In the long argument over where a child's schooling should be paid for and who should decide it, a conservative school choice leader now says the teachers unions and the Democrats who follow them are backing a losing hand. The claim comes in the wake of the November midterms, where Texas offered a jolt to his movement: Democrat Gina Hinojosa's win over Governor Greg Abbott puts the future of one of the country's largest voucher-style savings programs in doubt. Beneath the campaign rhetoric lies an older tension, between those who see public money as best spent inside public schools and those w
AFC CEO Says Backing Teachers Unions and Opposing School Choice Is a Losing Political Strategy
Hinojosa's win raises questions about Abbott's signature voucher program
Mark
Why does this Texas result matter so much to the school choice debate?
Mimi
Because Abbott's program was one of the largest education savings account efforts in the country, and the person who beat him has signaled opposition to it. Its future is suddenly uncertain.
Mark
How does the program work?
Mimi
The Texas Education Freedom Accounts program started with $1 billion from the legislature. Eligible families can direct state money toward private school tuition and other approved expenses.
Luke
Worth noting that Schultz runs a school choice advocacy group. His claim that opposing choice is a losing strategy is his argument, not an established finding.
Mark
And yet Hinojosa just won in Texas.
Luke
Right, which cuts against him, or at least complicates it. The piece doesn't say how much education or vouchers mattered in her win. And her opposition is described as signaled, not spelled out in policy.
Mimi
The unions' side is on the record too. They say vouchers siphon money from public schools, and that the money should go to salaries, recruitment and buildings.
Mark
What about the $3 billion figure?
Luke
That's Schultz's number, with no source given. The article says analyses show hundreds of millions spent over a decade, which is a different measure.
Mimi
And the NEA's statement after the election talked about affordability and corruption. It never mentioned vouchers directly.
Luke
The AFT and Hinojosa haven't responded, so we don't yet know what she plans to do with TEFA.
The Pulse
- A conservative advocate declares that the teachers unions and Democratic resistance to school choice are a strategy destined to lose.
- Texas's midterm result throws Abbott's education savings account program into uncertainty as the incoming governor signals opposition.
- Unions counter that vouchers drain taxpayer dollars from public classrooms that already struggle with staffing and buildings.
- Shrinking enrollment in major districts raises the stakes, and both sides are now watching whether Democratic candidates will shift their positions.
In the long argument over where a child's schooling should be paid for and who should decide it, a conservative school choice leader now says the teachers unions and the Democrats who follow them are backing a losing hand. The claim comes in the wake of the November midterms, where Texas offered a jolt to his movement: Democrat Gina Hinojosa's win over Governor Greg Abbott puts the future of one of the country's largest voucher-style savings programs in doubt. Beneath the campaign rhetoric lies an older tension, between those who see public money as best spent inside public schools and those who see it as following the family, all unfolding as urban districts grow smaller and parents look for alternatives.
Tommy Schultz, who leads the American Federation for Children, a group that champions school choice, told Fox News Digital that Democrats relying on teachers unions and resisting choice are walking a path that will not win at the ballot box. He made the claim just after the November 3 midterms, which gave his movement a setback in Texas.
Schultz argues that voters are drawn to candidates offering a full education agenda rather than ones who simply block every alternative. He described the unions' goal as keeping children in schools they run and control, a message he believes does not persuade parents.
The unions see the matter differently. They oppose vouchers and education savings accounts because they divert taxpayer money from public schools, and they argue those funds should instead go to teacher pay, staffing and school buildings. Schultz, citing a figure the source does not explain, claimed the unions take in about $3 billion a year and called their opposition to choice a reflex tied to the party's biggest donors.
The immediate test is Texas. Democrat Gina Hinojosa defeated Governor Greg Abbott and has signaled she will oppose the state's Texas Education Freedom Accounts program, which started with a $1 billion allocation and lets families use state funds for private tuition. Its effect on public districts, many of which have lost students since the pandemic, remains unsettled.
The NEA responded through its president, Princess Moss, who said voters want affordable living, strong public schools and safer communities. The AFT and Hinojosa had not yet commented. What comes next is whether Democrats shift their school choice positions and how Texas's program fares under new leadership.
Tommy Schultz, the chief executive of the American Federation for Children, a conservative school choice advocacy group, told Fox News Digital that Democrats who lean on teachers unions and resist school choice are following a strategy that will not win. His argument arrives just after the Nov. 3 midterm elections, which handed Democrats a result that complicates his movement's plans in Texas.
Schultz's case is that the unions are losing ground with voters. In his words, more people are listening to politicians who offer a full education agenda, rather than ones who simply try to block every option. He described the unions' agenda as keeping children in schools the unions run and control, and said that is not a winning message.
The unions see it differently. Teachers unions regularly oppose school choice measures such as vouchers and education savings accounts, arguing that they pull taxpayer money out of public schools. Union leaders say those dollars should go toward higher teacher pay, recruiting staff and improving school buildings.
The political stakes are tied to money. Democratic candidates for governor, Congress and state legislatures routinely back education platforms aligned with the unions. Financial analyses indicate the two largest, the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on political activism, lobbying and progressive advocacy over the past decade. Schultz put the unions' intake at about $3 billion a year, counting the two national organizations and their affiliates, and called opposition to choice a knee-jerk reaction to the party's largest funders. The source does not say where that figure comes from. Both unions have also occasionally backed select Republicans in rural districts who pushed for state aid to underfunded public schools.
Republicans, meanwhile, have campaigned heavily on school choice, fueled partly by friction between unions and parents over learning loss after pandemic-era school closures. They have enacted state-funded vouchers and education savings accounts that let families use public money for private or alternative schooling outside their assigned neighborhood district.
Texas is the immediate test. Democrat Gina Hinojosa defeated Republican Gov. Greg Abbott on Nov. 3 and, as governor-elect, has signaled opposition to the state's school voucher program. That raises questions about the future of Abbott's signature legislation, which created one of the largest education savings account programs in the country. The Texas Education Freedom Accounts program was set up by the legislature with an initial $1 billion allocation and lets eligible families direct state funds toward private school tuition and other approved education expenses. Its possible financial effect on traditional public school districts remains an open question.
That question sits against a backdrop of shrinking enrollment. Major urban districts across the country have lost students since the COVID-19 pandemic, and some large ones, including Houston Independent School District, have struggled to keep students amid shifting enrollment patterns and competition from other options.
Schultz remains confident. He said that in recent years, candidates who pair pro-school choice policies with a brighter vision for public schools and for families controlling their children's education have won.
The AFT and Hinojosa did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The NEA pointed to a statement issued after the election from its president, Princess Moss, who said most Americans want a more affordable future, strong public schools and safer communities, and are ready to end corruption and self-dealing. She said voters across race, place and gender sent a mandate to put working families, students and educators first rather than billionaires and corporations.
What to watch now is whether Democratic candidates adjust their positions on school choice, and what Hinojosa's administration does with Texas's TEFA program.
Notable Quotes
It's not a winning message at the end of the day.— Tommy Schultz, CEO, American Federation for Children
Voters sent a clear mandate to put working families, students and educators first, not billionaires and corporations.— Princess Moss, NEA President (paraphrased)
Want the full story?
Read the original at Fox News ↗