UPDATE: Stunning Voucher Disinformation from Ohio's Lt. Governor

After State School Board Takeover, LG Now Bullying a Local School Board

If there was an award, he’d win it. In fact, he already did!

When it comes to weaponizing the power of government to benefit private entities seeking public education funds for their own benefit, Ohio’s Lt. Gov. Jon Husted is the undisputed champion.

Early in his career, he went to bat for ECOT, a scam, on-line “school” that exploded into one of the largest scandals in Ohio history.

What did Husted do? As Ohio’s Speaker, he eliminated the legislative agency that was providing oversight of new, for-profit charter schools and was already warning about their dangers. For eliminating public accountability in a way that allowed ECOT to grow quickly, ECOT honored Husted with its first honorary degree:

Then he did it again more recently, becoming the Governor’s henchman last year, running around the state to convince Ohioans (who hate the idea) that the Governor needed to take over most of the power of the independent state school board (which includes numerous elected members). Last year’s takeover, following an election of public school advocates, moved most major decisions behind closed doors. Like his handiwork as Speaker, this lack of transparency and accountability is yet another bonanza for those whose goal it is to extract profit from the funds meant to go to public education.

And true to form, THIS WEEK, he’s up to no good again. At a very local level. And amid the ever growing outrage about the explosion of private school vouchers (there’s a story a week now about how bad it’s getting). Last week it was the Dayton Daily News exposing that the EdChoice Expansion program is “largely subsidizing families already sending their kids to private schools.”

Wouldn’t you know it? Just as the extent of this giveaway is becoming clear—in Ohio and nationally—Husted once again swoops in to keep people from standing up to it.

How?

By signing as dishonest a letter as you’ll see.

Upper Arlington and Vouchers

Some context.

Recall how a few months ago, I visited a forum in Upper Arlington, where we discussed a lawsuit that’s been filed to take on expanded universal vouchers in Ohio. Well, the grassroots leaders in that community—and many others—are advocating that their school board pass a resolution in support of the suit. (You should do the same BTW. Go HERE to start).

Well, they must be close to success. The school board is meeting THIS evening to consider this decision. And Husted is so threatened by this discussion by this single school board that he sent a letter to the board.

My short summary is that it’s full of lies, horrific legal analysis, and bullying, to a stunning degree from a sitting Lieutenant Governor. Husted should be ashamed of himself.

But through these strong-arm tactics, Husted also revealed the extent he and his allies are willing to go to stop even a single school board from standing up. No wonder they were so desperate to take over the state school board to keep as much of this behind closed doors as possible.

But let me walk through just how grotesque this letter is.

A Quick Fact Check:

Here’s what Husted wrote, paragraph by paragraph. I will fact check it along the way:

HUSTED:

“It has come to my attention that the Upper Arlington School Board is considering joining litigation to strike down the EdChoice Scholarship program.

The case of school vouchers was long ago litigated in an Ohio case that was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. It is on the basis of that successful litigation that the EdChoice Scholarship was created and structured. I know because I created it in 2005 when I served as Speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives. [**Remember this for future elections—might be the biggest reason that he loses.]

In Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639 (2002), the US Supreme Court, 22 years ago, addressed the federal constitutionality of school voucher programs. The US Supreme Court ruled that the voucher program in Cleveland, Ohio, did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Zelman case has been cited over 240 times by federal and state courts, including 14 times by the US Supreme Court in the years since. It is good law that has been relied on repeatedly and extensively throughout the country.”

FACT CHECK:

The case in Ohio is a state law case, arguing that the voucher program violates specific aspects of the State Constitution. A US Supreme Court opinion about federal clauses (ie. the Establishment Clause) has no bearing on that separate Ohio Constitutional language.

For example, the Ohio Constitution states that “No religious or other sect shall ever have any exclusive right to or control of, any part of the school funds of this state.” The Ohio Constitution also states that Ohio must find a “common,” single system of public schools throughout the state. The current case is alleging that these clauses are being violated by the EdChoice voucher program, where the costs are exploding and most of the money is being funneled into religious schools. There are no federal Constitutional clauses (including the Establishment Clause) that bear on these state claims, or this unique Ohio Constitutional language, approved by Ohio voters.

Bottom line: Husted here is spewing legal misinformation that a first year law student would not sign off on.

HUSTED:

“Prior to the US Supreme Court’s ruling, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in 1999 that the voucher program did not violate state constitutional provisions around school funding found in Oh. Const. Art. VI, § 2, the Uniformity Clause of Oh. Const. Art. II, § 26, or the State or Federal Constitutional Establishment Clause. Simmons-Harris v. Goff, 86 Ohio St. 3d 1, 4 (1999) (reversed on other grounds). Simmons-Harris is good law on these points.

In an effort to convince you to appropriate funding for this lawsuit, advocates will explain to you that they are challenging the program on different grounds. This of course is nonsense, as the Supreme Court of Ohio has already established the fact that the program is constitutional, and furthermore, it is well established that the Ohio constitution delegates appropriation authority to the General Assembly subject to the approval or disapproval of the Governor.”

FACT CHECK:

The 1999 case he’s referring to is essentially from the Stone Age era of the long history of Ohio’s voucher program. It involved a narrow, tailored program serving lower-income public students in Cleveland.

The program now being challenged is the far broader universal private voucher program (no income limits, no geographic limits) known as EdChoice, expanded again last year (with the income cap lifted entirely), which is already running through $1 billion in just its first year. It’s an entirely different set of facts, as all the recent newspaper exposes have unveiled.

That is the reason that a common pleas judge allowed discovery to move forward in the first place, and the trial to proceed later this year. In fact, the Attorney General and out-of-state anti-public school organizations advanced the same arguments Husted is making to try to have the case dismissed. But the judge ruled that all five counts had sufficient merit to go to discovery and a trial.

If Husted were right about his assertion above, the case would already be over.

Apparently, in addition to taking over the state school board, Husted also now wants to supplant the decision already made by a duly elected and independent judge to allow the case to move forward.

HUSTED

“There are approximately 130,000 students across the state of Ohio who are enrolled in schools through the EdChoice Scholarship. Most of these are lower-income families and do not have the means other than through the EdChoice Scholarship to send their child to a school that serves them best. I have met many of these children and their families who are thriving in their new educational environment.”

FACT CHECK:

This is perhaps the second most egregious lie of this letter.

For months now, investigations and analyses have made it clear that what Husted has written here is NOT the case. To the contrary, 83% of Vouchers this year have gone to families that earn up to 450% ABOVE the poverty level, $150,000.00 a year. The top 10 communities utilizing vouchers include some of the wealthiest communities of Ohio.

Only 17% of Vouchers are serving lower income families with the new, expanded Ed Choice Voucher program.

Just a few more datapoints on this, from Steve Dyer:

• “[M]ore new [] voucher (high school) recipients come from families making more than $150,000 a year than families making less than $120,000 a year;”

• “There are more new vouchers flowing to subsidize private high school students whose families make as much as $250,000 a year (or MORE!) than there are flowing to subsidize private high school students whose families make less than 1/2 that much”

• “An astounding $1.3 million of your tax dollars went to subsidize the private school tuitions of families who make more than $250,000 a year!”

HUSTED

“Furthermore, your actions also serve as an attempt to deny 348 Upper Arlington families and students currently using a state voucher as their choice of education for their children, many of which are attending other schools because of autism or other special needs.”

FACT CHECK:

And this, my friends, is the most egregious lie of this letter. Pants on Fire. Offensive.

The lawsuit challenges only the universal voucher program known as EdChoice.

Families using a separate voucher program that provides vouchers for children with autism are not affected by the case, no matter how it turns out. This separate program is called the Jon Peterson scholarship fund, supporting students who have Autism, Dyslexia and other disabilites. Again, this program is NOT part of the lawsuit being considered.

In fact, the lawsuit is focused on only 1 of the 5 state Voucher programs—the Ed Choice Universal Voucher program that has generated all the negative attention.

How dare Husted use these families as pawns in his disinformation to the Upper Arlington board and community. As low as it gets!

HUSTED

“If after reading this email, you choose to fund this lawsuit, you will knowingly be wasting thousands of dollars on attorney fees for a lawsuit that has no chance of succeeding in an attempt to thwart the will of students and families who pay the property taxes that fund Upper Arlington schools.

This lawsuit would cost the taxpayers of Upper Arlington twice – once when the school board sues, and the second when defending the lawsuit.”

FACT CHECK:

The real taxpayer funds at play here are the more than $1 billion in public funds flooding out of the Ohio budget, which could be going to public school systems like Upper Arlington’s. Instead, these funds are supporting the private school tuition of families who were already sending their kids to those private schools. Again, newspapers have documented this trend again and again.

And in communities like Upper Arlington, the amount the state is paying per private voucher (ie. private school student) is multiple times as high as the amount that the state is sending to each public school student in the same district! (In UA, it’s $850 per public student versus $8500 per private student).

The Upper Arlington community and school system should be appalled by such lopsided treatment by the state.

And that’s the reason that hundreds of other school boards have supported the case—they are standing up for taxpayers, homeowners, students, educators and parents in their communities who know this out-of-control EdChoice voucher program is siphoning away hundreds of millions of dollars to private schools with zero accountability and zero oversight. And often paying far more for the private school students than the public school students in the same community. (And of course, most communities in Ohio don’t have a private school to begin with, so it’s a pure loss).

HUSTED

“Additionally, I’d like to point out that the state, through the current operating budget, has made a historic investment into K-12 public schools: $9.6 billion in FY 2024 and $9.9 billion for FY 2025. This amount does not include the hundreds of millions of dollars schools get in state funding for literacy programs, technology, broadband, healthcare, and other specific programs. Upper Arlington was also awarded Career Technical Education Equipment Grant funding - $496,154 for IT & Advanced Manufacturing.”

FACT CHECK:

The EdChoice voucher program is uncapped, and draws money out of the same line item as public school funding. This means that the higher the private voucher side of the ledger explodes, the less funds there will be to support public education in schools like Upper Arlington—and districts across the state (again, most of which do not have private schools to begin with). It is simply a net loss for those schools and communities.

One group (private vouchers) has an unlimited checkbook. The other group (public schools) pay when that unlimited checkbook runs over budget.

HUSTED

“I share this in the hope that you will choose not to join this lawsuit which would be a waste of tax dollars and serve to further divide the community.”

FACT CHECK:

Jon, you wrote a letter full of legal fallacies and outright lies. You exploited and mischaracterized difficult situations to try to divide the community.

This has only shown how weak your actual case is. The fact that you wrote it (with those lies) shows how desperate you and supporters of this reckless private voucher explosion are to keep communities across this state from standing up and speaking out.

Which tells the rest of us…KEEP SPEAKING OUT!

They know the facts are damning, and want the criticism silenced.

So whatever you do, don’t be silent.

Stand up to bullies like Jon Husted.

Please share this widely, and get it to the Upper Arlington school board members (who meet tonight!), or others, so they see what lies they are being sent by their own sitting Lieutenant Governor.

It’s yet another example of a long career spent going to bat for private interests who want public school dollars for their own benefit.