House committee advances 'Wyoming Freedom Scholarship Act,' reduces startup appropriation and rejects multiple accountability amendments

The House Committee of the Whole reported House Bill 199, the “Wyoming Freedom Scholarship Act,” to the full House Friday after a full-day floor debate that focused on funding, accountability and constitutional risk. Representative Andrew, the bill sponsor and committee chair, described the measure as a conversion of the state’s existing education savings account (ESA) program into a universal, income‑independent scholarship program.

Representative Andrew said the program would pay roughly $7,000 per student and that state analysis and other states’ experience suggested 1,500 to 4,000 students could participate in year one. “As the bill is written, it would be worth about, well, it would be worth $7,000 per student,” Andrew said.

Key policy and fiscal changes in the bill as discussed on the floor: - Universal eligibility: The bill removes income limits so any Wyoming family could apply for an ESA under the program as written. The sponsor also proposed removing kindergarten as an eligible expense. - Start-up appropriation reduced: The appropriations committee reduced an initial general‑fund appropriation in the draft from $50,000,000 to $30,000,000; Representative Andrew said the $30 million better matched expected first‑year uptake. That division (division number 1) was adopted in committee proceedings. - Funding source change: The bill diverts a portion of federal mineral royalties (FMRs) into the ESA account; supporters said the change would not necessarily reduce the School Foundation Program (SFP) long term because ESAs would cost less per student than the state’s average per‑pupil cost. - Certification and assessment: The bill removes a mandatory certification process for provider entities and without an annual nationally normed assessment requirement. Floor sponsors and education department officials urged that certification and assessment be maintained for consumer protection; other members opposed reimposing those rules, calling them a constraint on parental choice.

Floor debate was lengthy and partisan. Supporters argued the program would expand parental choice and reduce per‑student state costs; opponents raised several concerns, including fraud risk, erosion of public‑school funding and potential violations of the Wyoming Constitution. Representative Harshman warned of fraud and loss of local budget authority and said, “You have to have guardrails. ... This is going to be the wild wild west of waste, fraud and abuse,” if certification and registration were removed. Representative Jarvis, a former reading specialist, urged assessments and said targeted measurement is needed to identify and fix student-level deficits.

Committee of the Whole votes on amendments and divisions during floor consideration: - Committee/appropriations amendment (division number 1): reduced the general‑fund appropriation from $50,000,000 to $30,000,000 (passed by division). - Division number 2 (move effective date to July 1, 2026): called, challenged, and later withdrawn after a rules‑committee finding that it violated a standing rule. - Committee of the Whole amendment number 1 (reinsert certification process): vigorously debated and put to division; the final division tally recorded 29 in favor and 31 opposed — the attempt to reinsert the certification language failed. - Committee of the Whole amendment number 2 (require nationally normed annual assessments): failed on division, 23 ayes to 34 noes. - Committee of the Whole amendment number 3 (restore pre‑K eligibility for families up to 150% of poverty): failed on division, 25 ayes to 35 noes. - Additional numeric and design amendments (including proposals to lower the appropriation to $28 million or tie ESA award amounts to local property-tax contributions) failed to pass.

After the debate and amendments, the Committee of the Whole reported the bill to the House; the committee report was adopted by a recorded vote of 39 ayes and 20 noes, advancing the bill out of committee of the whole for further floor action.

Speakers on both sides noted potential downstream effects: Representative Harshman and others said diverting an estimated $44 million a year from the School Foundation Program to ESAs (an amount discussed on the floor) could materially affect small districts’ budgets; Representative Andrew and supporters said the ESA per‑student cost (about $7,000) is well below the state per‑pupil average of roughly $18,000, producing long‑term savings if uptake assumptions hold.

The bill will return to the full House calendar with the committee of the whole report; further amendments and votes are possible in subsequent readings.