Texas lawmakers on Monday sparred during a hearing over two topics expected to consume much of the public education debate during the 2025 legislative session: religion in schools and education savings accounts.
The House Public Education Committee began the public hearing with testimony from Texas Education Agency Commissioner Mike Morath. Later, there were questions from at least one Democrat about an education commission proposal that would infuse Bible teachings into elementary school English and Language Arts curriculum pending State Board of Education approval in November. If approved, the decision to adopt the curriculum would rest with school districts. Those that do adopt it would receive an incentive of up to $60 per student.
Rep. James Talarico, D-Austin, spoke to Morath about what many in recent weeks have described as a bias toward Christianity in the educational materials, which they believe could violate church-state separation and alienate Texas children whose families oppose government support for a single faith.
“I can tell you, there is a difference between teaching and preaching,” Talarico said. “And in my opinion, these passages, which appear at length throughout the curriculum … they are preaching under federal law.”
Talarico specifically pointed to a kindergarten lesson that teaches the Golden Rule as a core value of the Bible, despite the fact that many other religions have their own versions of it. He raised concerns that teachers are not adequately equipped to teach complex lessons on religion.
Talarico also questioned Morath on what involvement organizations like the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a conservative think tank, had in the development of the materials, alluding to a report from the education news organization The 74 citing the foundation as one of the materials’ vendors.
The Austin Democrat also asked the commissioner whether he personally thought that the curriculum violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits states from endorsing or promoting an official religion. He noted a provision in House Bill 1605, the law directing the TEA to create its own free-to-use textbooks with the goal of helping teachers save time preparing for classes, that protects instructors from discipline in the event that allegations are raised about an establishment clause violation.
Morath, who said that he did not have the curriculum material in front of him at the hearing, argued that it references other religions, that the education commission was open to making adjustments where appropriate, that he doesn’t believe the curriculum is biased toward Christianity, and that the development and review process has included a broad set of perspectives.
“What I want to make clear is that we are responsive to feedback,” Morath said, “that we’re identifying accuracies and/or inaccuracies in the material and make modifications so that this is what Texas families would want for their children to learn while they’re in elementary school.”
The materials received backing from some Republicans on the panel, who said their constituents have been craving materials like the ones proposed and, as one lawmaker said, see that the mission of public schools is “to teach the belief systems that form the founding principles of our country.”
“The simple truth is that all world religions did not have an equal impact on why we’re here today,” said Rep. Matt Schaefer, a Tyler Republican. “I don’t think we should ever be ashamed of mentioning the name of Jesus in our curriculum or shying away from the role of Christianity in developing this country, developing Western civilization and developing the very American and legal system that brings us here … today as lawmakers.”
Efforts to infuse more Christianity in schools across the nation are currently facing several legal challenges, but legal experts note that recent rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority have eroded decades of precedent and made it unclear what state actions are unconstitutional. In its 2022 ruling on Kennedy v. Bremerton, for example, the high court found that a Washington high school football coach did not violate the First Amendment by conducting personal prayers on the field after team games.
“I want us to meet the needs of our constituents, meet the needs of our students,” Talarico said in response to GOP criticism of his remarks. “All I’m asking … is that we respect and obey the United States Constitution while we’re doing it.”
School vouchers: findings from other states
Separately, a panel of experts on education savings accounts and school vouchers in other states provided recommendations to Texas lawmakers. Education savings accounts allow for parents to use tax dollars to pay for private school tuition and expenses like tutoring and school supplies, while vouchers primarily go toward tuition. Both terms are often used interchangeably.
The nation’s largest voucher programs give most of their funds to religious schools, according to a Washington Post analysis. In Arizona, a model for voucher programs across the country, the state is facing a billion-dollar budget shortfall largely attributable to new voucher spending.
On Monday, however, the panelists highlighted what they see as the biggest needs for a successful program, namely eliminating onerous barriers to access and allowing for a wide variety of educational expenses to be approved.
“While the challenge of navigating through significant parent choice policies is a difficult one, both legislatively and politically, it represents the future of education,” said Robyn Bagley, executive director of Utah Education Fits All. “We exist in an ever-changing world where we have the ability to customize nearly everything in our lives. This shift to an ESA-style approach is a harbinger of a more dynamic, responsive and inclusive educational landscape where the needs and choices of families take center stage.”
Last year, Gov. Greg Abbott made creating an education savings account program his top legislative priority, holding hostage any additional base-level public school funding along the way. A coalition of Democrats and rural Republicans killed the proposal.
Abbott has vowed to make a similar push next year after helping oust many of his GOP colleagues who voted against the measure, citing his belief that he now has enough support to get it passed through the Legislature.
Education savings account opponents echoed many of their reservations on Monday, most notably their belief that it would siphon money away from public schools that are already struggling to make ends meet in the face of rising inflation and expiring pandemic relief funds.
They also raised concerns about holding private schools accountable for ensuring they aren’t exacerbating school segregation, that they are improving student outcomes and that they are providing services to underserved children, like those with disabilities and kids learning English as a second language.
“If we’re serving 1% to 8% to the detriment of 92 or 99%, something’s wrong,” said Rep. Steve Allison, R-San Antonio, who lost to an Abbott-backed opponent in the March primary. “That’s just not a good business model anyway you want to stretch it.”
Disclosure: The Texas Public Policy Foundation has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune, a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy.
