hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Diverts federal education funds to parents if schools close.
Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) introduced the bill in the Senate.
Introduced in the Senate, no vote yet.
This bill proposes that certain federal education funds (Title I) be directly paid to parents if a public school fails to offer in-person instruction for more than three days due to a public health emergency or collective bargaining. Senator Tim Scott, a Republican from South Carolina, introduced it. It has been referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions for review and has not yet been voted on by the full Senate.
Introduced Mar 11, 2026
This bill was introduced in the Senate on March 11, 2026, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. It must pass this committee, then be voted on and passed by the full Senate. If it passes the Senate, it would then go to the House of Representatives for consideration and a vote. Finally, if passed by both chambers, it would be sent to the President to be signed into law.
If your child attends a public school receiving Title I federal funds, and that school closes for more than three days due to public health or labor disputes, you could receive direct payments. These funds are intended for 'qualified educational expenses,' which include curriculum, books, tutoring, online materials, private school tuition, testing fees, and therapies for students with disabilities. Schools would be required to create a plan for these payments, and parents would need to submit receipts or return unused money.
Supporters Say
Supporters argue it addresses significant learning loss and educational inequality when schools close, especially for disadvantaged students.
Critics Say
Critics may raise concerns about diverting federal funds from public school systems to individual parents and the implications of including collective bargaining actions.
The bill's findings highlight research indicating that school closures lead to negative, long-lasting effects and wider educational inequality, particularly for low-income students and students of color. Supporters would emphasize that this bill directly empowers parents to counter such learning loss by providing resources for alternative educational services. Critics might argue that diverting Title I funds, which are designed to support disadvantaged students within the public school system, could weaken public schools. Concerns could also be raised about the inclusion of collective bargaining as a trigger for these payments.