The Case for TRULY Universal Education Savings Accounts

Originally published to X. 

Parents across the country are demanding more choices in how their children are educated, and for good reason.

Despite record spending of nearly $900 billion annually on K-12 education, or more than $17,000 per student, student outcomes continue to decline. The latest National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) scores show significant drops in math and reading proficiency, exposing the failure of the current system to deliver quality education.

While more than 30 states have some form of school choice, The 2025 EdChoice Friedman Index notes that only four states—Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, and West Virginia—offer truly universal Education Savings Accounts (ESAs).

Image Source: Ed Choice

EdChoice defines universal ESAs as those in which all students are eligible and parents have full flexibility in spending their education dollars. This is the gold standard, and every state should strive to meet it.

The fight for universal school choice is not new. Milton Friedman, one of the most influential champions of free markets and school choice, introduced the idea of school vouchers in 1955, arguing that education dollars should follow students rather than being tied to government-run schools.

Milton and Rose Friedman laid the intellectual foundation for school choice policies, including ESAs. These policies expand on vouchers by allowing parents to use funds for private school tuition, homeschooling, tutoring, career training, and more. Today, Friedman’s insights are more relevant than ever as policymakers debate how to fix an education system that has failed millions of students.

If more spending were the solution, U.S. education would thrive. Instead, government schools spend nearly a trillion dollars yearly while producing stagnant or declining results.

The real problem is that administrative bloat has skyrocketed. Government schools have hired more non-teaching staff than ever, growing their bureaucracies instead of investing in classroom instruction.

Rather than prioritizing student success, the current system funds institutions at the expense of families, trapping children in schools that fail to meet their needs.

Universal ESAs are the best solution to this crisis.

They allow parents to direct their child's education funding toward private school tuition, homeschooling materials, tutoring, career training, or other approved education services. This provides immediate relief for students stuck in failing schools and creates competition that incentivizes all types of schooling to improve. When schools must earn demand from parents and supply from teachers rather than rely on guaranteed government funding, they must innovate, prioritize student success, and operate efficiently.

Opponents claim ESAs “take money away” from government schools. That’s a myth.

Government schools are funded on a per-student basis. When students leave, schools are no longer responsible for educating them—but in many cases, they still retain a portion of the funding.

No business expects full revenue after losing customers—why should government schools be different?

The real reason critics oppose school choice isn’t about funding—it’s about protecting a failing monopoly from competition.

The 2025 Friedman Index highlights the states leading the way and those still having work to do. The four states that have fully embraced universal ESAs ensure every student can access funding for education options that fit their needs. These states have prioritized students over systems and are seeing positive results.
​
Meanwhile, states like Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Ohio, and South Carolina have taken steps toward broad eligibility but still impose restrictions that limit flexibility and funding.

Image Source: EdChoice

The largest red state, Texas, has no private school choice programs. With 6.3 million school-age children, including 5.5 million in government schools and nearly 1 million in private, home, micro, or other types of schooling, Texas has more students than the total populations of all but 17 states.

Yet, despite its size, Texas lags in delivering true universal school choice.

Texas lawmakers have introduced House Bill 3 (HB 3) and Senate Bill 2 (SB 2), claiming universal eligibility. However, neither bill provides universal funding or usage, meaning they fall short of true school choices like Arizona, Florida, Arkansas, and West Virginia. If Texas truly wants to lead, HB 3 is the stronger bill, but it should be improved to ensure full funding and total flexibility for families. Otherwise, millions of students will remain trapped in a failing system.

Texas lawmakers are also pushing bad policies like HB 2, SB 26, and other bills that would funnel at least $8 billion more into government schools while allocating only $1 billion to ESAs. This would cover at most 1.5% of students, serving just 100,000 children—a small fraction considering Texas has more than 6 million students and a population of 30 million, the second-largest in the country.

Texas doesn’t need more spending—if that were the answer, we’d already have the best education system in the world. What Texas needs is competition.

Parents shouldn’t have to wait for slow legislative action while their children’s futures are at stake. If Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, and West Virginia can provide truly universal ESAs, there is no excuse for other states to lag behind.
​
It’s time for a bold vision for education that prioritizes students over bureaucracy. The demand is clear, the data are conclusive, and the path forward is undeniable. Universal ESAs must be the standard in every state.