Arizona Voters Could Shift Control of ESA Program to Democrats in the Fall

This feature is a part of The 74’s EDlection 2024 coverage, exploring candidates’ education policies and their potential impact on the American education system post the 2024 election.

Arizona emerges as a pivotal battleground state in the upcoming 2024 presidential campaign. Going beyond the presidential race, the state’s legislative contests could reshape its reputation as a leading advocate for school choice.

Arizona holds the distinction of being the first state to introduce education savings accounts (ESAs) in 2011—a milestone followed by a historic move a decade later, making these programs accessible to all families by providing approximately $7,500 for their children’s educational needs, including private school fees.

With a wave of imitating legislation extending ESAs to upwards of a dozen states, Arizona voters face a groundbreaking decision this fall. They could potentially give control of the state’s private school choice system to the Democratic Party, led by Governor Katie Hobbs, making them the first electorate to do so. This shift may challenge the political sustainability of ESAs while testing the influence of their opponents.

Presently, Republicans hold slight majorities in both the Arizona Senate and House of Representatives. The Democrats harbor hopes of securing these chambers for the first time in decades, considering the narrow margin. This scenario, coupled with Hobbs’ imminent third year in office, could grant the Democratic Party its sole period of complete government control in Arizona since 1966.

Arizona’s legislative races are anticipated to be highly competitive, with limited polling available. The latest polls depict the Democratic presidential duo of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz leading by three points. Notably, an upcoming statewide vote on abortion rights is anticipated to spike Democratic voter turnout, yet its impact on non-presidential races remains uncertain.

Hobbs’ initial state budget proposal earlier this year sought to retract the statewide expansion of ESAs enacted a year ago, intended to broaden program eligibility to affluent families already enrolling their children in private schools. However, the proposal faced obstacles within the state legislature.

In subsequent efforts, Hobbs introduced a revised set of modest reforms focused on introducing accountability measures to the system. These included mandating private schools benefiting from ESA funds to fingerprint their teachers, akin to public schools, and restricting ESA usage during summer breaks. Despite being incorporated in the FY 2025 budget, critics argue that these measures fall short of curbing private school choice expansion.

Since universal eligibility was enacted, ESA enrollments in Arizona surged from 12,000 to 75,000 students—an indication of increasing program popularity.

Republican pollster Paul Bentz expressed overwhelming public support for legislation enhancing ESA transparency, indicating that any abolishment of ESAs at this juncture seems unlikely.

“Democrats could pass more accountability measures tomorrow,” Bentz affirmed, citing widespread voter backing for parity in reporting requirements, teacher verification, and safety standards between private and public schools.

Despite initial intentions, Democrats may encounter challenges in significantly restricting the private school sector without securing substantial majorities in the upcoming November elections. The more probable scenario, according to Bentz, is a single-chamber victory or a potential 50-50 split necessitating power-sharing arrangements.

“I don’t think they can outright eliminate [ESAs] at this point. The genie’s out of the bottle for that,” remarked Marisol Garcia, the prominent president of the Arizona Education Association, emphasizing the importance of a cautious and gradual dismantling of the ESA program to ensure ongoing support for students, especially those with special needs.

Garcia stressed the need for well-managed public schooling systems to accommodate individual student requirements, emphasizing the careful transition of students from private to public education.

The financial aspect of the ESA program remains a significant concern for Garcia and many educators, given its substantial costs. Data from the Arizona Department of Education indicates that the program’s total expenses surpassed $700 million in the previous fiscal year, equivalent to roughly half of the state’s deficit, which was mitigated through budget cuts.

Disagreements persist regarding the financial implications of private school choice initiatives, with critics highlighting the burgeoning number of ESA recipients as contributors to significant debt, while advocates argue that the lower per-pupil spending on ESA accounts, compared to public school allocations, may lead to long-term savings.

Matthew Ladner, an experienced researcher at the Arizona Charter Schools Association and ESA advocate, refuted any connection between the program’s growth and the state’s financial challenges. He emphasized the balanced budget of the Arizona ESA program within the Department of Education’s budget, signaling financial stability.

Ladner discredited claims of the ESA program impacting the state’s deficit, highlighting a surplus reported by the Department of Education. Such financial assertions, he emphasized, lacked credibility given the department’s operational surplus.

Despite these clarifications, concerns persist within Arizona’s education policy community regarding K-12 funding. The state ranks among the lowest in education spending nationwide, a consequence of severe budget reductions during the Great Recession that have yet to be fully remedied.

The state’s historical underfunding of education, reinforced by the 2018 #RedforEd demonstrations, underscores the longstanding dissatisfaction with stagnant teacher salaries and inadequate school resources. While Democrats have made significant electoral gains, their ability to address education funding challenges remains constrained without legislative victories.

Moreover, crucial educational initiatives like Proposition 123, providing substantial funding to school districts annually, face impending expiration. The debate over renewing this initiative underscores the broader funding issues facing education in Arizona, with competing proposals highlighting divergent priorities.

Rich Nickel, President of Education Forward Arizona, shared concerns about the lack of investments in necessary resources for schools recovering from pandemic disruptions. A significant gap exists between public expectations for improved education outcomes and the current funding landscape, offering little optimism for imminent change.

Nickel stressed the broad consensus across party lines and demographics regarding the urgency of enhancing educational outcomes and resources, underscoring the critical need for substantive investment in the state’s education system.

“There’s wide agreement among both parties, all races and ethnicities, that our leaders should be doing more to increase our achievement and attainment rates. But we’re not seeing any investments in that in this current budget, and there’s not a lot of optimism that we’re going to see that in the next couple of years,” Nickel concluded.