Dear Friends,

The tuition support increase in Gov. Braun’s proposed budget (Jan. 16, 2025) is 2.0% in the first year and 2.0% in the second year of the biennium.

The tuition support increase in the House Republican budget unveiled on Feb. 14, 2025 is also 2.0% in the first year and 2.0% in the second year.

Then the House Republicans added $160 million to each year in the tuition support line for curriculum materials, whereas in previous years and in the new Governor’s budget, curriculum materials were a separate line item.  Keep this change in mind when comparing the two proposals in the chart below.  This maneuver allowed House Republicans to show a bigger tuition support line item in the budget itself than the Governor proposed, when actually they were both increases of 2.0%.

A 2.0% increase is not enough to maintain programs in traditional public schools.

COMPARE THE NEW BUDGET TO THE PREVIOUS NINE BUDGETS  

The chart below shows how the Governor’s budget proposal and the House budget proposal stack up compared to the nine previous budgets.

Because of the curriculum materials line item described above, these two proposals can’t be directly compared until the $160 million for curriculum materials (textbooks) is subtracted from the total.

Keep this confusing factor into account when comparing the budget proposals:

INDIANA SCHOOL FUNDING INCREASES FOR THE PAST NINE BUDGETS FOR COMPARISON WITH GOV. BRAUN’S BUDGET (JANUARY) AND THE HOUSE BUDGET (FEBRUARY)  

Source:  The summary cover page from the General Assembly’s School Formulas for each budget and House Bill 1001 (the budget bill) in each year.

Prepared by Dr. Vic Smith, 3-1-25

When the school funding formulas are passed every two years by the General Assembly, legislators see the bottom line percentage increases on a summary page.  Figures that have appeared on this summary are listed below for the last nine budgets that I have personally observed as they were approved by the legislature.

Tuition support and dollar increases have been rounded to the nearest 10 million dollars.

Total funding and percentage increases were taken directly from HB 1001 (the budget) and the School Funding Formula summary page, as well as from the House Republican Power Point presentation that explained that the tuition support line item included $160 million for curriculum materials/textbooks that were listed on a separate line item in the previous budget (2023). 

Here are four comments about an increase of only 2.0% each year:

1. Keeping Up with Inflation The current federal inflation rate is 3.0%.  The 2.0% proposal will not allow schools to keep up with inflation, let alone compensate for inflation over the past few years.

2. Lowest Funding Plan Since the 2017 Budget It has been eight years (FY 2018 and FY 2019) since the funding plan for tuition support did not exceed 2%.  The hope expressed in the Statehouse is that the revenue forecast in April will be higher and the budget for tuition support can be expanded.  Until then, a 2.0% increase for tuition support is reminding many school districts of the headaches that came with recession budgets of the past.

3. Private School Voucher Funding Takes Priority Currently in law from the previous budget, families of four with incomes up to $230,000 can get state tax dollars for tuition vouchers.  While this seems more than generous, it was not enough for Republican leaders. Both new budget proposals remove all income caps, called “universal vouchers”.  This change would provide private school vouchers for the first time to even the very wealthy. This means significant state money would now go to high income families who haven’t had any problem affording a private school for their child.This is truly an unwelcome move in a year when tuition support is given the lowest annual increases since the budget written in 2017 (FY 2018 and FY 2019).

How much state money will it cost to fund vouchers for the wealthy?

According to the latest Legislative Services Agency Fiscal Impact Statement dated 2-20-25, universal school vouchers will cost an additional $139 million in FY 2026 and an additional $52 million in FY 2027.

As veteran budget expert Denny Costerison reminded everyone in testimony on the House budget, the additional costs for private school vouchers are paid first and come off the top of any budget increases.  In the first year, when the House budget allots $180 million in new money for tuition support, the $139 million taken off the top for universal vouchers leaves an increase of $41 million for FY2026 funding.  That amount is a 0.5% increase for traditional public schools, rather than the overall 2.0% as announced.

The same calculations for FY 2027 funding would reduce the $190 million in new money proposed by the House by $52 million.  That leaves an increase of $138 million for funding tuition support for traditional public schools, which is an increase of 1.5%.

Once again, private school vouchers are being given priority funding while traditional public schools get what is left over.   This is unfair to the 90% of Indiana students who have chosen traditional public schools.

4. A Troubling Future for Textbook/Curriculum Materials The House budget unveiled on February 14th was accompanied by a Power Point that clearly explained the 2.0% tuition support increases “net of curriculum materials,” as they put it on the Power Point.As they concluded on the Power Point:  “Funding formula rolls the $160 M curricular materials appropriation into the foundation.”

In the previous budget written in 2023, a separate line item for providing textbooks and curriculum materials was listed as $160 million each year.  School administrators have complained that the budget was inadequate for their textbook needs.  Instead of increasing the $160 million budget for curriculum materials, the House proposal would put curriculum materials into the general tuition support budget. This would give administrators more flexibility to cover textbook budget needs with tuition support money, but that move would reduce money available for all other general fund needs, including teacher salaries.  The need to find money to improve teacher pay may reduce the funding available for textbooks and leave schools with old textbooks.  There are good reasons to put curriculum materials on a separate line item to keep them from being swallowed by other budgetary needs, but these reasons are now in question in the House proposal.

In the 2023 budget session, the House treated “Curriculum Materials” in this same manner, but the Senate version of the budget prevailed on this point, and “Curriculum Materials” remained a separate line item.  

GIVING VOUCHERS TO HIGH INCOME FAMILIES

Bit by bit, taxpayer support for private and parochial tuition has been increased by the Republican leadership during the past fourteen years.  In 2011, when the watershed bill was passed to pay for private and religious school tuition with your tax money, only families with incomes under $42,000 were eligible.  Families with incomes of $63,000 could get a 50% voucher.

Over the budget years, more and more tax money has been funneled to high-income families who are going to private schools already. Budget by budget, income limits to get a voucher have been lifted higher and higher until the last budget debate in 2023 led to a jump to cover families up to a previously unheard of level of $230,000 for a family of four.  This is no longer recognizable as a voucher program to help poor families go to private schools as originally justified.

Now the House budget proposes to remove all income limits and to give vouchers to the very wealthy.

Do these families really need your tax dollars? 

Let legislators know your answer to this question.

The budget debate now moves to the Senate.  Let your Senators hear your support for a strong K-12 budget increase for traditional public schools during these times when inflation remains at 3%.

Then let them know you deeply oppose expanding private school vouchers to all high-income families when there is no supervision or accountability for voucher dollar expenditures!

Grassroots support of public education makes all the difference.  Thank you for your active support of public schools in Indiana!

Best wishes,

Vic Smith      vic790@aol.com

 “Vic’s Statehouse Notes” and ICPE received one of three Excellence in Media Awards presented by Delta Kappa Gamma Society International, an organization of over 85,000 women educators in seventeen countries.  The award was presented on July 30, 2014 during the Delta Kappa Gamma International Convention held in Indianapolis.  Thank you Delta Kappa Gamma!

ICPE has worked since 2011 to promote public education in the Statehouse and oppose the privatization of schools.  We need your membership to help support ICPE lobbying efforts.  We need all ICPE members to renew their membership.  

Our lobbyist Joel Hand is representing ICPE extremely well in the 2025 session.  We need your memberships and your support to continue his work. We welcome additional members and additional donations.  We need your help and the help of your colleagues who support public education!  Please pass the word!  

 Go to www.indianacoalitionforpubliced.org for membership and renewal information and for full information on ICPE efforts on behalf of public education.  Thanks! 

Some readers have asked about my background in Indiana public schools.  Thanks for asking!  Here is a brief bio:

I am a lifelong Hoosier and began teaching in 1969.  I served as a social studies teacher, curriculum developer, state research and evaluation consultant, state social studies consultant, district social studies supervisor, assistant principal, principal, educational association staff member, and adjunct university professor.   I worked for Garrett-Keyser-Butler Schools, the Indiana University Social Studies Development Center, the Indiana Department of Education, the Indianapolis Public Schools, IUPUI, and the Indiana Urban Schools Association, from which I retired as Associate Director in 2009.  I hold three degrees: B.A. in Ed., Ball State University, 1969; M.S. in Ed., Indiana University, 1972; and Ed.D., Indiana University, 1977, along with a Teacher’s Life License and a Superintendent’s License, 1998.  In 2013 I was honored to receive a Distinguished Alumni Award from the IU School of Education, and in 2014 I was honored to be named to the Teacher Education Hall of Fame by the Association for Teacher Education – Indiana.  In April of 2018, I was honored to receive the 2018 Friend of Education Award from the Indiana State Teachers Association.