Georgia voucher program could cover biological children of families that take in foster children
The Georgia Senate approved a bill that would expand the state's voucher program to include biological and adopted children of foster parents. Getty Images
Senate Republicans passed a bill they say will help encourage residents to take in foster children by giving foster parents priority access to the state's school voucher program for their biological and adopted children.
Democrats, who largely opposed the voucher plan when it passed last year, criticized the plan for not benefiting foster children themselves and said it could invite fraud, waste and abuse.
Under Georgia's voucher system, officially called the Promise Scholarship, parents can apply for $6,500 for academic expenses, including private school, if they pull their kids out of public school. Participating families must have an income level below four times the national poverty level and be districted into the bottom quartile of public schools in Georgia.
Public education advocates argue that vouchers take money from public schools that need it and send it to private schools, which are not subject to government scrutiny.
The Governor's Office of Student Achievement keeps a list of eligible schools, and applications are set to begin on Saturday.
If Senate Bill 152 by Cumming Republican Greg Dolezal becomes law, foster parents will not need to meet those requirements to be eligible.
Democrats said it does not look proper that the bill would not apply to foster children themselves. Instead, the benefit would apply to any biological or adopted children of foster parents.
'As we all know, typically foster children feel ostracized,' said Atlanta Democratic Sen. RaShaun Kemp. 'They come into a household where there are already relationships developed where they may feel a little jealousy in terms of the environment in which they're in. And now we're telling them to come into this house, the children of the parents can go to the private school that's down the street, to the school that they have deemed to be the better school for their children. But we're telling the foster children, no, you have to go to the school that I have found to be ineffective for my own kids. This is wrong.'
Dolezal said the bill's goal is to encourage more people to take in foster children. He said including foster kids did not make sense for this bill but added that he plans to look into the idea.
'We went through a number of steps to try to work this bill in its current form to include the foster families, but everything in the bill and in the Georgia Promise Scholarship program is executed and managed by parents, the biological parents or the adopted parents of children,' he said. 'And so we are going to work in the off session to do the work that needs to be done to have that included. I believe there may be a study committee.'
Dolezal sparred with Atlanta Democratic Sen. Elena Parent, who said the voucher expansion could be rife for abuse.
'Are you aware that in Florida families have used this taxpayer money for annual passes to Disney World and Universal Studios?' Parent asked.
'I can tell you I am familiar that Florida's program was so successful that it was originally implemented under Governor (Jeb) Bush that just a couple of years ago Governor (Ron) DeSantis and the Florida legislature expanded it from its limited use to be a universal program in Florida, and they have appropriated about 10 times as much funding as we have to our current program,' Dolezal said.
Parent said said families in other states have taken advantage of voucher programs to buy things like electronics, video game consoles and sporting equipment.
'Senator, it sounds like we might need Elon Musk to go down to Florida and look into what they're doing down there,' Dolezal said. 'I know that Governor DeSantis has implemented a DOGE Florida bill, and I would probably say that in all areas of government, we can find examples of misappropriation of funds, and I would link arms with you in finding ways to find those.'
Under the bill, families could remain eligible up to 10 years after they care for a foster child. And once a child is in the program, they remain in it until they decide to reenroll in public school. Parent implied that could lead to significant fraud.
'Would you agree with me that the language in today's bill, the way it's written, does say that a family could have a foster child for a day, then say, 'you know, it didn't work out,' and then receive the taxpayer-funded voucher for the next 15 years?'
'Senator, I think we could imagine edge cases in which that would be the case, but I know that the 2,300 families who are currently fostering in the state of Georgia are not doing it for their daily stipend that they currently get paid, but they are doing it for love of the children and for a desire to see some of the most vulnerable children in our state be taken care of,' Dolezal said.
The bill will next head to the House, where it will need to pass out of committee and the full chamber before the end of the session, April 4.
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
36 minutes ago
Michigan House Republicans sue the secretary of state over election training materials
KALAMAZOO, Mich. -- Michigan Republicans are suing the battleground state's top elections executive over access to election training materials. The lawsuit filed Thursday is the latest escalation in a brewing dispute that began when the GOP took majority control of the state's House of Representatives last year. Since winning control of the chamber in the 2024 election, statehouse Republicans have repeatedly scrutinized the state's election processes and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat who is running for governor in 2026. The conflict comes as some state Republicans echo past false claims of election fraud in Michigan, which was a prime target of President Donald Trump and his backers after his 2020 election loss. Republicans on the chamber's Oversight Committee subpoenaed Benson in April, seeking access to training materials for local clerks and staff who administer elections, including access to the Bureau of Elections' online learning portal. Benson's office released some requested materials in response to the subpoena, but not all, citing cybersecurity and physical security concerns related to administering elections and the voting process. The office has said it needs to review the online portal for 'sensitive information" and make redactions. 'Since the beginning of this saga, Secretary Benson has asked lawmakers to let a court review their request for sensitive election information that, in the wrong hands, would compromise the security of our election machines, ballots and officials,' Michigan Department of State spokesperson Cheri Hardmon said in a statement Thursday. House Republicans say the goal of reviewing the material is to ensure clerks are trained in accordance with Michigan law. The House voted along party lines in May to hold Benson in contempt for not completely complying with the subpoena. The request for training materials originally came from GOP state Rep. Rachelle Smit, who has pushed false claims that the 2020 election was stolen. Smit is the chair of the House elections committee, which was renamed to the Elections Integrity Committee with the new Republican majority. 'Secretary Benson has proven she is unwilling to comply with our subpoena and Michigan law,' Rep. Smit said in a statement Thursday. 'She's skirted the rules and done whatever she could to avoid public scrutiny. It's become overwhelmingly clear that she will never release the training materials we're looking for without direction from a court." The lawsuit asks the Michigan Court of Claims to intervene and compel Benson to comply with the subpoena. 'The public interest is best served if the constitutional order of the State of Michigan is preserved and the Legislature can properly perform its duty to regulate the manner of elections in the state and, if deemed necessary, enact election laws for the benefit of Michigan residents,' the lawsuit says. Benson gained national attention for defending the results of the 2020 election in the face of Trump's attempts to undercut the outcome nationwide and in Michigan. Multiple audits — including one conducted by the then-Republican-controlled Michigan Senate — concluded former President Joe Biden won the state in 2020 and that there was no widespread or systemic fraud. Benson has remained a subject of GOP scrutiny this year. A Republican state representative introduced three articles of impeachment against Benson on Tuesday, and several of the accusations continue to cast doubts on the results of the 2020 election. With Democrats in control of the state Senate, it's unlikely the impeachment articles will result in a conviction.
an hour ago
What Trump ordering an investigation into Biden's actions might mean legally and politically
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump has ordered an investigation into pardons and other executive actions issued by his predecessor, Joe Biden — launching an extraordinary effort to show that the Democrat hid his cognitive decline and was otherwise too mentally impaired to do the job. Trump, who turns 79 this month, has long questioned the mental acuity and physical stamina of Biden, and is now directing his administration to use governmental investigative powers to try and back up those assertions. Biden, 82, and now undergoing treatment for prostate cancer, dismissed Trump's actions as 'ridiculous.' Here's a look at what Trump is alleging, what impact it could have, and why the country may never have seen anything like this before. Trump directed his White House counsel and attorney general to begin an investigation into his own allegations that Biden aides hid from the public declining mental acuity in their boss. Trump is also casting doubts on the legitimacy of the Biden White House's use of the autopen to sign pardons and other documents. It marks a significant escalation in Trump's targeting of political adversaries, and could lay the groundwork for arguments by leading Republicans in Congress and around the country that a range of Biden's actions as president were invalid. 'Essentially, whoever used the autopen was the president,' Trump said Thursday. He then went further, suggesting that rogue elements within the Biden administration might have effectively faked the president's signature and governed without his knowledge — especially when it came to pushing policies that appeased the Democratic Party's far-left wing. 'He didn't have much of an idea what was going on,' Trump said, though he also acknowledged that he had no evidence to back up those assertions. A Trump fundraising email released a short time later carried the heading, 'A robot ran the country?' Legal experts are skeptical about that the investigation will do much more than fire up Trump's core supporters. 'I think it's more of a political act than one that will have any legal effect,' said Richard Pildes, a constitutional law scholar at New York University School of Law. He added: 'I think it's designed to continue to fuel a narrative that the administration wants to elevate, but courts are not going to second-guess these sorts of executive actions' undertaken by Biden. Trump has long questioned the legitimacy of pardons his predecessor issued for his family members and other administration officials just before leaving office on Jan. 20, people whom Biden was worried could be targeted by a Trump-led Justice Department. But Trump has more recently suggested Biden was unaware of immigration policies during his own administration, and said Thursday that aides to his predecessor pushed social issues like transgender rights in ways Biden might not have agreed with. It is well-established that a president's executive orders can easily be repealed by a successor issuing new executive actions — something Trump has done repeatedly since retaking the White House. That lets Trump wipe out Biden administration policies without having to prove any were undertaken without Biden's knowledge — though his predecessor's pardons and judicial appointments can't be so easily erased. 'When it comes to completed legal acts like pardons or appointing judges,' Pildes said, a later president 'has no power to overturn those actions.' Autopens are writing tools that allow a person's signature to be affixed automatically to documents. The Justice Department, under Democratic and Republican administrations, has recognized the use of an autopen by presidents to sign legislation and issue pardons for decades — and even Trump himself acknowledges using it. 'Autopens to me are used when thousands of letters come in from young people all over the country and you want to get them back,' Trump said Thursday. Michigan State University law professor Brian Kalt said the 'consensus view is that, as long as the president has directed the use of the autopen in that particular instance, it is valid.' 'The only issue would be if someone else directed the use of the autopen without the President's approval,' Kalt, an expert on pardons, wrote in an email. Yes. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution bestows the president with the power 'to grant Reprieves and Pardons.' 'A president's pardons cannot be revoked. If they could, no pardon would ever be final,' American University politics professor Jeffrey Crouch, author of a book on presidential pardons, said in an email. 'There is no legal obstacle I am aware of to a president using an autopen on a pardon.' Kent Greenfield, a Boston College law professor, said, 'Once you pardon somebody, you can't go back and un-pardon them.' 'If it's done with a president's authority, I don't think it matters whether it's done with an autopen or not,' Greenfield added. 'The president's authority is the president's authority.' Trump's suggestions that Biden's administration effectively functioned without his knowledge on key policy matters go beyond questions about pardons and the president using the autopen. Even there, though, the Supreme Court ruled in 2024 that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution. At the time, Trump celebrated the ruling as a 'BIG WIN' because it extended the delay in the Washington criminal case against him on charges he plotted to overturn his 2020 election loss. Such immunity would likely cover Biden as a former president. It might not extend to Biden administration officials allegedly acting without his knowledge — though Trump himself acknowledged he's not seen evidence of that occurring. Biden has dismissed Trump's investigation as 'nothing more than a mere distraction.' 'Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency. I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation, and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn't is ridiculous and false,' he said in a statement. In a word, no. There have been allegations of presidents being impaired and having their administrations controlled by intermediaries more than the public knew — including Edith Wilson, who effectively managed access to her husband, Democratic President Woodrow Wilson, after his serious stroke in 1919. Wilson's critics grumbled about a shadow presidency controlled by his wife, but the matter was never formally investigated by Congress, nor was it a major source of criticism for Wilson's Republican successor, Warren G. Harding. More recently, some questioned whether President John F. Kennedy struggled more than was publicly known at the time with Addison's Disease and debilitating back pains while in office. And there were questions about whether dementia might have affected Ronald Reagan during his second term, before he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's in 1994, five years after he left office.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
High court ruling on reverse discrimination a no-brainer: Chuck Rocha
(NewsNation) — The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected legal precedent that people in a majority group have a higher standard for proving discrimination. Democratic strategist Chuck Rocha agrees with the high court decision. 'Discrimination doesn't say, 'Oh, you have to be black,' or, 'You have to be a woman,' or, 'You have to be gay.' … Discrimination means you're treating me different,' he says on 'CUOMO.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
