A policy incubated in the laboratory of state governments is now on the cusp of going nationwide. Following a model adopted by Arizona in 1997, the House Republicans’ “Big Beautiful Bill” would implement a nationwide school choice program entirely free from government interference. “The idea here is to catalyze a school choice revolution across the country,” said Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.), “and bring school choice even to states like mine, California, that have done everything they possibly can to restrict it.”

The plan is based on a bill Kiley introduced, the Educational Choice for Children Act, he explained on “Washington Watch.” “We estimate that will mean getting two million kids private school choice across the country.”

Section 110109 of the bill would create a tax credit for “qualified contributions” to “a scholarship granting organization” that meets the education-related expenses of “eligible students.” Students are eligible if they belong to “a household with an income which is not greater than 300 percent of the area median gross income,” which would encompass most of the country’s school-age population.

Individuals could receive a one-to-one tax credit for contributing $5,000 or 10% of adjusted gross income, whichever is greater, to such scholarship funds.

The entire credit is capped nationally at $5 billion annually for 2026-2029, with credits awarded on a “first-come, first-serve” basis.

“It appears to be modeled after legislation that started in Arizona back in 1997, by former Congressman Trent Franks [R-Ariz.],” said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins. Like the Arizona plan, taxpayers receive a credit for private donations to a private scholarship organization, which must in turn devote a high percentage (90% or more) of the tax credit contributions directly to scholarships. The primary difference is the scope of the program, with the federal cap dwarfing the Arizona program and reaching even into states that oppose school choice.

Although this model “first started in Arizona about 30 years ago, I introduced it when I was in the legislature in Louisiana,” Perkins added. “Back then, we weren’t quite at the point we are now. Louisiana has something very similar today.”

Perkins alluded to organized opposition against the bill, largely coming from teachers’ unions captured by left-wing interests. “The educational establishment is saying it’s taking dollars away from programs that would strengthen all schools,” he said, but really “what they’re afraid of is competition.”

Kiley concurred. “The idea that more money will improve student outcomes necessarily has been completely debunked. Under the Biden administration, we increased education spending by $200 billion, and yet student test scores have plummeted. There’s been an inverse relationship.”

“What really does make a difference is giving families options and giving schools an incentive to offer a high-quality product,” Kiley continued. “What we see when the competition does occur is it actually lifts all boats, because then the other schools in the area have to offer a higher quality product.”

Furthermore, “when a child is being educated at a private school, then that’s no longer a cost to the public school system,” he added. “At the end of the day, what we’re doing is we’re allowing parents and families to have a greater amount of control over how their share of education spending is used.”

“Right now, we have private schools across the country, but only those who have means generally can attend them,” Kiley concluded. “This bill … opens that opportunity up to everyone. Democrats who are opposing this bill and calling it some sort of voucher system — what they’re really defending is making school choice the exclusive province of the wealthy.”