Key Points 

• Negotiations on Empowerment Scholarship Account collapsed

• Competing measures headed to voters

• Ballot measures face legal, language and campaign battles in runup to election 

Legislators twice tried to iron out a deal to reform the Empowerment Scholarship Account program this session, but now, voters will have the final say.

The legislative session ended with negotiation between lawmakers across the aisle, school choice idealogues and the state teacher’s union, with the aim of passing more tempered ESA program reforms instead of sending a more sweeping proposal to the ballot in November.

But attempts on the final day of the legislative session and an ultimately unsuccessful push for a special session after the fact left two measures on the ballot.

The Protect Education Act, a voter initiative, backed by a public school advocacy group and the state teacher’s union, aims to overhaul the Empowerment Scholarship Account program, while a legislative referral, House Concurrent Resolution 2048, proposes striking the entire measure down upon its passage.

Negotiations marked the first time the Republican majority entertained making any substantive changes to the program since its universal expansion in 2022. But after compromise fell out of reach, Republicans still seem keen on keeping the program untouched.

And now, the path to ballot is shaping out to be a drag-out fight across the board as HCR2048 must survive legal challenge and Protect Education Act proponents must cut through amendments and changes to language by the majority on legislative council.

As the legislative session trudged on, voter momentum grew behind the Protect Education Act.

The measure, introduced by Save Our Schools Arizona and the Arizona Education Association, would bar enrollment from families making more than $150,000, prohibit luxury purchases, enact background checks and fingerprinting for ESA educators, require academic testing and recoup unused program funds for public schools.

As of the filing deadline, the Protect Education Committee filed 421,451 signatures with the Secretary of State’s Office, about 165,500 more than necessary to qualify for the ballot.

In the final days of the legislative session, Republican lawmakers, the Arizona Education Association and school choice groups convened to strike up a deal.

Republicans offered a proposal to ban the purchase of luxury items, require background checks and fingerprints and slightly restrict the funds an ESA accountholder could keep in their account. It also added additional employees to administer the program at the Arizona Department of Education.

And, Republicans agreed not to move forward with House Concurrent Resolution 2040, which restricts educator union participation, and Senate Concurrent Resolution, which dictates district classroom spending.

In exchange, the AEA would withdraw the Protect Education Act from voter consideration.

Senate Democrats rejected the deal, alongside Senate President Warren Petersen and Sen. Jake Hoffman. Then, majorities in both chambers passed HCR2040, SCR1032 and HCR2048.

After sine die, conversations swirled around a special session, with a second attempt to cut the Protect Education Act, in exchange for the removal of all three legislative referrals.

But the final deal floated by the majority only offered to take the union measure off the table.

AEA and labor unions immediately dubbed it a nonstarter.

In a statement, the coalition said they were initially open to good-faith discussions when all three referrals were on the table, but the final proposal from the majority ultimately torpedoed any hope of a compromise.

“After … extremist allies intervened, their involvement left the Republican caucus divided and unable to negotiate in a serious or constructive way,” a statement from AEA and labor unions read. “As a result, we are no longer willing to participate in what has become a political circus. If Republican leadership cannot present a unified, credible proposal, there is no basis for further discussions.”

Save Our Schools Arizona, or SOSAZ, never participated in negotiations with the Legislature and instead stayed deadset on sending the full measure to voters.

“These hundreds of thousands of signatures represent the clear will of Arizona voters to place significant reforms on the ESA voucher program that is siphoning $1 billion from Arizona’s underfunded public schools every year,” SOSAZ said in a statement. “Arizona voters are more than ready to add commonsense guardrails to provide far better transparency and accountability, to curtail waste, fraud and abuse, and to ensure safety and quality academics for all students.”

Both the Protect Education Act and HCR2048 face hurdles ahead.

In a complaint filed June 24, the Protect Education, Accountability Now Committee and Save Our Schools Arizona, represented by the Center for Law in the Public Interest, claim HCR2048 “is deliberately designed to subvert the very democratic process it invokes” and is unconstitutional on two fronts.

And, during the legislative council hearing on July 8, the Republican majority made every effort to ensure HCR2048 leads with the provision to prohibit military scholarship sweeps, but obscures the piece voiding the entirety of the Protect Education Act.

“Failing to include this provision, even a mention of it, is astounding, earth-shattering frankly,” House Minority Leader Oscar De Los Santos said. “It 100% betrays our duty… to provide an impartial and accurate analysis.”

Summary language changes to the Protect Education Act approved by Republicans also swapped out “would be recouped” to “shall be taken” when talking about stockpiled scholarship dollars.

Senate Minority Leader Priya Sundareshan noted the connotation.

“You could say take, you could also say steal and burgle or thief,” Sundareshan said. “That’s the line of analysis of advocacy that we’re going down with that kind of a change.”

The majority also inserted language suggesting the political action committee can sue individual ESA families and private schools, despite the provision providing a right of action – primarily against state agencies – to compel enforcement of the act.

And Republican lawmakers approved a clause that would work in a non-severability clause, mandating a court to strike down the entire act if one provision is found unconstitutional.

“It is a lie to the voter,” Sundareshan said. “This is squarely bias and advocacy being added to the analysis language of this measure is completely false and misleading to the voters of Arizona.”