HR-7082-119
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 566.
Sponsored by Ryan Mackenzie (R-PA)
What it does
This bill would amend the federal Charter Schools Program under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to change how grant funds are allocated among states, charter management organizations, and national activities—raising minimum reserved percentages and adding a new category for "remaining amounts." It would also expand allowable uses of grant funds (including facility operations, academic subscriptions, and hiring costs), allow advance payment of funds to grantees, streamline application requirements by letting states use existing charter authorization applications, and limit the Secretary of Education's ability to impose additional nonstatutory requirements on grantees.
Who benefits
Charter schools and charter management organizations seeking to open, expand, or add programs, particularly those in states with limited charter options or newly enacted charter legislation; state entities administering subgrants, which gain more flexibility and advance funding; rural students and students with disabilities targeted for increased charter seats; and charter school operators who benefit from reduced federal paperwork and faster access to funds.
Who is hurt
Traditional public school districts that may see funding or enrollment competition intensify as charter capacity expands; oversight advocates and some state education agencies that lose certain application-review authority as the Secretary's discretion to require additional grantee obligations is curtailed; and potentially students and families relying on traditional public schools in areas where charter expansion diverts local resources or attention, though effects would vary by state and district.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue the bill modernizes an outdated, overly rigid grant structure by letting charter schools use funds for facility operations, technology, and staff compensation—costs schools actually face—rather than limiting money to narrow "startup" categories. They contend advance payments and streamlined applications would reduce administrative delays that have historically slowed charter school openings, and that raising reserved percentages for facilities and national activities would help successful charter models expand into underserved rural areas and states with limited options.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue the bill shifts more federal discretion and funding toward charter school expansion without corresponding accountability safeguards, since it removes some Secretary oversight authority and eliminates certain reporting requirements tied to program design. They contend that easing facility-cost eligibility and providing advance payments increases the risk of funds going to charter operators that later close or underperform, potentially diverting resources from traditional public schools that serve the vast majority of students.
Constitutional context
Congress is exercising its Spending Clause authority (Art. I, §8, cl. 1) to attach conditions to federal education grants, an authority the courts assess under the five-part test from South Dakota v. Dole (1987); because charter schools remain state-authorized institutions, this bill also touches the Tenth Amendment principle that education is primarily a state function.
Checks and balances
Congress amends the statutory framework governing the Department of Education's grant program, while limiting the Secretary's regulatory discretion by barring additional nonstatutory requirements—shifting some administrative authority from the executive branch back to Congress and state entities.
Historical precedent
This bill builds on the existing federal Charter Schools Program established and periodically reauthorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, most recently amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015.