INDIANAPOLIS – In 2011 lawmakers created the Indiana Choice Scholarship Program, which gave qualifying K-12 students the option of using state money to help pay tuition at private schools.

The program has been wildly successful in terms of participation. Between 2011-12 and 2014-15, enrollment has skyrocketed from 3,919 to 29,148.

MORE NEWS: Know These Before Moving From Cyprus To The UK

That’s an obvious signal that Indiana parents want school choice.

But some state lawmakers would like to eliminate the program, or at least limit its scope. That’s because they believe the program costs public schools too much money, since students who enroll in private schools take part of their share of state education dollars with them.

They want to guarantee public schools a certain level of revenue, regardless of academic performance, even if that means keeping many students trapped within the artificial boundaries of their public school districts.

They are aware that without access to the choice program, many lower- and middle-income families would lack the resources to send their children to private schools.

Many Democratic lawmakers, with their close ties to anti-choice teachers unions, take that position. But surprisingly some Republicans have broken with their party and joined the anti-choice crowd.

State Sen. Sue Glick, R-LaGrange, and state Rep. Denny Zent, R-Angola, made that clear at a recent legislative forum at Trine University.

“It has significantly impacted public education,” Glick was quoted as saying by KPCnews. “It has gone too far. It’s time to rein it in. I think you will see it coming back.”

MORE NEWS: How to prepare for face-to-face classes

“Public education is what made this country great,” Zent was quoted as saying by the same publication. “(The choice program has) got to be ratcheted back.”

The two lawmakers were quoted by an opinion columnist who is clearly anti-voucher. In his article he claimed Glick and Zent “owned up to screwing up” for their past support of vouchers, as well as tax relief for homeowners.

So EAGnews followed up, to make sure their statements were not taken out of context.

Zent declined to be interviewed, but Glick told EAGnews that the columnist accurately portrayed her views.

“There is growing concern that costs are getting out of hand,” Glick said. “In the beginning there were limits on the number of vouchers and the money, but now we’ve reached the point where thousands of more people are claiming the vouchers.

“Last year Indiana spent $78.6 million on vouchers and we will spend a projected $122 million this year. In the next budget cycle, based on the budget passed by the House, it could be more than $156 million.

“That’s why I’m raising the concern. The numbers are growing so significantly that it’s having a serious impact on the state budget and the public school system, which serves the vast majority of students.”

Glick said most Indiana families “use public school systems and are happy with public schools.”

Robert Enlow, president and CEO of the Friedman Foundation for Education Choice in Indianapolis, isn’t surprised that some Republican lawmakers have become critical of the voucher program, because local politics factor in.

He notes that many GOP lawmakers represent rural and suburban communities where public schools are often the largest employers. If too many students choose to leave a particular district, there are fewer jobs in that district.

That’s one of the same fundamental reasons why teachers unions oppose school choice. When students leave public schools, there are fewer positions for dues-paying teachers, and the unions depend on their dues.

But Enlow believes the debate should be focused on what’s best for students, not adults who are concerned about employment. And he believes all parents, regardless of income, should be able to decide what school is best for their children, and have the resources to pay for that school.

Indiana’s choice program clearly benefits some of the neediest children in the state. According to a report from the Indiana Department of Education, more than 70 percent of voucher recipients qualify for the federal free or reduced-price school lunch program, based on their family income.

“There is widespread satisfaction with public schools, widespread satisfaction with the choice program, and a widespread desire for more choice.” Enlow told EAGnews. “They are not mutually exclusive.”

Enlow notes that a small percentage of state education funding goes toward the choice program. For instance, as recently as fiscal year 2012, Indiana spent approximately $9.8 billion on K-12 public schools, according to federal statistics, and the dollar amount has increased since then. The $78 million spent on the choice program in fiscal 2014 is less than one percent of $9.8 billion.

“I don’t think the relatively small amount of money spent on the choice program should make that much difference,” Enlow said.

Enlow notes that education is much less expensive for students in the choice program. In 2013-14, the average voucher amount for students in the choice program was $3,968. In 2011-12 the state spent a per-pupil average of $9,719 on public school students.

If some schools lose more students and more state revenue than others, it’s due to the manner in which the state distributes the savings from the choice program, according to Enlow.

He believes the district that loses a student should keep the difference between the cost of the voucher and the cost of public instruction. Under the current system, the savings are distributed statewide, according to Enlow.

“We have a screwy funding formula here, which is something that should change,” Enlow said. “All the savings should go to the district that lost the kid.”

Enlow says the competition provided by private schools forces public schools to improve academically to keep as many students as possible. With limited competition, they would have a stable number of trapped students every year, and little incentive to be the best they can be.

“One can make a strong argument that (the choice program) helped make public schools better,” Enlow said. “Without it the only incentive for public schools to perform well would be the altruism of good employees, and there are many of those. But we need more than just altruism to make sure a school system functions properly.”