Out on the trail this month, Republican candidate for governor U.S. Rep. Randy Feenstra reignited an old debate about the private Iowa schools that receive state funding.
“I just will say this, is that every school has to make sure they take every child. Right? If we have to compete on a level playing field, the playing field has to be level all the way,” Feenstra said at an Urbandale conservatives’ breakfast April 8. He later specified children with special needs as students who should not be denied private-school admission.
Other Republican lawmakers and candidates for governor offered reactions ranging from skepticism to hostility. Adam Steen, a former state administrator and one of Feenstra’s four GOP opponents, characterized it as a direct attack on religious freedom.
They can sort out the politics of Feenstra’s stance without help. The salient question should be this: Is it fair and just for religious schools to discriminate in admissions while almost every student they enroll receives up to $8,000 from Iowa taxpayers?
The short answer is no, it isn’t fair. But the remedy isn’t as simple as taking discretion away from private-school officials. Discrimination is at the heart why private schools exist — and there’s nothing wrong with that.
Iowa’s error was entangling public money and private schools in the first place with the Education Savings Account, or ESA, program. If undoing that mistake entirely isn’t on the table, policymakers interested in fairness will have to thread some needles.
Most of Iowa’s private schools are religious. Most of the religious schools are Christian. In that context, most of the reasons a school might deny an application fall into three buckets. A straightforward one is space. If 100 high school students each from a dozen central Iowa public district suddenly decided they wanted to go to Dowling Catholic next year, it’s OK for Dowling to say it can’t handle that.
Private schools can reject prospective students over their needs
About 13% of Iowa students have Individual Education Programs detailing how to meet their special education and related needs. Iowa public schools receive extra tax money for each student with special needs in recognition of the additional resources involved. But it’s difficult to precisely match the extra money with the full scope of what schools provide to meet their legal obligation for a “free and appropriate public education” for each child: More space. Special training. More employees.
Before and since ESAs started in 2023, private schools could decline to take on the task of providing education to a student with disabilities. It’s to Feenstra’s credit that he publicly identified that inequity. He’s not on an island among Republicans, either. State Rep. David Blom, R-Marshalltown, said April 16 on the House floor that he would have supported a Democratic proposal to require private schools to accept all applicants if it had come with additional funding.
If it’s so important that Iowa families be able to choose religious schools, a lack of resources should not be an acceptable excuse for closing the doors to any of tens of thousands of Iowa children. Even if enforcement was difficult, state law and administrative rules could and should spell out a requirement for schools to welcome all IEP students if they accept ESA money.
Exclusivity defines private education. So now what?
Steen, who has centered his campaign for governor on upholding Christian values, was blunt in an April 9 post on X: “Randy, when you say everyone should be welcome into Christian private schools, do you mean the children with two mothers? What about the mentally ill transgender students?” That tone might indicate that propping up Christian schools financially is more about being segregated from people who are different than about, say, biblical instruction.
But, before ESAs, nobody questioned whether being selective was private schools’ prerogative. And that prerogative is important. In a written statement, the group Iowa Advocates for Choice in Education said that “treating all schools as if they are meant to operate the same way misunderstands the purpose of educational choice.”
“Private schools, including many faith-based schools, are built around clear missions. Some ask families to affirm a statement of faith. Others give preference to church members. Still others focus on areas like the performing arts or a distinct educational philosophy. These are not arbitrary policies — they define what each school is and why families choose them. … Preserving the freedom of private schools is essential to ensuring families have real choices.”
Public support for private schools muddies these waters.
It would be counterproductive for Iowa to keep ESAs but require schools to deny their essence to participate. That leaves a thorny mess, though. If schools can draw lines based on beliefs, they could conceivably stretch those lines to exclude anybody they wish.
Feenstra’s remarks illuminated how arbitrary exclusion is fundamental to the ESA program. The Iowa Legislature and governor should try to make a meaningful improvement by requiring that students with special needs get a fairer shake in admissions. But it’ll never be fair as long as tax money is being diverted to discriminatory schools.
Lucas Grundmeier, on behalf of the Register’s editorial board
This editorial is the opinion of the Des Moines Register’s editorial board: Rachel Stassen-Berger, executive editor; Lucas Grundmeier, opinion editor; and Richard Doak and Rox Laird, editorial board members.
This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Randy Feenstra lays bare ‘school choice’ contradictions | Opinion
Reporting by The Register’s editorial, Des Moines Register / Des Moines Register
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
