Oklahoma taxpayers were sold a load of bull about parental choice tax credits
There's a terrible stench that smells a lot like bull excrement emanating from the halls of our state Capitol right now, and Republicans are hoping that Oklahomans plug their nose and pretend their highly touted voucher-like program doesn't stink to high heaven.
Many are also likely hoping that their constituents will suffer from a convenient bout of amnesia when it comes to recalling the promises made — and not kept — in 2023 about their Parental Choice Tax Credit Act.
As it turns out, Oklahomans were sold a sham when legislators sought to convince us why our hard-earned tax dollars should be used to pay for children's private school educations even while their local public schools continue to struggle financially and academically.
Lawmakers swore until they were blue in the face that the program, which allows the Oklahoma Tax Commission to issue individuals checks ranging from $5,000 to $7,500, would expand school choice for low-income children who were trapped in failing schools.
To add guardrails to prohibit all 33,000 private school students from claiming the credit and busting our budget, lawmakers prudently capped expenditure at $150 million in 2024, $200 million in 2025 and $250 million in all subsequent years.
But I think we all probably knew in our gut exactly where this program was headed when lawmakers refused to implement income limits on who could qualify.
Yep, to probably nobody's great surprise, it turns out our legislators capitulated to their wealthy overlords and created a program that heavily benefits those who absolutely do not need government handouts.
Over 45% of the 'tax credits' awarded in the spring 2025 semester went to recipients in households that earned more than $150,000 a year, according to an analysis quietly published by the Oklahoma Tax Commission last month.
That same analysis revealed that we forked out $19.3 million to cover the spring private school costs for over 7,700 recipients whose households made over $250,000 a year.
In comparison, slightly more than 8,100 households whose parents made $75,000 or less received the tax credit, according to the records.
Just a little more than a quarter of the roughly 30,000 recipients came from that income bracket, despite half the workers in our state making less than $57,000 a year.
Meanwhile, at least one GOP legislator and Gov. Kevin Stitt, a millionaire whose own children attend private school, are pressuring lawmakers to expand access to the rich by removing the program's spending cap. (Lest you forget, Stitt made headlines in 2023 by announcing his family planned to apply for the government handout before backtracking amid public ridicule and questions about the ethics of creating a law that would grow his own checking account.)
But if that wasn't enough, earlier this month, The Tulsa World reported that the Oklahoma Tax Commission is trying to claw back $5 million in funding for 1,855 taxpayers whose children did not attend private schools for the entire year. It's not clear which income bracket those students fell into. The publication also reported that the Tax Commission says how much public funding is going to each school is a deep dark 'secret' because checks were made out to individual taxpayers.
It's absolutely unacceptable that lawmakers are not willing to be transparent about how our tax dollars are being spent and if we're getting a good return on our investment. At the very least we should all be allowed to see what entities we're subsidizing, though I'd also argue we deserve to know who exactly we're subsidizing. If a family receives this funding, there should be no expectation of privacy. After all, if businesses accept subsidies we all know how much they're receiving.
Why should this program be any different? I sure as heck want to know if my governor, legislators or influential donors – Republican or Democrat – are taking charity from the government.
Legislators would have you forget that they want to use public money to continue to subsidize the costs of a small subset of rich children whose parents have fled the public school system that 700,000 children rely on. The exodus further exacerbates the gap between the haves and have nots.
To further rub salt in the wound, many private schools used the new 'tax credit' to raise tuition. An Oklahoma Watch analysis found that about 12% of 171 participating private schools capped tuition rates near $7,500, the max a family can receive. Some schools raised tuition rates 100%.
Apparently our lawmakers are so humiliated by the failure of this program that they're hoping nobody will notice it because over the past month, I haven't seen a single legislator tout how great these outcomes are.
It was actually an Oklahoma Voice reader who brought the Tax Commission report to my attention.
Since our lawmakers are on a quest to cut wasteful spending, maybe this program is a place they could start.
After all, I'd rather use these funds to bolster the salaries of public school employees, increase the pay foster parents receive, fix our roads, or even give us all some temporary tax relief.
Instead we've chosen to invest in this exclusionary and secret program that has little accountability.
I guess it's yet another disappointing outcome in a state that always seems to manage to invest in the wrong thing.
Janelle Stecklein is editor of Oklahoma Voice. An award-winning journalist, Stecklein has been covering Oklahoma government and politics since moving to the state in 2014.
This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: Lawmakers sold us a sham on parental choice tax credits |Opinion
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Politico
29 minutes ago
- Politico
Pritzker to run for a 3rd term
Happy Wednesday, Illinois. New York's ranked choice voting has us interested. TOP TALKER HE's DOING IT: Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker is set to announce on Thursday that he'll seek a third term in 2026, leaving open the possibility that he could also run for president in 2028. The Democratic governor, who's been on a media blitz criticizing President Donald Trump's administration, will make the announcement at events starting Thursday in Chicago before traveling to Springfield and across the state in the coming days, according to two people in the campaign. Pritzker is seen as a shoo-in to win the Democratic primary in March. Republicans have yet to step up with a challenger. Illinois does not have term limits for its statewide offices, though there hasn't been a three-term governor since Republican Gov. Jim Thompson, who won four times and held office from 1977 to 1991. Pritzker's campaign kick-off comes after months of speculation about whether the state's top Democrat would run for re-election at a time of budget uncertainty — and then run for president in 2028, too. Watch for that to be a Republican talking point. Pritzker has headlined numerous national speaking engagements in recent months, fueling the buzz about a presidential run. In an interview with POLITICO, Pritzker insisted he's just trying to bring attention to Illinois and highlight the Trump administration's tariffs and cuts to his constituents. The big question for Thursday's announcement is whether he will also bring out a running mate. We hear that's not likely. Watch him announce his No. 2 down the road, allowing for another media bump. Current Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton, who has served with him both terms, is now running for the U.S. Senate seat held by the retiring Sen. Dick Durbin. Pritzker self-funded his past two campaigns — spending a combined $350 million to do so — and will do the same this time around. THE BUZZ GETTING INTERESTING: State Rep. Kam Buckner, former County Commissioner Richard Boykin and SEIU's Anthony Driver Jr. are considering running for Congress in the IL-07 District now represented by Rep. Danny Davis. They join a growing list of potential and declared candidates who are tip-toeing around Davis as he has yet to reveal his future political plans. We hear he'll announce in early July. It's starting to irk some folks who wonder if Davis is just holding out to make it hard for candidates to start a campaign, allowing him to open a lane for an anointed candidate. Davis' chief of staff insists the congressman is just 'assessing' his next move. 'More people are telling him to run than telling him not to run,' said Tumia Romero. Our assessment: Davis is 83. His back hurts. And he's facing a political moment of increased scrutiny on age. Meanwhile, potential candidates are waiting in the wings. Buckner is the Illinois speaker pro tempore and co-leader of House budget negotiations and an education and transit modernization advocate. Boykin is a former Cook County commissioner who previously worked as Davis' chief of staff for nearly 10 years. He's an attorney and president of Bridge Builders Consulting and Legal Services. Driver is executive director of the SEIU Illinois State Council and president of the Community Commission for Public Safety and Accountability, which works to improve police oversight and public safety. Driver, Boykin and Buckner are still just 'considering' a run and won't jump in until Davis makes an announcement. Announcing Thursday: Marine Corps veteran and Chicago comedian John McCombs, who served as a public affairs officer at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina and currently works at the Naval Station Great Lakes training new sailors. He's also traveled the world doing stand-up comedy, something he started while in college. Politics is part of his show, says the 34-year-old McCombs, who describes himself as progressive. 'My experience as a Marine was to fight and win battles, and as a standup comedian it's to communicate in any room.' He joins state Rep. La Shawn Ford and businessman Jason Friedman, who also have filed to run along with fellow Democrats Kamaria Kali and Jerico Brown. Others still considering: Chicago Ald. Walter Burnett Jr., who serves as vice mayor and is the longest-serving West Side elected official next to Davis; Chicago City Treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin, who ran for the seat in 2024; Forest Park Mayor Rory Hoskins; and Metropolitan Water Reclamation District President Kari Steele. You counted right: That's 12 candidates. If you are Danny Davis, Playbook would like to hear from you! Email: skapos@ WHERE'S JB No official public events WHERE's BRANDON At Arie Crown Theater at 9 a.m. for the Chicago Fire Department firefighter and EMT graduation Where's Toni At the Cook County building at 10 a.m. to launch the next phase of the Cook County Down Payment Assistance Program Have a tip, suggestion, birthday, new job or a (gasp!) complaint? Email skapos@ BUSINESS OF POLITICS — IL-09: The progressive 314 Action Fund is endorsing Evanston Mayor Daniel Biss for Illinois' 9th Congressional District. 'He's a proven leader, delivering results rooted in facts and data. As Trump and Republicans try to strip millions of their health care to give tax breaks to billionaires, Daniel will work tirelessly to protect the district,' said Shaughnessy Naughton, the group's president, noting Biss' experience as mayor, state legislator and local activist. 314 Action is a national nonprofit that recruits, trains and helps elect STEM candidates up and down the ballot. — Speaking of IL-09: State Sen. Mike Simmons is considering a run for the congressional seat now held by Rep. Jan Schakowsky. Simmons is taking part in a candidate forum Sunday with other announced candidates. Details here — IL-06 REMATCH: Republican Niki Conforti is running for the seat held by Democratic Congressman Sean Casten. The two faced each other in 2024, too. 'With our strong foundation from the 2024 election and my background in business and policy, I am confident we can flip this seat in 2026,' Conforti said in announcing her campaign. 'People feel disenfranchised. Something needs to give, and I am the change agent.' — Nick Uniejewski has been endorsed by Dick Simpson, the former Chicago alderman and political consultant, in his bid for the 6th District state Senate seat. Uniejewski is a Democrat primarying state Sen. Sara Feigenholtz. THE STATEWIDES — New Illinois laws: Gas tax, hotel offerings set for changes on July 1, via NBC 5 — CDC confirms Illinois' first human case of West Nile virus this year, by USA Today's Hannah Hudnall — Challenges persist for women, minorities breaking into Illinois' skilled trades, by Capitol News' Maggie Dougherty TAKING NAMES — Janice Jackson is stepping down as founding CEO of Hope Chicago, a nonprofit that offers debt-free college scholarships and wrap-around services to students and their parents. She's exiting 'to pursue other career opportunities, effective Aug. 1,' according to a statement. Jackson, the former head of Chicago Public Schools, has been mentioned as a potential 2027 mayoral candidate. — Michael O'Grady has been named chair of the Civic Committee. In his day job, O'Grady is CEO of Northern Trust. He succeeds Jennifer Scanlon, president and CEO of UL Solutions, by Crain's Brandon Dupré. CHICAGO — City mum on what documents it provided ICE in Streets and Sanitation subpoena, by the Tribune's Alice Yin — Bucking policy trend, public access to video of CPD Officer Krystal Rivera's fatal shooting is delayed, by the Tribune's Madeline Buckley and Sam Charles — After objections, Chicago Police agree officers won't search vehicles based on smell of raw cannabis, advocates tell judge, by WTTW's Heather Cherone — New Jersey solar company Nautilus relocates headquarters to Chicago, by the Sun-Times' Abby Miller — Woman charged with driving car through downtown anti-ICE protest, by the Sun-Times' Cindy Hernandez — 'Danke Schoen": Ferris Bueller vest sells for $279,400 at auction, by the Block Club's Gwen Ihnat COOK COUNTY AND COLLARS — Suburban lawmakers, Democratic and Republican, address concerns about political violence: 'It's unfortunately a real consideration that any time I am going to have a public event I have to think about what the security situation is,' said Democratic state Rep. Bob Morgan. 'The temper and tone of political rhetoric has been out of control for quite some time,' added Republican state Rep. Marty McLaughlin, by the Pioneer Press' Daniel I. Dorfman. — DuPage to establish community land bank, trust to incentivize more affordable housing, by the Tribune's Tess Kenny — OPINION: Cook County stands with public servants as feds purge workers, Toni Preckwinkle writes in the Sun-Times Reader Digest We asked who you're hoping the Bulls get in the draft. Brian Caminer: 'Derrick Queen of Maryland.' Rev. Tyrone McGowan: 'Anyone other than another guard.' Ron Michelotti: 'Rasheer Fleming of St. Joseph's College. He's 6-8 and can shoot threes.' Omari Prince: 'Ace Bailey is definitely out of the picture, but I hope the Bulls land Will Riley or Danny Wolf.' Timothy Thomas: 'Another University of Illinois veteran to join Ayo Dusomo, specifically either Kasparas Jakučionis or Will Riley.' Noah Walch: 'Derik Queen seems like the consensus answer and would be fine with me, but something about the height and rawness of Yang Hansen appeals to me. Otherwise, cross your fingers Khaman Maluach falls to 12.' NEXT QUESTION: What do you like or not about ranked-choice voting? THE NATIONAL TAKE — Mamdani topples Cuomo in NYC mayoral primary: It was a race about affordability v. fear and affordability won, by POLITICO's Jeff Coltin and Joe Anuta — Dems struggle to respond as Trump's Iran strikes sow chaos, by POLITICO's Elena Schneider and Nicholas Wu — Rubio credits president for pushing NATO allies to increase spending, by POLITICO's Felicia Schwartz — White House sends Dr. Oz to calm Senate nerves, by POLITICO's Adam Cancryn TRANSITIONS — Paula R. Worthington has been named senior policy adviser at the Civic Federation. She's a long-time senior lecturer at the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago. EVENTS — July 1: Screening of 'Drop Dead City,' a documentary about New York City's financial crisis in the 1970s. It's presented by the Chicago Policy Center, Civic Federation and Better Government Association. Their pitch: 'What New York fixed with courage and oversight, Chicago can fix too, if we learn from history.' Details here TRIVIA TUESDAY's ANSWER: Congrats to Barbara Flynn Currie for correctly answering that Jeanne Hurley and Paul Simon were Illinois House members (not Senate) who married each other. TODAY's QUESTION: What year did Mayor Richard M. Daley first suggest closing Meigs Field? Email skapos@ HAPPY BIRTHDAY Former state Sen. Mike Jacobs, The Strategy Group partner Aviva Bowen, Globetrotters Engineering CEO Ajay Shah, philanthropy pro Francee Harrington, Fisher Broyle Deputy General Counsel Jayne Reardon, blogger John Kass and Tribune political reporter and POLITICO alum Olivia Olander -30-


Forbes
34 minutes ago
- Forbes
3.8 Million Student Loan Borrowers Will Lose Access To Lower Payments By July If GOP Bill Passes
WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 22: U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) speaks to the media after the ... More House narrowly passed a bill forwarding President Donald Trump's agenda at the U.S. Capitol on May 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. The tax and spending legislation, in what has been called the "big beautiful bill", redirects money to the military and border security and includes cuts to Medicaid, student loan forgiveness and repayment, and other domestic programs. (Photo by) Nearly four million student loan borrowers are at risk of losing access to affordable payments, as Republican lawmakers move forward to enact sweeping changes to repayment plans and student loan forgiveness programs. One of the major targets of the proposed legislation is Parent PLUS borrowers. Parent PLUS loans are a type of federal student loan issued to the parent of an undergraduate student. While the student is the one who benefits from the loan, their parent is the legal borrower, and the parent is the one responsible for the loan's repayment. Historically, Parent PLUS loans have had fewer affordable repayment plan options compared to traditional federal student loans. But proposed legislative reforms would place even more severe limits on these loans, and would effectively cut off access to affordable repayment options for most of the 3.8 million borrowers who have Parent PLUS loans. The reforms are part of a broader effort by congressional Republicans to use the budget reconciliation process to enact President Donald Trump's legislative agenda through narrow party-line votes, including extending major tax cuts and slashing government spending. The House already passed its version of the reconciliation bill last month, and GOP Senate leaders may bring their bill to a vote as soon as this weekend. While full passage of the legislation by Congress isn't a foregone conclusion, party leaders hope to have the bill on President Trump's desk sometime in July. Parent PLUS Loans Have Had Limited Access To Student Loan Repayment Plans Tied To Income Parent PLUS loans have always had more limited repayment options compared to most other types of federal student loans. As a rule, Parent PLUS loans are ineligible for income-driven repayment plans. IDR plans allow borrowers to have a monthly payment tied to their income and family size, with the possibility of student loan forgiveness after 20 or 25 years in repayment. However, since 2006 there has been an important exception. Borrowers who consolidate their Parent PLUS loans into a federal Direct consolidation loan have been able to access the Income-Contingent Repayment plan, or ICR. ICR is the oldest and most expensive IDR plan, and may not make sense for higher-income earners. For example, a Parent PLUS borrower with an Adjusted Gross Income of $150,000 and a family size of 2 would pay around $2,150 per month under ICR – hardly an affordable payment, and likely more costly in this example than what the borrower would pay under a traditional Standard repayment plan. But for Parent PLUS borrowers who have experienced a reduction in their income, Direct loan consolidation and ICR can be a lifesaver. A borrower with $150,000 of Parent PLUS loan debt on a fixed income of $40,000 annually would not be able to afford Standard plan payments, which could be more than $1,700 per month. But if the borrower consolidated their loans and enrolled in ICR, their monthly payment would be only $405 per month. GOP Bill Would Cut Off Most Parent PLUS Borrowers From Affordable Payments And Student Loan Forgiveness Legislation that Republican lawmakers in Congress are on the cusp of passing would make student loan repayment much harder for Parent PLUS borrowers, and the impacts could be profound. Both the House and Senate versions of the budget reconciliation bill would repeal the ICR plan (as well as PAYE and SAVE), including for current borrowers. The bill would create a new repayment option based on income called the Repayment Assistance Plan, or RAP. But Parent PLUS loans would be ineligible for RAP, even if they consolidate their loans. The result is that most of the 3.8 million Parent PLUS borrowers would have no option to base their student loan payments on their income. In addition, these borrowers would effectively be cut off from student loan forgiveness, both under IDR plans as well as via the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. PSLF requires that payments be made under qualifying repayment plans, which for the most part are IDR plans. Without being able to access IDR, Parent PLUS borrowers would also not be able to access PSLF. The GOP-sponsored bills do provide one important exception to the sweeping changes. Parent PLUS borrowers who have already consolidated their loans via the Direct consolidation program and are already enrolled in the ICR plan at the time that the bill is enacted would effectively be grandfathered in. While ICR would still be repealed, these borrowers would be moved to a modified version of the Income-Based Repayment plan, or IBR – a plan that historically has been unavailable for Parent PLUS borrowers. In many cases, IBR is a more affordable repayment option than ICR, which could result in lower monthly payments. But all other Parent PLUS borrowers would be cut off from student loan forgiveness and income-driven repayment. This may also include borrowers who pursued so-called 'double consolidation' to enroll in other IDR plans like the SAVE plan or PAYE. As written, the legislation appears to only grandfather in consolidated Parent PLUS loans that are specifically enrolled in the ICR plan. Can Parent PLUS Borrowers Act Now To Lock In Lower Student Loan Payments? So can Parent PLUS borrowers who are not already enrolled in the ICR plan do anything now to preserve their access to income-driven repayment and student loan forgiveness? The answer is complicated, and may depend largely on a borrower's specific circumstances: Ultimately, Parent PLUS borrowers are in a tough spot. There is a very real possibility that they could be cut off from affordable repayment plans and student loan forgiveness, quite soon. And they aren't the only borrowers who could face higher payments if the reconciliation legislation ultimately passes. Some student loan borrower advocacy organizations are urging borrowers to contact their congressperson and senators, as there is still time to make changes to the bills.

Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Editorial: Trump's entry into Iran war left Congress MIA
Americans can be forgiven for feeling a bit exhausted by the head-spinning pace of events in the Middle East. From calls for negotiation to sudden bombings and missile strikes, to a failed attack on a U.S. military base in Qatar then a promise of a ceasefire quickly followed by a claim that both Israel and Iran violated that ceasefire, the last few action-packed days have felt more like months. But as questions continue to be asked about what just transpired — and, most importantly, about the prospects of Iran developing a nuclear weapon — there's also a more basic inquiry facing the United States: Did President Donald Trump violate the constitutional authority of Congress to declare war? The founders were famously leery of U.S. involvement in foreign wars and that's why Congress, and not the president, is solely vested with that power. And while one can certainly recognize that the nature of warfare has changed over the last 237 years, Trump's decision to launch an offensive war on Iran was not sudden. There was an undeniable opportunity for consultation and to invoke the War Powers Resolution, the 1973 law that requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of military action. But is that obligation met simply by calling up a handful of Republican leaders after the fact? The point is to seek congressional approval, not to merely have them on speed dial. Much of the build-up to U.S. direct involvement focused on Trump's efforts to mediate a more peaceful resolution but it was also clear that the conflict generated much division within Republican Party ranks and particularly in the MAGA wing. A promise not to duplicate the 'forever wars' launched by Trump's White House predecessors has been one of the more unifying characteristics of his base — until, of course, it wasn't. Yet how easy it is to judge the U.S. invasion of Iraq two decades ago, for example, with the benefit of hindsight and unhappy experience. Did Trump just meet the moment? Perhaps. But even if he did, do we want future presidents to launch unconstitutional wars at the mere drop of a hat or push of a button? You can bet Democrats will raise this issue. Indeed, they already have. But when it comes from high-profile Trump critics like U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia or U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, it sounds like the usual partisan politics. Just as telling is what happened when some back-bench Republicans raised some concerns as well. After U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie, a libertarian-leaning GOP member from Kentucky and frequent Trump critic, introduced a bipartisan resolution last week calling for an explicit declaration of war, Trump labeled him a 'lazy, grandstanding, nonproductive' politician on his social media account and called for him to be defeated in the 2026 Republican primary. That's why it's now up to GOP leaders to stand up and be counted. Admittedly, that's a challenge politically, particularly if the bombing of Iran appears to have proven effective. One can assume Trump will react badly to any dissent including a suggestion that he seek legislative approval for just about anything. Yet the War Powers Resolution also limits how long the military can be deployed — specifically to 60 days unless Congress authorizes war or extends the length for military intervention. Will the Israel-Iran war be resolved in two months? If there's no further need for U.S. military involvement, the president will have sidestepped the constitutional question. And while it's impossible to know for sure how talks will proceed (or even whether ceasefires will be respected), history strongly suggests further U.S. military involvement. Once again, it's in the interests of all to address the matter, for Congress to speak up and perhaps even engage in floor debates about the wisdom of direct military intervention. There are moments when presidents don't have the luxury to seek congressional approval — when there's an ICBM hurtling toward a U.S. population center, for example — but this isn't one of those occasions. And just because presidents from both parties have failed to meet this obligation doesn't make it right. It only makes it all the more urgent for constitutional authority to be respected and for Congress to claim its rightful role. _____