Nebraska forum spotlights sharply divided views on referendum 4-35 over LB1402 scholarships

Lincoln — At a public forum held at the Nebraska State Capitol, proponents and opponents of referendum 4-35 clashed over section 1 of LB1402, a state law that would create a $10 million education scholarship program aimed at low-income students to attend qualified nonpublic schools.

The forum, convened by Wayne Bennett, Deputy Secretary of State for Elections, opened with rules for testimony and a short presentation of official pamphlets about the ballot measures. Supporters, including Rita Bennett of Support Our Schools Nebraska and representatives of Opportunity Scholarships in Nebraska, argued the measure expands access for low-income families and does not reduce funding for public schools. Opponents, including members of the Nebraska State Education Association and the ACLU of Nebraska, said the measure diverts taxpayer funds to mostly religious private schools, lacks adequate accountability and nondiscrimination protections, and risks long-term budget growth seen in other states with voucher programs.

Why it matters: The question on the ballot asks voters whether to repeal section 1 of LB1402 (referendum 4-35). Supporters say the $10 million appropriation would give families, especially lower-income households and students with special needs or those denied option enrollment, a meaningful option to attend nonpublic schools. Opponents say the appropriation risks reducing transparency and could channel public dollars to schools that can exclude students for religious or other reasons.

Supporters' case

Jeremy Ekeler, executive director of Opportunity Scholarships in Nebraska, said the program prioritizes low-income students and provides modest awards that help families access private or faith-based schools. He told the forum that the “average scholarship amount is $1,700,” and said nearly half of current scholarship recipients are below the children’s health insurance threshold (213% of poverty). Ekeler also said “all 215 schools eligible for this program are accredited or approved by the state of Nebraska” and that about 36,000 Nebraskans attend nonpublic schools.

Several school leaders and parents described individual cases they said would benefit from scholarships. Jeremiah Majorins, principal of Christ Lincoln Schools, said the program “provides families with greater choice” and that the scholarships allowed new families who otherwise could not afford tuition to enroll. Sierra Schauss and other parents described scholarships easing financial burdens and enabling children with special needs to remain in inclusive classrooms.

Supporters including Senator John Arch and Senator Justin Wayne framed the issue as one of expanding options for children who are not well served by their assigned public school. Arch, who identified himself as Speaker of the Legislature and senator from District 14, said the appropriation “was designed to focus on low income children who need an option.”

Opponents' case

Tim Royers, who identified himself as president of the Nebraska State Education Association and a public school teacher, warned of fiscal and accountability risks. Royers and others cited examples from other states where voucher-style programs expanded rapidly, including testimony referencing Iowa, Arizona and Florida as cautionary examples. Royers said sections 2–7 of LB1402 would eliminate existing opportunity scholarship programs and that the narrow nondiscrimination reference in the law (cited in testimony as 42 U.S.C. 1981) does not cover many modern nondiscrimination categories.

Jason Witmer of the ACLU of Nebraska said taxpayer dollars should not fund religious education and said many nonpublic schools are not bound to the same accountability standards as public schools. Sharon O'Neal, a former Lincoln Public Schools paraeducator, emphasized that about 90% of Nebraska children attend public schools and argued $10 million would disproportionately benefit urban areas and families that already can pay tuition.

Points of contention and evidence cited

- Funding and scale: Supporters repeatedly said the $10 million scholarship appropriation represents about 0.2% of the roughly $5 billion the state spends annually on public K–12 education; opponents noted recent state increases in K–12 spending and disputed assertions that the scholarship would not affect local levies or school budgets. Speakers on both sides invoked multi-hundred-million- and billion-dollar figures to characterize broader legislative funding actions during recent sessions.

- Accountability and nondiscrimination: Supporters said qualifying schools must meet state approval or accreditation and that many scholarship recipients are students of color or students with special needs. Opponents said the statutory nondiscrimination reference is narrow and does not clearly prohibit denial of students for religion, gender identity, disability or other categories.

- Precedent from other states: Opponents cited rapid cost growth in other states’ voucher programs and academic studies they say show negative outcomes when voucher programs scale. Supporters pointed to research and fiscal analyses they say show net savings or fiscal benefits when students enroll in nonpublic schools.

Discussion, direction and next steps

No formal vote was taken at the hearing; the forum served to gather public testimony required by Nebraska law for initiative hearings in each congressional district. The Secretary of State’s office will include the hearing record in the administrative record for referendum 4-35. The measure will appear on ballots in November; the forum closed with an encouragement from the moderator to cast ballots on the scheduled election date.

Ending

Speakers on both sides urged voters to weigh claims about fiscal impact, student accountability and family access when deciding how to vote on referendum 4-35. The Secretary of State’s Office made pamphlets and the hearing record available for review and noted the hearing was part of the statutorily required process for citizen-initiated referenda.