Skip to main content
Hemlock Collective Logo Hemlock Collective
Education

The Voucher Shell Game: 2025 Study

Published
Case Dossier EDU-PRI-002
STATUS
Published
SEVERITY
High
DATE
2025-09-12
DOMAIN
Education
SUBDOMAIN
Privatization
CAPTURE VECTOR
Upward redistribution
TAGS
vouchers inequality education-funding religious-schools market-distortion inflation
Back to Case Files
Tulane University study confirms universal vouchers primarily subsidize wealthy families already in private schools, fuel tuition inflation by 5-10%, and redirect public funds to unregulated religious entities.

Summary

A landmark 2025 study by Tulane University economists Douglas N. Harris and Gabriel Olivier provides the first comprehensive national analysis of universal Education Savings Account (ESA) programs. The findings dismantle the “equity” arguments used to sell these policies, revealing that the “lion’s share” of voucher recipients were students already attending private schools. Furthermore, the study documents a “voucher inflation” effect, where private schools in voucher states raised tuition by 5-10% more than those in non-voucher states.

Capture Mechanism: Wealth Transfer & Sectarian Funding

This policy operates as a dual-vector capture mechanism:

  1. Upward Redistribution: By subsidizing families earning up to 300% of the median income (as proposed in the Trump administration’s federal expansion), the state effectively transfers tax revenue to the upper-middle class and wealthy, who face fewer barriers (transportation, tuition gaps) to utilizing the funds.
  2. State-Sponsored Sectarianism: The study found that voucher expansion primarily spurred the growth of “under-the-radar” religious schools (mostly non-Catholic Christian). This redirects public treasury funds into a parallel, unregulated religious education system, which lead author Dr. Harris described as “the biggest change in education policy since Brown v. Board.”

Key Findings

  • Inflationary Impact: Private schools in states with broad voucher access increased tuition by 5% to 10% more than schools in states without such policies, capturing the public subsidy as private profit rather than lowering costs for families.
  • The “Incumbency” Benefit: Private school enrollment increased only modestly (3-4%), indicating that the vast majority of the 1.3 million students now using vouchers were already in the private system. The policy is a windfall for existing private school families rather than a bridge for low-income public school students.
  • Barriers to Entry: Low-income families remain excluded due to the “tuition gap” (vouchers covering less than full tuition) and lack of transportation, meaning the “choice” is illusory for the poor.

Policy Context

These findings emerge as the Trump administration pushes a federal private-school choice program that would expand eligibility to families earning more than $300,000 in some regions. The data confirms that such programs function not as a safety net for failing schools, but as a wealth preservation vehicle for the affluent and a funding stream for religious indoctrination.

Analysis

The study exposes the “free market” rhetoric of school choice as a facade for market distortion. Rather than fostering competition that lowers prices, the injection of public money without oversight has incentivized private operators to raise prices. The result is a system where public funds are siphoned into opaque, often religious institutions that are free to select their students, while the public system—which serves all students—is systematically starved.