With reduced scholarship for homeschool students, Utah Fits All update poised to become law
With about 80% of school choice voucher recipients being homeschooled in the Utah Fits All program's first year, the Utah Legislature has passed a bill restricting funding for extracurriculars and decreasing awards for students learning at home.
HB455, sponsored by Rep. Candice Pierucci, R-Herriman, was updated in the Senate Education Committee last week to reduce the amount that homeschool students can receive, bringing down the $8,000 annual scholarship.
Now, homeschooled Utah Fits All students 5 to 11 years old would have access to $4,000 a year, while those 12 to 18 years old could get $6,000. Private school students are still eligible for $8,000 a year to help cover their tuition or other expenses.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
'We made that change,' Pierucci said on the House floor on Monday. 'It will open up a minimum $16 million in the current existing appropriation, so that that money can be reallocated to more students.'
The bill passed both the House and the Senate and now only awaits the governor's signature.
In a public hearing, many spoke against the change in scholarship amounts. Madeline Ogborn, who has two children in the program, said it would be devastating to lose 50% of her budget to educate them.
'We're, I guess, confused, disappointed, worried about being treated equally,' she said, adding that she has tried to be thoughtful about her expenses, but still, one of her students is already over that $4,000 limit for this school year, she said.
However, Pierucci defended the scholarship amount cut, arguing that while she acknowledges that homeschool learning can work in many ways, with different expenses, she heard concerns about the program encouraging 'frivolous spending' with the $8,000 amount.
She struggled with the cut, she said, because it could send a message that homeschooling is 'less than.' But, the change is to allow more students into the program.
The school choice scholarship, which detractors call 'school vouchers,' has been controversial and even faces a challenge in court with a lawsuit questioning its constitutionality. But, it has also been highly sought after in the state, with a lengthy waitlist of those vying to get state dollars for education expenses including private school tuition and fees, homeschooling, tutoring services, testing fees, materials and other expenses.
Pierucci said lowering the scholarship amount could potentially allow some of the more than 17,000 students on the waitlist to get into the program. And, more Utah students may also have access to the money in the coming year, as a new request for appropriations was included in the state's budget recommendation for the 2025 fiscal year, leaving some Democratic lawmakers frustrated.
Currently the Utah Fits All is allocated $82.5 million in taxpayer funding a year, used to serve about 10,000 students. A request to almost double that amount was met halfway in the budget, which adds $40 million more in ongoing money for the program.
The legislation also establishes more guardrails and clear guidelines for the program manager, strengthening residence requirements and adjusting the priority for families with an income from 200% of the federal poverty level to 300%, 'to make sure we're truly capturing low income and middle class families before it is available to all families in Utah,' Pierucci said.
It also includes a provision that has been very unpopular among recipients — a 20% cap for extracurriculars and physical education, and the clear exclusion of ski passes, furniture, musical instruments, apparel and others from the allowable expenses.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags

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


Newsweek
34 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Greg Abbott Threatens to 'Eliminate' Almost Every Texas Democratic Seat
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Texas Republican Governor Gregg Abbott has warned Democrats that he could "eliminate" 10 of his state's 12 Democratic-held seats if the two parties were to launch a nationwide battle to redraw congressional maps. Why It Matters Democrats and Republicans in the Lone Star State are embroiled in an escalating showdown over the GOP's efforts to redraw the congressional map to gain five seats in the U.S. House of Representatives as the 2026 midterms loom. President Donald Trump has thrown his support behind Texas Republicans' redistricting efforts. His Republicans face vulnerabilities ahead of next year's elections and a new poll showing the president's approval rating suddenly dropping among conservatives will increase Republican worries about the midterms, and raise the stakes for both parties as they wrangle over congressional maps. President Donald Trump, left, and Texas Governor Greg Abbott field questions on July 11 in the wake of the catastrophic flooding in Kerrville, Texas. President Donald Trump, left, and Texas Governor Greg Abbott field questions on July 11 in the wake of the catastrophic flooding in Kerrville, To Know Abbott, in comments aired by KWTX News 10, said Democrats would lose any nationwide battle over redrawing congressional maps because blue states have fewer Republican districts to play with. "All those big, blue states, they've already gerrymandered. Look at the map of Illinois, look at the map of California, New York and Massachusetts and so many other blue states, they gerrymandered a long time ago, they've got nothing left with regard to what they can do," Abbott said. "And know this, if California tries to gerrymander five more districts, listen, Texas has the ability to eliminate 10 Democrats in our state. We can play that game more than they can because they have fewer Republican districts in their states," Abbott said. Texas has 38 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. The GOP holds 25 and the Democrats have 12, with one vacancy. Nationally, Republicans hold 219 House seats while Democrats have 212, with four vacancies. Two seats left vacant after the deaths of two Democrats—in Arizona and Texas—will be decided in special elections in the fall. If the GOP loses both in the heavily blue districts, Democrats will inch to within three seats of a House majority, and there are several dozen competitive districts out of 435. The two parties have long traded accusations of gerrymandering, or amending maps in the interests of one side over another to create "safe" electoral seats, in various states around the country. Texas' plan to redistrict, or redraw legislative district boundaries, has in turn kicked off a broader fight between blue and red states, with at least nine, including Texas, New York and California, saying they are considering redrawing their maps, according to officials and media reports. California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom has warned that if Texas Republicans follow through with their push to redistrict their state, he will retaliate by doing the same in California, which is already heavily blue. In a letter to Trump on Monday, Newsom urged the president to abandon his push, telling him he is "playing with fire" and "risking the destabilization of our democracy." What People Are Saying Trump, referring to the 2024 presidential election, told CNBC on August 5: "I won Texas. I got the highest vote in the history of Texas, as you probably know, and we are entitled to five more seats." Newsom, in his letter to Trump on Monday, said: "If you will not stand down, I will be forced to lead an effort to redraw the maps in California to offset the rigging of maps in red states." What Happens Next Legal experts anticipate that any aggressive redistricting moves could prompt court challenges. Historically, lawsuits have delayed or overturned redistricting plans when courts deemed them unconstitutional or in violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.


Indianapolis Star
2 hours ago
- Indianapolis Star
Why 17-year-olds are exempt from new Indy youth curfew passed after mass shooting
Indianapolis officials have made the youth curfew two hours earlier for all children younger than 17 for at least the rest of this year. About a month after a July 5 mass shooting left two teenagers dead, the Indianapolis City-County Council voted Aug. 11 to make the youth curfew stricter effective immediately. An initial proposal that included 17-year-olds was amended at the last minute by Democratic councilors who felt that older teens should be granted more independence. The new rules mean that children ages 15 and 16 won't be allowed in public unsupervised past 11 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays and past 9 p.m. Sundays through Thursdays. Children under 15 will face a 9 p.m. curfew every day. The city's emergency curfew will remain in place for 120 days, which means the council must decide in early December whether to extend or relax the policy. Teens who are 17 will still be subject to the state curfew of 1 a.m. on Fridays and Saturdays and 11 p.m. on Sundays through Thursdays. The 25-person council's Democratic majority passed the amendment that excluded 17-year-olds from the new curfew despite the opposition of all six Republican councilors. "The sun doesn't even go down in the summer until near 10 p.m., and I don't think we're putting ourselves in a good position pushing 17-year-olds to break curfew at 10-10:30 p.m.," said Councilor Jared Evans, who introduced the amendment at Monday's council meeting. Republicans like Councilor Joshua Bain said that excluding 17-year-olds from the new policy weakens the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department's efforts to keep people safe. "It is not the goal of IMPD to go around arresting every 17-year-old that's out at night," Bain said. "This is a targeted way for them to get in between a 17-year-old that's about to make a really bad decision and possibly ruin the rest of their life." The ordinance doesn't create a criminal offense for children who break curfew, but it does grant police the authority to detain them. The policy carves out several exceptions for kids who are returning home from work, a school activity, a religious event or activities protected by the First Amendment such as political protests, among others. IMPD Chief Christopher Bailey said he was unbothered by the change exempting 17-year-olds from a stricter curfew. (He mentioned in jest that his daughter, who is nearly 17 and has been criticizing her father at home over the new curfew, would be "very pleased.") "My direction to the officers is not some sweep of everyone that's out," Bailey said. "It's really behavioral-based." Democratic Councilor Dan Boots spoke bluntly in support of more leniency for 17-year-olds. "Seventeen-year-olds are rising seniors in high school, a step away from being able to vote and be drafted and killed for our country," Boots said. "I think they have a right to stay out past 9 to go to a movie and come back." Republican Councilor Michael-Paul Hart, who also voted against the last-minute change, introduced a new proposal Monday night that would fine parents whose children violate curfew. State law allows the city to impose thousands of dollars in fines, according to city attorney Brandon Beeler, but it's unclear how harshly violators would be prosecuted. Hart's proposal would give parents one written warning for a first violation, followed by a $500 fine for a second time and a $1,500 fine for each subsequent occurrence. Councilors will consider the proposal in committee later this month before a likely vote in September. The harsher curfew change comes after hundreds of unsupervised teens lingered downtown in the hours following the Fourth of July fireworks show, culminating in a mass shooting after midnight that killed Xavion Jackson, 16, and Azareaon S. Cole, 15. Two other teens and three adults were also injured. Four teenagers ranging from 13 to 17 years old have been charged in connection with the shooting for illegally carrying guns.

Politico
2 hours ago
- Politico
Likely Pennsylvania gov candidate slams Shapiro over rumored presidential ambitions
Shapiro is considered a top potential presidential candidate in 2028, but has not said whether he will run for the White House. The video seemed intended to signal that Garrity would mount a more aggressive campaign against Shapiro than his past rivals. Far-right state Sen. Doug Mastriano lost to Shapiro by 15 points in 2022, after raising little money and airing few TV ads. Mastriano is considering another gubernatorial bid and remains popular with the MAGA base. 'I can tell you on the record that this may be both the first ad of 2026 and 2028,' Garrity adviser John Brabender told POLITICO. 'And that it's just a start.' The battleground state of Pennsylvania will host a gubernatorial race and as many as five competitive House races as Democrats grasp for control over the lower chamber in the midterms next year. Garrity, a combat veteran in her second term as treasurer, is seen by state GOP insiders as the best Republican candidate to challenge Shapiro. Mastriano's potential bid has alarmed President Donald Trump's advisers and Pennsylvania Republicans .