In 1994, Wu-Tang Clan’s Raider Ruckus famously proclaimed, “Cash rules everything around me.” Decades later, that sentiment rings true not only in hip-hop but also in the ongoing debate over education choice. Unfortunately, many discussions about the financial side of educational freedom miss the mark, failing to focus on the actual needs of students and their families.
Nowhere is this more apparent than in discussions around funding caps for educational choice programs. Even though there is overwhelming evidence that education choice often generates significant fiscal benefits for taxpayers, the fear of budgetary impact has led some policymakers to cap spending on education choice programs. Indeed, some states have designed their programs with set appropriation amounts due to worries over their state budget, including Wyoming, which capped its program at $20 million; West Virginia, at $45.3 million; and Maryland, at $9 million.
But here’s the real issue: while funding caps may reduce financial risk, they also limit student opportunities. To maximize opportunities for students and families, states should fully allocate the money set aside for each child’s education through existing funding formulas or by greatly increasing the appropriation amounts. This would ensure that all students, regardless of their background, have access to high-quality education options.
Currently, too many programs have low-funded eligibility. For example, up until recently, North Carolina’s Education Savings Account barred 55,000 waitlisted students from enjoying education freedom due to its funding cap. In other words, families who wanted to access better education options found themselves locked out of North Carolina’s education choice program – not because they did not qualify, but because funding had run dry due to poor program design. Thankfully, state policymakers recently struck a deal and cleared its waiting list.
Families in other states like Utah are not as lucky. Utah’s education savings account allows parents to access scholarships of around $8,000 for private educational expenses, including tuition, tutoring, and more. Furthermore, 100 percent of Utah’s students are eligible for the scholarship. Yet, because of the funding cap for 2025 – slightly over $80 million – less than two percent of students can access an education savings account for this school year, leaving thousands of families on waiting lists, hoping for better luck next year.
For these families, the consequences are significant because the traditional one-size-fits-all model doesn’t work for every child. Still, because of the funding cap this school year, the families wanting to homeschool their children with their desired curriculum will go without, parents who wish to provide therapy and specialized services for their neurodivergent children are unable to, and students who face bullying are left without alternatives, all because of a discretionary budget limit.
These families deserve more than hope. They deserve opportunity.
Undoubtedly, education savings accounts and other choice programs are steps in the right direction for creating an education system that recognizes the dignity of each student. Their impact is limited, however, if most families can’t access them.
Fortunately, states like Arizona and Florida provide blueprints for creating universal eligibility in both name and practice by funding every family so they can choose the best academic path for their children. Arizona and Florida allow all families to access an ESA provided by funding through their respective education funding formulas. More states should follow their lead and remove funding caps by tying education choice funding to their state’s student funding formula or ensuring that enough funds are allocated to cover all families wanting to participate.
Families are waiting, and students are hoping. Let’s not allow arbitrary funding caps to stand in their way.
