Once again, Governor Josh Shapiro has proposed cutting funding to public cyber charter schools.
For the 2026–27 school year, his budget calls for an additional $75 million reduction, on top of the nearly $300 million already cut in 2024 and 2025. That brings total cyber charter funding cuts to almost $375 million over three years.
For Commonwealth Charter Academy (CCA) alone, this means:
- ~$150 million already lost over the past two years
- An additional ~$45 million cut proposed
- Nearly $200 million in total losses over three years
These cuts apply only to families who choose public cyber charter schools while brick-and-mortar districts continue to receive record-level funding increases.
Let’s be clear:
Cyber charter schools are public schools.
The students enrolled in them are public school students.
And the families choosing them are taxpayers.
My son is autistic.
Methacton’s elementary schools failed him academically, developmentally, and ethically. Like many neurodivergent children, he was left behind in a system that was never built for him and had no intention of adapting.
CCA worked.
It provided structure, flexibility, and an environment where my child could actually learn instead of survive.
Now the state wants to take that option away not because cyber charter schools don’t work, but because they don’t fit a preferred funding narrative.
Brick-and-Mortar Waste vs. Cyber Charter Scrutiny
Here’s what makes this infuriating.
While cyber charter schools are being gutted, brick-and-mortar districts continue spending taxpayer money on non-essential, discretionary projects.
For example:
Methacton School District celebrated opening a new e-sports gaming room, in 2024, complete with high-performance gaming computers, specialized seating, and competitive gaming setups.
Let me be blunt:
Taxpayer money is funding gaming labs with high end level equipment while families like mine are being told there is “no money” for the public school our children actually attend.
That is not fiscal responsibility. That is misaligned priorities.
This Isn’t Just About School Funding
This issue goes far beyond cyber charter schools.
It’s about forced taxpayer funding without transparency or consent.
Pennsylvania taxpayers do not get to approve line-item spending.
We do not get opt-outs.
We do not get advance disclosure.
We find out after the money is spent.
Public funds are routinely used for:
- Legal fees and court-related expenses tied to staff conduct
- Administrative and discretionary projects unrelated to student outcomes
- Political or reputational damage control framed as “operational necessity”
- Budgetary decisions made behind closed doors and justified only after exposure
And yet, when it comes time to fund essential public services families rely on, suddenly every dollar must be questioned, slashed, and clawed back.
That contradiction is the point.
Selective Austerity Is Not Accountability
If Pennsylvania truly lacked money, cuts would be shared equitably.
Instead, the cuts fall almost exclusively on:
- Disabled students
- Working families
- Children who already failed once in traditional systems
- Parents who exercised their right to choose a public cyber charter school
Brick-and-mortar districts are insulated.
Cyber charter families are punished.
That is not neutrality.
That is selective austerity.
This Is About Choice — and Consequences
Families choose cyber charter schools for real reasons:
- Medical needs
- Disability accommodations
- Bullying and discrimination
- Academic failure in traditional settings
- Mental health and safety
Cutting funding doesn’t hurt “institutions.”
It hurts children.
And it sends a clear message:
If your child doesn’t fit the traditional model, the state is willing to sacrifice them to protect the system that already failed them.
If Pennsylvania has money for opaque expenses, discretionary projects, and non-essential upgrades, then it has money for the public schools families actively choose.
What it lacks is honesty about its priorities.
I pay taxes.
I followed the rules.
I chose a public school that worked for my child.
And I am done being told that my family and thousands like mine are expendable.
Pennsylvania doesn’t need a mini-Trump — it needs leadership that puts children, transparency, and accountability ahead of political optics.
