Senate adopts amendment giving preference in school-choice program to families at or below 300% of poverty

COLUMBIA, S.C. — The South Carolina Senate on Tuesday adopted an amendment that gives enrollment preference in the state's education scholarship program to children from families at or below 300% of the federal poverty level and clarifies that children already enrolled will be counted as continuing participants.

The amendment, offered on the Senate floor by Senator Hembree, passed on a roll-call vote of 37 to 2. Senator Hembree told colleagues, "This is the amendment that gives preferences to children that are at 300% of poverty," and said it also clarifies that currently enrolled students are carried forward as participants under the program's new name.

Why it matters: The change alters the program's priority tiers as lawmakers plan for the program's expansion and lingering court questions about funding and structure. Senators debated whether the new priority would protect lower-income families or unintentionally favor siblings of current participants whose household incomes differ. The session included extended questioning on implementation, fiscal impact and whether lottery funds or general fund dollars should back the program.

What the amendment does: As adopted, the amendment creates a three-tier priority system: current participants first, siblings of current participants second, and children from households at or below 300% of the federal poverty level third (the amendment makes that income tier an ongoing preference rather than a one-year rule). The sponsor said the change was intended to steer available scholarships toward more vulnerable families as the program grows.

Debate highlights and concerns: Senators pressed several operational and policy points during the roughly 90-minute floor colloquy. Questions from multiple senators focused on: - How "siblings" are treated when children in the same family live in different households with markedly different incomes; - Whether the 300% threshold is the right level to target families in need (sponsors described 300% as roughly $90,000 gross income for some household sizes); - Whether the preference is perpetual or time-limited (sponsors said the preference is perpetual); - The program's fiscal math: supporters said a conservative estimate of maximum exposure was $90 million if the maximum number of awards is reached, while early uptake this year is much lower. Senators noted about 2,500 students were enrolled in the first year and roughly 700 used scholarships for private school tuition under the initial rollout.

Funding and legal context: Senators repeatedly referenced prior court rulings that shaped how the program can be funded and delivered, including the Adams litigation (referred to on the floor as "Adams v. McMaster") and subsequent opinions that influenced the legislature's drafting choices. Several senators urged clarity about whether lottery funds or general fund dollars should be used to avoid future constitutionality questions and to protect other programs funded by the lottery. Floor debate made clear that using lottery funds would avoid certain constitutional challenges by the state's high court, but would shift other budget priorities between lottery and general fund allocations.

Votes and next steps: After adoption of the Hembree amendment, the Senate voted to carry over the underlying bill to a later day for further consideration. Lawmakers also discussed implementation details and asked staff to provide clarifications on priority definitions, annual requalification, and fiscal estimates before final action. The bill remains on the calendar for future debate and additional amendments.

Votes at a glance: - Adoption of amendment by Senator Hembree (creates priority for families at or below 300% of FPL; clarifies continuing participants): adopted, roll call 37 yes, 2 no. Named no votes recorded in the roll call: Mrs. Matthews (no) and Mr. Walker (no). The roll call transcript shows 37 ayes and 2 no votes; no abstentions were recorded. - Carry over of the bill for further consideration: adopted by voice vote (motion to carry over the bill passed). - Confirmations during the same session (voice votes): Joanne Elizabeth Summey Hayes confirmed as Charleston County magistrate (voice), William D. Road IV confirmed as Bamberg County magistrate (voice).

What was not decided: The Senate did not complete final passage of the underlying scholarship legislation. Lawmakers did not adopt a final funding plan on the floor; some senators said further budget work would be needed to determine whether lottery funds, general funds, or a mix should underwrite the program as it expands.

Background: The scholarship program, enacted in prior sessions and adjusted after litigation, provides awards that can be used for a range of educational services, including private-school tuition in some instances. The statute sets program caps and maximum award amounts (floor discussion referenced a maximum award of $6,000 and a statutory cap of 15,000 awards, which together produce the $90 million maximum figure discussed on the floor). Lawmakers said actual near-term spending so far has been substantially below that statutory maximum.

What lawmakers asked for next: Sponsors and several committee chairs directed staff to produce clearer written language on priority treatment for siblings, the mechanics of annual requalification, the precise fiscal impact under multiple uptake scenarios, and a feasible funding pathway that addresses past judicial rulings. The bill was carried over to allow staff to supply those details before further floor action.

Ending note: With the amendment adopted 37' 2, senators signaled support for prioritizing lower-income families in the scholarship rollout while also signaling a need for more precise fiscal and implementation work before final passage.