Rep. Shannon Erickson, R-Beaufort, during a committee meeting Wednesday, Feb. 19, 2025. (Screenshot/SCETV livestream)
COLUMBIA — The voucher plan heading to the House floor looks a lot like the one struck down by the state Supreme Court last year, with one main difference: The money would flow through a designated trustee instead of a “trust fund.”
That one tweak — putting a single person in charge of paying tuition for eligible students — should be enough to make the law constitutional, House Education Chairwoman Shannon Erickson told reporters.
It’s a test, of sorts, as she fully expects any new voucher law to be back before the state’s high court.
Sending justices something so similar to what they threw out will be more informative than a vastly different law, Erickson said. Either their ruling will allow transfers for private K-12 tuition to resume, or it will give the Legislature a clearer picture of how to try again, she said.
“The goal here is to get the feedback … or get the approval,” Erickson, R-Beaufort, told reporters after her committee voted 13-4 along party lines to send the bill to the floor.
“We’re going to learn from it,” she continued. “And we’re going to make it better, and we’re going to listen to what the court says. That’s how you learn.”
SC Senate passes K-12 voucher bill pulling from lottery profits
The state Senate took a very different approach in the bill it passed last month, which used lottery profits to fund the K-12 scholarships and increased the scholarship amount.
In changing the source of the money, GOP senators repeatedly noted that lottery profits already fund scholarships to private colleges and private preschools. So, it should be a constitutional source for K-12 tuition too, they argued.
But Erickson said that’s an untested idea. Lottery funding for K-12 private tuition is a relative wild card before the high court, she said.
While Democrats will oppose the bill on the House floor, the chamber’s GOP supermajority is certain to pass it. The real battle will likely be between Republicans in the House and Senate.
Both chambers’ proposals are an attempt to revive the K-12 private tuition payments halted by the state Supreme Court last September, when a majority of justices found the transfers violated the state constitution’s ban on public money directly benefiting private education.
The rest of the law remains intact, meaning money is still flowing to parents’ accounts for still-allowed spending, including tutoring, textbooks, and fees for students who transferred from one public school district to another. And sign-ups for the program continue while legislators seek to renew the real reason for the law: Private school choice.
Under the House plan, the funding source for the scholarships would be up to the Legislature’s budget writers every year. They could pull from lottery profits if they want, but it wouldn’t be required by law, Erickson said.
The South Carolina Education Association, which successfully sued the state over the 2023 law, still believes that would be unconstitutional, said MaryRita Watson, a lobbyist for the group.
She urged legislators to “let the people of South Carolina decide” whether the state should help pay for private K-12 tuition.
In last fall’s majority decision, justices already laid out a sure way for a voucher plan to be constitutional: Change the constitution first. That would require the Legislature to put a question on the ballot asking voters whether the ban on public money directly benefiting private schools should be deleted.
“The issue should be put on a ballot measure, allowing citizens of our state to determine whether they wish to allocate their public dollars to fund private religious schools,” Watson said.
Donations will cover third-quarter costs for SC K-12 students using vouchers
But GOP legislators have been reluctant to do that.
The earliest voters could be asked is November 2026. Even if voters say “yes,” the constitution wouldn’t be amended until 2027.
And ballot referendums on vouchers have failed in other states.
Under the House bill, the program’s scholarship amount and participation caps also closely mirror the law partially thrown out.
Like the Senate bill (and existing law), up to 10,000 students whose families earn up to 300% of the federal poverty level, or nearly $80,000 for a family of three, would qualify in the coming school year. That would rise to 15,000 students with families making 400% of the poverty level during the 2026-2027 school year.
Both the House and Senate plans would expand eligibility to students already attending private schools but give preference for the state aid, through the creation of priority application windows, to students seeking to leave a public school.
Unlike the Senate plan, the House bill keeps scholarship amounts at $6,000 next school year.
However, the dollar amount would rise in future years at the same rate that state aid to public schools increase. The Senate plan gives more money by providing 90% of the average per pupil aid to schools statewide. In the coming school year, that would be about $7,700.
Democrats on the House committee worried about the program’s cost. If all available spots are filled, the program will cost the state $60 million in 2025-26, a number that will continue to grow with eligibility and rising scholarship amounts.
“I am very, very concerned about how we’re going to fund this bill long-term,” said Rep. Kambrell Garvin, D-Columbia.
About 4,700 students have applied for the program for the coming year, said Meka Childs, the state Department of Education’s director of education choice. That’s in addition to the 1,700 students who were accepted last year and opted to stay in the program, she said.
The deadline to apply for the upcoming school year is March 15.