 14 states and the District of Columbia had school voucher programs.<ref name=":52">{{Cite web |last=Legislatures |first=National Conference of State |title=Interactive Guide to School Choice Laws |url=http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/interactive-guide-to-school-choice.aspx#/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180415165619/http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/interactive-guide-to-school-choice.aspx#/ |archive-date=April 15, 2018 |access-date=2018-04-25 |website=www.ncsl.org |language=en-US}}</ref> Including scholarship tax credits and education savings accounts, 27 states plus the District of Columbia had private school choice programs, most of them targeting disadvantaged students. By 2014, around 250,000 students were enrolled in voucher or tax-credit scholarship programs, compared with 55&nbsp;million in public schools.<ref name="politico2">{{Cite news |last=Stephanie |first=Simon |date=2014-03-24 |title=Special report: Taxpayers fund creationism in the classroom |url=https://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/education-creationism-104934.html |access-date=24 February 2015}}</ref>

{{as of|2025}}, the Indiana Choice Scholarships program is the largest school voucher program in the United States.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Behning: Indiana's bold vision for universal school choice {{!}} State of Indiana House of Representatives |url=https://www.indianahouserepublicans.com/news/guest-column/behning-indiana-s-bold-vision-for-universal-school-choice/ |access-date=2025-03-02 |website=www.indianahouserepublicans.com}}</ref>

Supporters of voucher programs include New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, former governor of South Carolina Mark Sanford,<ref>{{Cite web |title=SC Biz News |url=http://www.charlestonbusiness.com/pub/6_2/news/2771-1.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070929003630/http://www.charlestonbusiness.com/pub/6_2/news/2771-1.html |archive-date=September 29, 2007 |website=www.charlestonbusiness.com}}</ref> billionaire and American philanthropist John T. Walton,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Godspeed John Walton |url=http://www.blackfive.net/main/2005/06/godspeed_john_w.html |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Blackfive}}</ref> Former mayor of Baltimore Kurt L. Schmoke,<ref>{{Cite web |date=August 20, 1999 |title=Civic Bulletin 20 &#124; Why School Vouchers Can Help Inner-City Children, by The Honorable Kurt L. Schmoke |url=http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cb_20.htm |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Manhattan-institute.org}}</ref> Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney<ref>{{Cite web |title=Candidate - Mitt Romney |url=http://www.ourcampaigns.com/CandidateDetail.html?CandidateID=2075 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Our Campaigns}}</ref> and John McCain.<ref>{{Cite web |title=U.S. Senator John McCain |url=http://mccain.senate.gov/press_office/view_article.cfm?id=587 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071101081939/http://mccain.senate.gov/press_office/view_article.cfm?id=587 |archive-date=November 1, 2007 |website=mccain.senate.gov}}</ref>

==== Legal issues ==== School vouchers have also been challenged on legal grounds. In ''Zelman v. Simmons-Harris'' (2002), the Supreme Court, in a 5–4 decision, held that Ohio's voucher plan did not violate the Establishment Clause merely by giving money to parents who choose to send their child to a religious school.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Getting an Education - The Voucher Controversy - School, Public, Schools, Charter, Private, and Vouchers |url=http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/1661/Getting-an-Education-VOUCHER-CONTROVERSY.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110727075759/http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/1661/Getting-an-Education-VOUCHER-CONTROVERSY.html |archive-date=July 27, 2011 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Libraryindex.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=October 30, 2008 |title=Vouchers |url=http://www.nea.org/home/16378.htm |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=NEA}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=November 13, 2008 |title=List of NEA beliefs and legal fights against vouchers |url=http://www.nea.org/home/19133.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110807093324/http://www.nea.org/home/19133.htm |archive-date=August 7, 2011 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |publisher=Nea.org}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Legal Summary of U.S. Supreme Court decision in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 436 U.S. |url=http://edreform.com/school_choice/supreme_court_ruling.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060417233028/http://edreform.com/school_choice/supreme_court_ruling.htm |archive-date=April 17, 2006 |access-date=April 21, 2006 |df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Friden |first=Terry |date=July 27, 2002 |title=Supreme Court affirms school voucher program |url=http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/06/27/scotus.school.vouchers/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060427160627/http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/06/27/scotus.school.vouchers/ |archive-date=April 27, 2006 |access-date=April 21, 2006 |work=CNN}}</ref> By contrast, the Florida Supreme Court struck down that state's Opportunity Scholarship Program in 2006, ruling that it violated constitutional provisions requiring a uniform system of public schools.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Sanchez |first1=Claudio |date=January 16, 2006 |title=Court Throws Out Florida School Voucher Program |url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5159138 |access-date=April 21, 2006 |website=NPR}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Florida Supreme Court Official Opinion: SC04-2323 – John Ellis "Jeb" Bush, Etc., Et Al. v. Ruth D. Holmes, Et Al. |url=http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2006/sc04-2323.pdf |access-date=November 1, 2006}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=United States Court of Appeals, Twelfth Circuit |url=http://www.trolp.org/main_pgs/issues/v10n2/Neily.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110728130452/http://www.trolp.org/main_pgs/issues/v10n2/Neily.pdf |archive-date=July 28, 2011 |access-date=August 11, 2011 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> In 2013, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that Louisiana's use of money earmarked, via the Louisiana Constitution, for public schools to fund Louisiana's voucher program was unconstitutional.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Strauss |first=Valerie |date=May 7, 2013 |title=Louisiana Supreme Court rules school voucher funding unconstitutional |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/05/07/louisiana-supreme-court-rules-school-voucher-funding-unconstitutional/ |newspaper=Washington Post}}</ref>

==== Administrative issues ==== People who can benefit from vouchers may not know it. In April 2012, a bill passed in Louisiana that made vouchers available to low-income families whose children attended poorly ranked schools.<ref>{{Cite web |title=See Tidmore, C. (2012, April 10). Voucher bill passes |url=http://www.louisianaweekly.com/voucher-bills-pass/}}</ref> Of the estimated 380,000 eligible students during the school year when the bill was passed,<ref>{{Cite news |last=Mooney |first=K. |date=March 12, 2012 |title=Louisiana legislature prepares to debate expansion of voucher program |url=http://www.thepelicanpost.org/2012/03/12/louisiana-legislature-prepares-to-debate-expansion-of-voucher-program/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131014214604/http://www.thepelicanpost.org/2012/03/12/louisiana-legislature-prepares-to-debate-expansion-of-voucher-program/ |archive-date=October 14, 2013 |work=The Pelican Post}}</ref> only 5,000 students knew about, applied for, and accepted the vouchers.<ref>Louisiana State Department of Education website for its Louisiana Scholarship program.[http://www.louisianabelieves.com/schools/louisiana-scholarship-program]</ref>

Voucher programs often may not be implemented with the necessary safeguards that prevent institutions from discriminating against marginalized communities. In the United States, as of 2016, there are currently no state laws that require voucher programs to not discriminate against marginalized communities.<ref name="Suzanne E 2016"/>

Some school voucher systems may also lack accountability to taxpayers.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Petrilli |first1=Michael J. |last2=Finn, Chester E. |last3=Hentges, Christina |last4=Northern, Amber M. |date=2009 |title=When Private Schools Take Public Dollars: What's the Place of Accountability in School Voucher Programs? |url=https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/research/when-private-schools-take-public-dollars-whats-place-accountability-school |publisher=Thomas B. Fordham Institute}}</ref><ref>See Leader, Barbara (July 2, 2012). Email exchange reveals voucher scheme. [http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/20120702/NEWS01/207020308/Email-exchange-reveals-voucher-scheme] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130804022132/http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/20120702/NEWS01/207020308/Email-exchange-reveals-voucher-scheme|date=August 4, 2013}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=White, Jr |first=Lamar |date=July 8, 2013 |title=Audit reveals systemic, widespread problems in Louisiana's school voucher program |url=https://cenlamar.com/2013/07/08/audit-reveals-systemic-widespread-problems/ |website=CenLamar}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Sentell |first=Will |date=June 30, 2013 |title=Ruston school banned from accepting voucher students |url=http://theadvocate.com/home/6377589-125/ruston-school-banned-from-accepting |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131015044643/http://theadvocate.com/home/6377589-125/ruston-school-banned-from-accepting |archive-date=2013-10-15 |work=The Advocate}}</ref> At the same time, tax credit systems relating to donations to voucher-distributing non-governmental organisations may be used as a means to reduce taxes without substantially benefitting low-income students.<ref name="NYTBD" /><ref>{{Cite book |last=Welner |first=Kevin G. |title=NeoVouchers: The Emergence of Tuition Tax Credits for Private Schooling |date=2008 |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |isbn=978-0742540804}}</ref>

====Trump's 2018 budget==== President Donald Trump proposed a 2018 budget that included $250&nbsp;million for voucher initiatives, state-funded programs that pay for students to go to private school.<ref name=":42">{{Cite magazine |title=Here's Why Researchers Say Betsy DeVos' Proposed School Voucher Program Won't Work |url=https://time.com/4832923/betsy-devos-trump-administration-school-choice-vouchers/ |magazine=Time |language=en |access-date=2018-04-22}}</ref><ref name=":32">{{Cite web |title=FACT SHEET: President Trump's FY 2018 Budget |url=https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget18/budget-factsheet.pdf}}</ref>

====Teaching creationism instead of evolution==== Some private religious schools in voucher programs teach creationism instead of the theory of evolution.<ref name="politico2"/> Over 300 schools in the U.S. have been documented as teaching creationism and receiving taxpayer money.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Hundreds of Voucher Schools Teach Creationism in Science Classes {{!}} Blog {{!}} Independent Lens |url=https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/blog/hundreds-of-voucher-schools-teach-creationism-in-science-classes/ |access-date=2022-10-14 |website=Independent Lens |language=en-US}}</ref> A strict definition of state-funded religious education was narrowly deemed constitutional in ''Zelman v. Simmons-Harris'' (2002).<ref>{{Cite news |last=Kopplin |first=Zack |date=January 16, 2013 |title=Creationism spreading in schools, thanks to vouchers |work=MSNBC |url=http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/16/creationism-spreading-in-schools-thanks-to-vouchers/}}</ref> At least 35 states have passed various Blaine Amendments restricting or prohibiting public funding of religious education.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Denniston |first=Lyle |author-link=Lyle Denniston |date=January 19, 2016 |title=Constitution Check: Are the states' "Blaine Amendments" on shaky ground? |url=http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2016/01/constitution-check-are-the-states-blaine-amendments-on-shaky-ground/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160816043553/http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2016/01/constitution-check-are-the-states-blaine-amendments-on-shaky-ground/ |archive-date=August 16, 2016 |access-date=August 11, 2016 |website=constitutioncenter.org |publisher=National Constitution Center}}</ref> However, ''Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue'' (2020) ruled that it is unconstitutional to disqualify all religious schools from receiving public funds that other private schools are eligible to get.

== See also == {{portal|Schools}} * Scholarship * School choice * Student debt * Student loan

==References== {{Reflist}}

==Further reading== * Carl, Jim. ''Freedom of Choice: Vouchers in American Education''. (Westport: Praeger, 2011), 264 pp. * {{Cite journal |last=Cecilia Elena |first=Rouse |year=2012 |title=School Vouchers and Student Achievement: Recent Evidence and Remaining Questions |journal=Annual Review of Economics |volume=4 |pages=17–42 |doi=10.1146/annurev.economics.050708.143354}} * [http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jel.20150679 Dennis Epple, Richard E. Romano, and Miguel Urquiola. "School Vouchers: A Survey of the Economics". ''Journal of Economic Literature''. Jun 2017, Vol. 55, No. 2: Pages 441-492] * {{Cite book |last=Hooker |first=Mark |title=Freedom of Education: The Dutch Political Battle for State Funding of all Schools both Public and Private (1801–1920) |year=2009 |publisher=CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform |isbn=978-1-4404-9342-3}} * {{Cite web |last1=Stewart |first1=Molly S. |last2=Moon |first2=Jodi S. |date=October 2016 |title=Understanding How School Vouchers Are Funded: Summary of Funding for the Louisiana Scholarship Program |url=https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED574828.pdf |publisher=Center for Evaluation and Public Policy}} - Hosted by the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) * {{Cite book |last=Stiglitz |first=Joseph E |title=Economics of the Public Sector |publisher=Stanford University |year=2000 |isbn=978-0-393-96651-0 |edition=3rd}}

Category:Alternative education Category:Education issues Category:Education economics Category:Fiscal policy