FAQ
What are ESAs?
ESAs are a funding system that recognizes parents as the primary decision makers in the educational life of their child and frees children from failing school systems. They empower parents by granting access to the financial resources to send their child to the school which can most effectively meet their needs, whether that school be public or private, religious or secular. By enacting ESAs, we are giving Minnesota families the flexibility and authority over their education financing.
Will enacting Education Savings Accounts be too costly for our state’s budget?
The cost of school choice programs like Education Savings Accounts, Opportunity Scholarships and others is minimal, and in the long-run, the state will see an overall cost savings. It is important to highlight that education dollars belong to the students – not the school or the district they are educated in. So, these dollars should be accessible in a way that best benefits individual students and their families.
Why are Education Savings Accounts Important?
Parents know their children best and our educators understand that it is imperative to work with families to fully educate a child in the best possible manner. It is crucial we empower parents to be fully immersed in planning an education plan for their kids. By empowering families and increasing parental choice, we are giving Minnesota children the opportunity to thrive in a school that best fits their needs.
Are there other states that currently allow ESAs to empower parents?
Where does the money come from?
Since the dollars spent by the State in funding education are intended for the benefit of the child and not school districts, they are meant to follow the student not the school itself.
ESAs work because they give parents direct control over the dollars the State has already allocated for their child’s education, allowing them, in turn, to purchase the educational services (tuition, tutoring, internet access, etc.) in an educational environment that they think best for their child.
Because actual costs in non-public schools are typically lower than the amounts allocated for public schools, the dollars which remain unspent roll-over in the student’s account from year-to-year and can be used to pay for post-secondary education expenses.
Will Education Savings Accounts or other tax credits hurt our public education system by removing resources from public schools?
ESAs and other programs simply increase parental authority and allow Minnesotans to use the education funds allotted to their children as they see fit, because education dollars belong to the students, and not the public schools themselves. As with other tax credits and incentive programs, these programs are not meant to hurt one area, but benefit the overall system.
Will school choice programs benefit low-income families who could not otherwise afford tuition and non-traditional schools?
By providing targeted financial resources to families, including low and middle-income families, children have the opportunity to receive financing and scholarships that could cover most or even all of non-public school tuition costs.
Will these education programs only benefit those already attending non-traditional schools, or be accessible to help all Minnesota children?
Educational options should fit the needs of all students and these programs do just that by giving parents and students greater options and increased authority over their education decisions. These programs have the opportunity to help all families – regardless of where they students are currently enrolled.
Who are non-traditional schools accountable to if they are not under the public education system?
Due to their structure and increased involvement from parents and families, non-public schools are directly accountable to the parents and families themselves. Studies show non-public schools are actually more accountable with higher graduation rates than their public counterparts. Additionally, all private schools in Minnesota administer required assessments to meet appropriate benchmarks.
With ESAs, Minnesota families are given the flexibility and financial capability to bring about the best educational outcomes for their child. ESAs signal to the entire community that parents are the ones to whom the educational system must be accountable.
Why now?
We know this needs to change and our moment to truly make a difference is now. The only true way to address the issues in our education system is through increased parental choice and Education Savings Accounts (ESAs). This is why OAK is taking the lead to ensure we make the most of this moment for Minnesota families.
Why are parents better suited for these decisions that professional educators and administrators?
Parents know their children better than anyone else and therefore, have the right and duty to be informed about the educational content in their child’s classroom and the duty to evaluate whether that content is appropriate for their child or not. It is crucial we empower parents to be fully immersed in planning an education plan for their kids. By enacting ESAs, we are giving Minnesota families the flexibility and authority over their education financing.
How do we make ESAs a reality?
Parental empowerment and additional choice can all be possible for Minnesota families if we pass legislation enacting ESAs.
If you are one of the thousands of Minnesota parents concerned about the current education system, sign the petition below to show your support for parental empowerment and education choice and urge the Minnesota Legislature to pass Education Savings Accounts.
Does Article XIII, Section 1, prevent the Legislature from enacting ESAs or other forms of private School Choice?
No. Article XIII, Section 1 requires the Legislature to provide a “general, uniform, and thorough system of public schools,” but that duty is a floor—not a ceiling.
While legislators must fund public schools, nothing in Section 1 prohibits enacting additional educational opportunities, including Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) for students attending private schools.
Bottom line: Legislators have both the responsibility and the flexibility to act. ESAs are constitutional under Article XIII, Section 1.
Does Article XIII, Section 2 prohibit funding for students attending religious schools?
No. Article XIII, Section 2 prohibits public funds from supporting schools that teach religious doctrines. This provision is a Blaine Amendment, adopted in 1877 during a period of strong anti-immigrant sentiments.
Today, however, courts cannot apply Section 2 as written. The U.S. Supreme Court held that Blaine Amendments cannot be enforced to exclude students who attend religious schools from generally available public benefit programs. In a trilogy of cases (Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer; Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue; and Carson v. Makin) the Court held that excluding religious options from neutral school choice programs violates the First Amendment.
Bottom line: The federal Constitution governs. Legislators do not violate the Minnesota Constitution by funding ESA and allowing parents to use them to send their children to religious schools.
Do religious schools “discriminate” in admissions?
No. Religious schools operate under the protection of the First Amendment, which safeguards their ability to maintain their mission and identity.
In Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC, the Supreme Court held that religious institutions may select employees who support their mission. This autonomy logically extends to schools’ admissions decisions that preserve a faith-based community.
Additionally, federal law recognizes clear differences between public and private schools when it comes to admitting students with special educational needs:
- The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act applies to public schools, not private ones.
- Religious schools are exempt from certain public-accommodation requirements under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Even so, many religious schools voluntarily serve students with disabilities.
Bottom line: Decisions about whom a private school can admit and serve are based on mission and capacity—not unlawful discrimination.
