As governors from both parties announce they intend to participate in the new federal Education Freedom Tax Credit (EFTC), Minnesota Democrats are doubling down.
Canned responses from legislators including Rep. Kaela Berg and Rep. Josiah Hill, shared with American Experiment, don’t just oppose the program but get basic facts wrong.
I address a few claims below.
The public dollars myth
Claim: “This would direct public dollars toward private education, which ultimately means fewer resources for our public education system.”
This objection gets repeated constantly, but it misunderstands how tax-credit scholarships actually work.
Tax-credit scholarships are funded by private donations, not appropriations. When a taxpayer donates to a Scholarship Granting Organization (SGO), that donor receives a federal tax credit. The scholarship money comes entirely from those private contributions. Not from the state general fund, not from the education budget, and not from school district money.
The disability protections myth
Claim: “Such programs also have a history of undermining legal protections for students with disabilities.”
SGOs that discriminate against students with disabilities lose their program eligibility. And students with disabilities do not lose their federal rights under IDEA or Section 504 simply because a scholarship program exists. Families who choose to apply for a scholarship are doing so voluntarily. In fact, some of the most targeted school choice programs in the country were designed specifically for students with disabilities whose needs weren’t being met in traditional public schools. Many private schools focus on areas such as autism, dyslexia, or ADHD, and with smaller class sizes can provide more individualized support.
The equity myth
Claim: “Such programs…can exacerbate inequities for students and families who do not have the resources and connections to apply for these scholarships.”
Right now, school choice in Minnesota is an option for people with money. If you can afford private tuition, or a home in a better district, you have options. Everyone else deals with capacity limits, transportation barriers, and open enrollment processes that aren’t fully open. Tax-credit scholarships are specifically designed to change that. In Florida, Georgia, Indiana, and Arizona, where similar programs have been running for years, scholarship recipients are more lower-income and more diverse than critics imply.
Opposition, then, to choice policies becomes less about “equity” and more about protecting the status quo and the teachers’ union influence over Democratic politics that comes with it.
The accountability myth
Claim: “…[A] very concerning lack of accountability and oversight measures to deter fraud and ensure public dollars are used responsibly and effectively.”
Given Minnesota’s track record on fraud, accountability is a legitimate concern. But it is hard to take the accountability argument seriously from legislators who spent years defending a state program long after the fraud warning signs were obvious (see MNFraudFiles.com).
SGOs under the EFTC are required to file with the IRS, maintain records, and report on scholarship distribution. This is more oversight than plenty of programs the legislature has quickly pushed through. The U.S. Treasury is still finalizing rulemaking, and more accountability provisions are expected.
If there are real gaps, then propose an amendment, negotiate the details. That’s how legislation works. Opposing the whole program over accountability concerns while tolerating a public system with its own well-documented transparency and spending problems is a double standard.
_____________
If you want to weigh in, you can urge Gov. Tim Walz and your legislators to opt Minnesota into the EFTC here. Feel free to incorporate any of the above in your email!
