The Arizona Legislature designated the Department of Education to manage the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program which is universal vouchers. This gives the parents ability to choose what school or homeschool program best meets their children’s needs. It is empowerment of parents which I fought for in my election and in my administration.
The ESA is a great program that is a big success. It has given parents more choices and students more opportunities to get an education that meets their needs. Parents and students across the state are benefiting which is why it has grown so fast.
Of course we must be sure taxpayer funds are being spent wisely. And sadly, like every government program there are those who would attempt to misuse the funds.
We have turned down requests for a $5000 Rolex watch, a $24,000 golf simulator, a vasectomy testing kit, among 35 other examples.
People on the left like to focus on the negative as they prefer the monopoly system of education that promotes mediocrity. Or they think it’s appropriate to spend tax dollars on Rolexes. But the real story is the 87,000 students benefitting from this program by getting a chance to go to a private, parochial, technical or home school that they would not have been able to afford without an ESA grant.
Recently Jason Bedrick and Arizona State Senator Jake Hoffman have been attacking me. Bedrick wrote a long article in the Independent carrying forward that attack. This is my response to that article.
Bedrick and Hoffman for some time have been espousing a wacky theory that the Department of Education, which was designated by the legislature to manage the ESA program, has no authority to limit payments to requests that have a legitimate educational purpose, and a reasonable price according to market prices.
When Bedrick claims that outlandish requests are already contrary to the statute, he admits that someone has to decide what is contrary to the statute, which is in direct contradiction to his theory that we have no authority to deny any requests.
I listed above the kinds of outlandish payments I would have to have made if that were the rule.
If I had paid those requests, it would have generated major publicity, there would have been a public reaction, and this would have questioned the sustainability of the program. One of my jobs is to protect the sustainability of the program.
Ironically, Bedrick praises Kathy Hoffman, my Democrat predecessor, who was so opposed to ESA’s that she went door-to-door to get signatures for an initiative to cancel the legislative authorization for them. Accordingly, she paid the most outlandish requests, such as for ski tickets, and then gave the message to Beth Lewis, of the SOS anti-school choice group, to publicly claim that ESA’s were wasteful and should be abandoned. That is Bedrick’s hero.
When liberals attack the ESA program they typically attack me personally as well. Even when they attack only the program, reporters come to me for a response. Here’s what I say: We have families with three children. Two of them are doing fine in the neighborhood public school. Even a good school does not necessarily meet everyone’s needs, and their third child’s needs are not being met. Under this program, they can choose a school that does meet the child’s needs. I do not understand how anyone could take the position that the family cannot do that unless they are so immersed in ideology that they lose sight of what is best for the students.
The effect of what Bedrick is doing is to create a split in the Republican party, which will make it more easy for the Democrats to take over, which would mean the death of the ESA program.
Hoffman has been claiming that I cannot win a general election. I have won 16 elections. I am much more likely to win than someone espousing a wacky theory.
Under my administration, the ESA program has grown quickly to where we have over 55,000 families with over 87,000 students. Of those 55,000 families, exactly 216 people wrote to complain about restrictions on expenditures. Any denial by us is subject to an appeal. A number of families have appealed, and the judges have ruled in our favor in every single case because the requests were outlandish.
Those complaining about delays and reimbursements, by contrast, have had a legitimate complaint, and I took very strong action to solve it. There were three causes: 1.The growth of the program, without any growth of the legislature’s authorization of the ESA employees; 2. The Attorney General’s requirement that we check every request for an obvious educational expense, such as books and pencils, with the users’ curriculum. We are joining with the Goldwater Institute’s Court challenge to that dictum from the Attorney General; 3. The legislative measure that permitted parents to avoid our vendor, class wallet, to avoid its fee, which was previously required for private school tuition, and permitted them to pay directly and seek reimbursement, which overwhelmed our reimbursement department.
The legislature provided a solution: risk based auditing. All expenditures over $2000 will still be checked before payment. Expenditures under $2000 will be subject to risk based auditing afterwards, and if we find any improper use, the money will be clawed back. The delays that parents legitimately complained about no longer exist.
In the 1990s, when I was in the legislature, I was chairman of a conference committee, and the first thing I did in that context was to kill a Senate bill that would have limited the growth of charter schools. As a result, when I left office after the first time I was superintendent, Arizona was first in the nation in the percentage of students going to charter schools, and Florida was second, a reversal of their usual claim to be first.
Now I fight for our ESAs and sustainability of that program and we are again first in the nation. In fact, our program has much more freedom for users than any other state.
Tom Horne has been touting the same spiel about Rolex watches, vasectomies, and golf simulators for a while now. Yet, he is still unable to provide a clear reason on why those outlandish purchase requests justify setting price and frequency caps on real educational items such as musical instruments, computers, tools and supplies for vocational programs, and home economics supplies. All of these categories are allowed by law, do not specify caps, or authorize the ability to create caps. ESA law does NOT give Tom Horn, or the ESA department, authority to create their own price restrictions when they feel like it.
What’s more egregious, is that Tom Horne has already implemented the caps. As of a few days ago, parents are getting denied what they need for their students when this change has not been approved. Let’s be VERY clear, not one single parent is fighting for Tom Horne’s list of stupid items to be approved. We’re fighting for the ability to keep the educational items already approved by law. If Tom Horne is feeling attacked, he should. Tom Horne is overstepping and it’s time he steps out!
I’ve never been involved in any local political issue until now. Tom Horne is only concerned with Tom Horne, don’t believe me, read the article. He says it himself. He was barely elected and it won’t take much for fired up homeschool parents to vote him out. The program has been poorly run, badly represented and mismanaged under his leadership. It’s telling that the prior Democrat who was anti-ESA ran it better than the so-called ESA supporting Republican.
Rebuttal to Superintendent Tom Horne: Accountability is Not a “Wacky Theory”
Submitted by Jay Griffin, ESA Compliance Advocate & Policy Champion
Superintendent Horne’s April 9 opinion piece misrepresents the lawful concerns of thousands of ESA families and falsely characterizes legitimate oversight efforts as “wacky theories.” As someone who has worked closely with ESA parents and studied Arizona’s ESA statute in depth, I feel compelled to respond.
Let’s be clear: ESA parents aren’t asking for Rolexes or vasectomy kits. They are asking why the Arizona Department of Education is denying educational expenses that are clearly allowable under statute, such as:
Musical instruments used in home education and microschools
Trade tools for vocational programs
Computers and tablets essential for therapy or independent learning
Home economics supplies used for life skills development
1. There Is No Statutory Basis for Categorical Spending Caps
The ESA law does not give ADE the authority to arbitrarily limit categories of purchases based on price or Department preference. It requires that expenses be educational—not “cheap” or “politically palatable.” If a golf simulator has no educational value, deny it on that basis. But price alone is not a lawful reason to ban an item, and no statute authorizes spending caps by category.
Horne’s invocation of fringe examples is a distraction. No law requires ADE to approve luxury goods, and no one is demanding that. But using extreme cases to justify restrictions on legitimate educational materials is a false equivalency.
2. Parents Deserve Transparent, Lawful Administration
Superintendent Horne claims he created the ESA handbook restrictions with parent input. Many parents, however, have filed public records requests and spoken at the State Board of Education to clarify that their concerns were ignored or misrepresented.
The ESA program is not sustainable because of Horne’s micromanagement—it is sustainable despite it, thanks to parents who carefully budget, save, and advocate for their children’s needs.
3. Rule by Rhetoric is Not Rule of Law
Calling oversight advocates “leftist” or “divisive” while dismissing legal criticism undermines trust in our public institutions. I am not a Democrat. I am not a liberal activist. I am an Arizona parent who believes that accountability should be guided by statute, not slogans.
This is not about politics. It’s about the law.
4. What Real Leadership Looks Like
Leadership means respecting the statute. It means acknowledging that parents—especially those homeschooling or raising children with disabilities—know their child’s needs best. It means creating lawful review procedures, not doubling down on unauthorized policy by weaponizing fear.
The Department doesn’t need to be defended from parents. It needs to listen to them.
If Superintendent Horne truly believes in empowerment, he should welcome lawful oversight, transparent appeals, and legislative clarification, not dismiss those seeking it as troublemakers.
Arizona doesn’t need more campaign talking points. It needs a Commissioner for ESA Compliance who can restore lawful program administration and protect families—not just politically, but constitutionally.
Jay Griffin
Champion for ESA Oversight and Administrative Integrity
az.esa.navigator@rtznj.com
Mr. Horne keeps regurgitating the same lines over and over. The fact is out of millions of purchases you had 40 REQUESTS for what you call outlandish things. Last time I checked you had fraud coming from within your own department. Fraud that far surpasses 40 outlandish requests! Let’s put the attention where it really needs to be, stop it with your secret rules and admit that we already have limits in place. Those limits are the amount the student receives each school year!
Are you kidding me Tom Horne? We are blatantly being lied all the time about no hidden spending caps. Parents are being denied purchases already with the spending caps that have not even been enforced yet. Ward said there currently are no hidden caps which is total malarky.
Tom Horne clearly doesn’t understand what his critics are saying, dismisses the hundreds of parents who testified against his proposed rules as being unrepresentative, takes credit for things he was dragged into doing, and shows that he doesn’t trust parents. My rebuttal to Horne’s op-ed is here:
https://x.com/JasonBedrick/status/1910761846015209772
The success and growth of the ESA program are not the result of Tom Horne’s leadership—they are due to the tireless advocacy of Arizona parents who have fought to preserve educational freedom for their children. Now, those same parents are having to fight again—this time against unlawful restrictions imposed by the Department of Education.
Despite clear legislative intent and direct communication from the Arizona State Legislature, Tom Horne has continued to enforce arbitrary spending caps and limitations that go beyond what the law allows. As stated in the March 25th letter from legislators, these added constraints “overstep the boundaries of the laws passed by the Legislature” and restrict the program more than was ever intended.
These restrictions do not “protect” the program—they undermine its purpose by limiting parents’ ability to meet their children’s unique learning needs. The Legislature has not set item-level restrictions for ESA funds because it trusts parents to make those decisions.
Rather than acting in service of families, Tom Horne is positioning himself above the law and the very Legislature that created the ESA program. This is not leadership—it’s obstruction.
Arizona families deserve a superintendent who honors the law, respects the role of parents, and works collaboratively with the Legislature—not one who imposes personal judgment under the guise of accountability.
Who are these folks that are screaming to cut off their noses to spite their faces? Horne has done a great job protecting and growing ESA, and those who throw a tantrum because they don’t get what they want, when they want it, on a silver platter with all the trimmings, deserve a globe-sized circumspect side-eye.
Horne has done nothing to grow and protect the ESA program. The laws and rules protect the program with guidelines, auditing, and clear consequences for misspending. He has spent more time throwing ESA parents under the bus highlighting already DISAPPROVED expenses that the system prohibits and prevents just to make himself the hero. He brought up 40 attempted purchases of already disallowed items, some not even in the past year. The department stated they process 1.7 million orders per year. 40 out of 1.7 million is 0.0023% meaning 99.9977% are lawful orders. Limiting computers for all students based on an attempted purchase of an already disapproved watch is illogical.
As another ESA advocate already mentioned, out of 87,000 students’ ESAs only 35 concerning purchases have been attempted?! And that list was compiled over several years. The argument to put caps in place on educational items is a non-starter. Spending limits are already in place; the allotted amount in a child’s ESA. Facilitate the program by implementing efficiencies and rebuilding relationships with vendors after the poor handling of the universal expansion burned those bridges. Stop accusing homeschooling and sped families of attempting to defraud the system.
Tom Horne supports ESA money going towards private schools. He has made it clear that he doesn’t care about sped or homeschool students. He even specifically calls them out in his last email because he thinks his base is private school families. And yet the history of ESA is sped, and homeschool families have been a huge new addition.
Costs are skyrocketing right now and yet Horne is citing rolexes and golf simulators while putting restrictions on musical instruments, trade school tools, and computers. It’s a false equivalency, because he can’t make rules against those obvious spending issues because they are already rightfully limited. Instead he is completely out of touch on what it takes to educate differently abled students. And while universal opened ESA to many students not formally sped, many of us have undiagnosed students who have needs but the system to even get an official diagnoses is too difficult. This is one more reason that we need the freedom to adjust to the individual student rather than having to fight for diagnosis and notes from medical providers just to be able to buy tools like computers, tablets, trade school tools, or musical education like lessons and instruments.
Here is the non-partisan and unemotional analysis by AI from ChatGPT: In its current form, the article is not entirely appropriate for someone serving as a state superintendent of public instruction, especially considering the expectations for professionalism, neutrality, and leadership in public education. It contains overuse of first-person references and shifts focus from policy to personal vindication.
If this article were submitted as an opinion piece or editorial in a 10th grade English class, it would likely receive a C to C+ grade, based on typical high school rubrics that evaluate structure, clarity, tone, evidence, grammar, and purpose.
Ad hominem is not an argument. Do better.
Horne should’ve never been elected in the first place. He glorifies private schools and demonizes homeschooling. 35″outlandish requests out of 87,000 accounts show that most people are using the program appropriately.
Why are no controls put in place on private schools that accept public funds? There is no accountability for their significant increases in tuitio that is used to still keep struggling families out but provide more funds from already paying students.
Placing caps on spending might sound to the ill informed that you’re doing something, but what you fail to iterate is that we are responsible for budgeting a smaller amount per pupil, and STILL have state minimums to teach. What you’re doing is punishing the vast majority of the ESA parents who are fiscally responsible with our accounts and save for the larger purchases, while exposing our children to a rich, diverse array of learning.
You are not protecting our program, Tom. You are kowtowing to the SOS crowd who hate any choice that doesn’t implement their ideological beliefs. You are hurting tens of thousands of students. As someone who campaigned for you last time, I cannot wait to unseat you next time. You have done immeasurable damage with your abhorrent Mishandling of this program.
Cry me a river! You’re just digging your own hole deeper with ESA parents. We’re gonna VOTE YOU OUT!
Time for Horne to go, he’s way past his prime. What has he actually done for education? Nada.
Mr. Horne, what will be financial impact to the K-12 Arizona school system when the 30% of seats now filled by illegals are empty?