Opponents of school choice have a familiar refrain: “These programs mostly benefit the wealthy.”
It’s an easy line to repeat—but it falls apart the moment you look at how universal Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) actually work in states like Iowa, Arizona, Florida, Utah, Arkansas, and West Virginia.
The truth is simple: wealthy families already had school choice. Universal ESAs finally extend that opportunity to everyone else.
The wealthy didn’t need universal ESAs. Everyone else did.
Before Iowa passed the Students First Act, nothing stopped wealthy families from exercising school choice:
-
They could buy a home in a high-performing school district.
-
They could pay private school tuition upfront.
-
They could move to a district with special programs.
Working-class and middle-income families had none of those options. They were effectively locked into their assigned public school, regardless of whether it worked for their child.
Universal ESAs are not a gift to the wealthy—they level the playing field.
Iowa’s ESA program helps middle- and lower-income families the most.
The ESA amount in Iowa—just under $8,000 per student—has dramatically changed access for families who could neverconsider a Christian or independent school before.
For affluent parents paying $7,000–$12,000 per year out-of-pocket, the ESA is a partial offset.
For middle-income or single-parent households, that same ESA is the difference between “no choice” and “real choice.” We’ve heard from those parents and private schools across the state have seen it as well. Many new ESA users are families who were financially unable to consider private education before. Now it is an option.
“But most early ESA users were already in private schools.”
Critics love pointing out that in the first year, a majority of ESA users came from private schools. In Iowa, roughly two-thirds of the first wave were existing private school families.
But this is expected—and it’s not evidence of who benefits long-term.
Every universal program has the same startup pattern:
-
Families already paying tuition respond immediately.
-
Families who could not previously afford tuition join gradually.
-
As schools expand capacity and new schools open, participation broadens.
Florida is the clearest example. After expanding choice in phases over a decade, the demographic profile of new scholarship users became more diverse and more economically mixed. That’s what happens when families learn about the program and schools grow into new communities.
Iowa is on the same trajectory.
The real winners of school choice aren’t the wealthy
They are families like:
-
The single mom whose child was bullied for two years and finally found a safe environment.
-
The rural family who discovered the local Christian school was now within reach financially.
-
The student with unique learning needs whose parents could finally afford specialized support.
-
The middle-income households who always wanted a faith-based education but couldn’t justify the cost.
These are the stories emerging across Iowa—not tales of wealthy families collecting handouts.
Equal opportunity requires equal access.
School choice does not “mostly benefit the wealthy.” Universal choice simply ensures that freedom isn’t limited to those who can afford it.
Iowa’s program—and those in other universal-choice states—represents a shift toward true equity:
Every family, regardless of income, has the power to choose the learning environment that fits their child.
And that’s not a policy for the wealthy.
That’s a policy for everyone.