Arizona is one of the nation’s leading states in offering families education choice—and families are loving it.
Three out of four parents support the state’s Empowerment Scholarship Accounts program, which enables families to choose the learning environments that work best for their children. Parents can use these funds to pay for private school tuition, tutoring, textbooks, homeschool curricula, online courses, special needs therapy, and more.
The typical student in this program receives about $7,500 per year, less than half the $15,300 per pupil at Arizona’s district schools.
But Democrat Attorney General Kris Mayes wants to put a stop to even that.
Yet again, Mayes is waging lawfare against the more than 90,000 students using the state’s education choice program.
Earlier this year, Mayes ordered the Arizona Department of Education to adopt an extra-statutory regulation—one she invented from thin air—that undermined the ability of the department to approve education savings account expense requests in a timely manner. Now, she’s using exaggerated concerns over misspending to achieve the same end: throwing sand in the program’s gears.
Late last month, Mayes sent a letter to Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne ordering him to cease automatically approving account purchases under $2,000, a practice Mayes argued “has led to ESA [Empowerment Scholarship Account] holders purchasing prohibited items […] with taxpayer funds.”
Horne, a former attorney general, responded that Mayes’s issue lies not with him but with the state Legislature, which modified the program’s statute last year to require the education department to adopt “risk-based auditing procedures” for the program. The revision was signed into law by Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat.
The risk-based auditing provision seems like a boring, in-the-weeds detail. But such details can make or break a program like the Empowerment Scholarship Accounts—and Mayes knows it.
Before the Legislature revised the statute, the Arizona Department of Education was manually approving every single account purchase or reimbursement request. This “review every penny” approach was causing massive backlogs and delays.
There were nearly 11,000 transactions in Quarter 3 of this year alone. It’s impossible for the department’s small staff to review each transaction in a timely manner. Instead, families were forced to wait over two months to purchase things like books or curricular materials.
But families can’t wait months just to buy a textbook or pay their child’s tutor or school. Those who couldn’t wait had to pay out of pocket—and it took nearly five months to be reimbursed.
The delays caused families considerable frustration. A survey of families using the accounts found that two-thirds were dissatisfied with how the program was being administered, and about 8 in 10 were frustrated by long wait times for expense approvals and reimbursements.
It wasn’t supposed to be this way. ClassWallet, the vendor that operates the program, promised in its 2023 contract with the state “to automate the approval of platform transactions and reduce the [department’s] reliance on manual reviews of platform purchases,” claiming that the artificial intelligence it was developing “provides the State a path to a zero-approval queue, minimizing staffing and costs.”
Unfortunately, ClassWallet has thus far failed to deliver on that promise. And while artificial intelligence might one day allow parents to instantly access their funds while reducing fraud to zero, it’s not there yet.
In the meantime, the department needed a practical solution that simultaneously maximized user-friendliness while minimizing fraud.
That’s where risk-based auditing comes in. In response to parental frustration with the manual review process, the legislature modified the statute, ordering the Arizona Department of Education to adopt a risk-based auditing approach.
To comply with legislative intent, the department decided to automatically approve spending requests below $2,000, then audit accounts on the back end.
The new approach has been a stunning success. Parents can get most items immediately, and wait times for purchase requests above $2,000 dropped from two months to just three or four days. And the risk-based auditing system produced a high degree of financial accountability.
Unfortunately, though, the media seized upon the tiny percentage of ESA holders who are taking advantage of the looser rules. Sensationalist “journalists” with a long history of factually challenged attacks on school choice programs breathlessly reported that account holders purchased a variety of ineligible expenses, including diamond rings and necklaces, flights and hotel stays, and even lingerie.
What they neglected to report was the scale of the misspending.
Last month, the Arizona Department of Education revealed that its internal audit of two years’ worth of ESA spending had turned up $622,000 in ESA funds that are “possible fraud or misuse.” That’s less than 0.05% of total ESA spending from 0.4% of account holders.
More than that, anyone engaged in misspending will be forced to pay the money back and could face prosecution. The department reports that it is “in the process of collecting more than $600,000” in improper spending, and it’s already suspended 400 accounts. Some have been referred some to the attorney general for further investigation and prosecution.
One would think that the attorney general would be impressed by this high level of accountability. But instead, she’s demanding that the Education Department abandon risk-based auditing in favor of the failed manual-review process that produced months-long wait times.
Clearly, accountability is not the goal here. Arizona’s attorney general is using misspending as a pretext. If accountability were her real concern, she’d be raising alarms about all the waste, fraud, and abuse in the district school system—such as the $12 billion worth of unused and underutilized buildings that Arizona school districts are sitting on, or the record $7.8 billion they’re holding in cash reserves.
Mayes says she is concerned with stopping the 0.4% of account holders committing fraud. But her demands would make the program unworkable for the over 99% of families who are just trying to do right by their children.
Punishing fraud is necessary. Every government program has some amount of fraud and abuse, and public officials have a duty to implement rules that keep fraud to a bare minimum. But undermining a program’s effectiveness does not serve the public interest, especially when that program is helping kids get access to a better education and a brighter future.
The attorney general’s demands are unreasonable and pretextual. Acceding to her demands would not fix the state’s education choice program—it would break it. Horne was right to tell the attorney general to go pound sand.
Jason Bedrick is a Research Fellow at The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Education Policy.
It says a lot when an influential leader takes the time to help other emerging leaders who are fighting on the same battlefield. How many great leaders would stop what they’re doing—and bring their entourage with them—to meet with a bunch of moms battling tyranny at their sons’ high school?
Charlie Kirk was a force who stirred a nation to wake up. But it will be his heart for Jesus, people, and American ideals that changes this nation for good. God used Charlie Kirk to bless a generation of youth—but he also inspired and challenged millions of women like us!
Back in 2021, Arizona Women of Action (AZWOA) was a new movement finding our way when Charlie came to my home to help a band of Brophy moms fight back against a near-mandate that every student comply and get the Covid-19 injection. We had become the voice for hundreds of parents. We gathered at auditoriums and produced a petition signed by 850 or so citizens (including over 30 AZ lawmakers) to urge Brophy College Prep to consider medical concerns and more studies. Still, they ignored the community.
So, we decided to call Charlie Kirk. He came around 7 pm the end of August 2021 to my dining room table, along with some of his staff, his pastor Rob McCoy, a former U.S. Congressman from the Midwest (who had been on his podcast earlier), and Charlie’s newly wedded wife Erika. He listened to the facts and the effects on families. And in the following days Charlie called out Brophy’s board on his podcast and social media. This made a huge difference, and concessions were eventually made (though no public acknowledgement came regarding our cause).
In the months and years since then, Arizona Women of Action collaborated at the local level with Charlie and his team here in Arizona. We spoke on panels with Turning Point USA and were flown out to Detroit in 2024 to present two break-out sessions at ‘The People’s Convention.’ We’ve had tables at Turning Point Faith events, and of course we included them at AZWOA’s. Charlie Kirk recognized the power of grassroots and generously invited hundreds to collaborate with him for the cause of freedom.
Before the 2024 election, Charlie and Turning Point partnered with AZWOA on a get-out-the-vote ballot initiative to reach women—a tough demographic. American men had been responding to conservative messaging, but most women still leaned Left. So, a strategic national organization saw the power of joining the forces of Turning Point and AZWOA. I was blessed to get to know Charlie better. Once when we were backstage, Charlie asked whether I thought America’s women could be awakened like men had. He cared about reaching EVERYONE with the truth. And not just the truth about values, virtue, family, science, philosophy, and Americanism (though he DID care deeply for those).
Charlie Kirk wanted everyone (ultimately) to know the Truth that can set them free. It begins with knowing and following your Creator. You and I cannot be free in any other way. In fact, THERE IS NO FREEDOM WITHOUT GOD. That is WHY Americans are free. Because the God of the Bible is our foundation.
I answered Charlie’s question by committing to him that we’d work as hard as he worked—at our mission to awaken women. We would engage women in the most effective, lasting way we could—through local relationships in action. Because of Charlie Kirk, and the hearts poured out by his team and ours, Arizona reached thousands and won by the highest margin of victory of all swing states.
But Charlie knew that America couldn’t be satisfied by winning political victories for conservatives and Christians. That’s fleeting and hollow by itself. Lasting joy—lasting victory—comes when God wins souls to a new life and hope for eternity! And He used Charlie Kirk for this specific purpose. Thank you, Charlie, for saying YES to God—and for all you did for each one of us!
But now what about you? Don’t miss this opportunity. God made YOU just as uniquely and specifically for a purpose that will bless everyone in the sphere He’s given to YOU.
What will YOU do, knowing you are here for a purpose, knowing people NEED YOU to stand up for them—and the truth that sets them free? What is worth your time, treasure and talent? What will you sacrifice to make a difference?
Let us all honor the message and memory of Charlie Kirk’s life!
“Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain.” – 1 Corinthians 15:58
“Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in this same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how can it be made salty again?” – Matthew 5:10-13
Kim Miller is the President and Founder of Arizona Women of Action. You can find out more about their work here.
The tragic assassination of Charlie Kirk is not only the loss of a cultural leader, but also a chilling reminder of what happens when we confuse speech with violence. Kirk was a tireless champion of free expression, and his death underscores the urgent need to examine how the suppression of dialogue can set the stage for real violence.
In his own words, Kirk once warned: “When people stop talking, really bad stuff starts… when you stop having a human connection with someone you disagree with, it becomes a lot easier to want to commit violence against that group. What we as a culture have to get back to is being able to have reasonable disagreement where violence is not an option.” His words now read as both a prophecy and a plea for the culture of dialogue we so desperately need.
Suppressing Speech Is Not The Answer
Psychology teaches us that suppressing thoughts doesn’t eliminate them — it simply pushes them underground. Clinicians see this dynamic in individuals who repress emotions until they reemerge as passive aggression or even have destructive outbursts. The same pattern plays out in society: When people are told their perspectives are unspeakable, frustration grows, mistrust deepens, and the risk of acting out increases. Ironically, attempts to enforce “safe spaces” by silencing dissent often make communities more volatile. True safety comes from open dialogue, where conflict can be addressed directly rather than festering in silence.
The Danger Of “Social Justice Warrior” Rhetoric
When individuals adopt the mindset of “social justice warriors,” the very word “war” can take on a literal dimension. Combined with rhetoric that labels opponents as “Nazis,” “fascists,” or even as “threats to existence” for questioning prevailing ideologies, we create a psychological framework where violence feels like moral self-defense. Social psychologists call this groupthink — a process in which consensus becomes so rigid that dissenters can be irrationally cast as evil. Ingredients of groupthink include a belief in the moral superiority of the group, direct pressure on dissenters, strong outgroup stereotypes, and collective rationalization — all of which were present here. In such an atmosphere, attacking a speaker can feel like a righteous duty. Tragically, Kirk’s willingness to question aspects of trans ideology and other sacred cows of certain political groups placed him squarely in the crosshairs of this warped moral reasoning.
Words Are Not Violence
Words can sting, but they are not the same as physical harm. Equating speech with violence not only inflates anxiety but also undermines resilience. It conditions people to believe that discomfort is intolerable and that retaliation — even violent retaliation—is justified. By contrast, protecting free speech fosters self-efficacy — the belief in one’s ability to navigate challenges constructively. It strengthens authentic connection, reduces the loneliness that comes from self-censorship, and creates opportunities for genuine problem-solving.
Charlie Kirk’s assassination must be seen for what it is: a catastrophic failure to uphold the principle that dialogue is the antidote to violence, not its cause. As Kirk himself urged, the future of our culture depends on whether we can “have reasonable disagreement where violence is not an option.”
To honor his legacy, we must recommit to that vision — resisting the falsehood that words are violence — and embracing the truth that dialogue, even when difficult, is the path to peace. This is the very theme I explore in my book Can I Say That? Why Free Speech Matters and How to Use It Fearlessly, which offers psychological tools for protecting free speech and building the resilience that open dialogue requires. The book includes examples such as Andy Ngo and Riley Gaines, who have suffered violence for their speech — and tragically, Charlie Kirk is now added to that list in the worst possible way. I urge you to channel your grief into action — do not be silenced but use your voice and stand together. It’s exactly what Charlie would have wanted.
Dr. Chloe Carmichael is contributor to the Daily Caller News Foundation, a clinical psychologist, USA Today bestselling author of “Nervous Energy,” and a visiting fellow at Independent Women. Her upcoming book “Can I Say That? Why Free Speech Matters and How to Use It Fearlessly” (Skyhorse, Nov. 2025) explores the mental health benefits of open dialogue and the costs of self-censorship.
President Donald Trump has done an admirable job at defanging the IRS, which was converted into a weaponized agency targeting their political enemies.
Chief Justice John Marshall famously pronounced early in our nation’s history that “the power to tax is the power to destroy.”
The Democrats inside the Biden IRS took that to heart. They hired thousands of new IRS agents to harass businesses, rich people, and, in some cases, Republican donors. Some of the lieutenants to the infamous IRS enforcer Lois Lerner, the woman who aimed her agency’s auditing guns at conservative groups, are still active at the tax agency.
One of the most noxious of Biden’s left-over regulatory rules applies to partnerships – an increasingly common form of business organization and expansion. Microsoft’s revenues/profits flow down through its business partners.
Business partnerships are vital contributors to the U.S. economy. A 2024 study by Ernst and Young for the Small Business Entrepreneur Council found that 10 million Americans work for these partnerships, and they generate $1.3 trillion in GDP.
The IRS evidently thinks they are TOO successful.
A gang of holdovers from the Biden administration and the ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, Ron Wyden of Oregon, are trying to administratively change the taxation of pass-throughs and partnerships and subject these entities to “guilty until proven innocent” audits. The changes would alter the “economic substance doctrine” which determines how the taxes on a business’s profits are applied to the partners. If the entities are found liable for increased tax assessments, they could face a giant tax bill AND a confiscatory 60% strict liability penalty.
These partnership rules are admittedly murky and may need updated protections against potential tax evasion abuses. But this rewrite of the tax laws would be applied WITHOUT CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL. The Trump admin promised to end this illegal rewrite of the tax laws, but because of the turmoil at the IRS – with a revolving door of IRS Commissioners – the Biden-era rules still stand.
Meanwhile, Wyden has introduced legislation to codify these new rules into law. Get this: the Joint Committee on Taxation scores these IRS “reforms” as a potential $730 billion business tax increase over the next decade.
If the IRS isn’t told to cease and desist, they could be the perpetrators of the largest non-congressionally approved tax increase in American history.
The Trump administration is supposed to be easing the tax burden on our businesses and employers to make them more globally competitive, not handing them a three-quarter trillion-dollar tax INCREASE.
Trump or Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent should fix this tax raid on business before it reverses some of the job-creating benefits of Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill.
Stephen Moore is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, a visiting senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, and a co-founder of Unleash Prosperity.
It was Biden’s biggest “accomplishment.” The so-called Inflation Reduction Act, which he later admitted had nothing to do with inflation (it actually did, just not in the direction the name suggested) but was really about dumping billions (really trillions) into subsidizing the green new scam. It was the biggest acceleration towards the “Net Zero” climate scam resulting in utilities across the country, especially here in Arizona, spamming the grid with unreliable energy generation such as solar, wind, and battery storage, driving up rates for utility customers while shattering reliability.
What finally made it through Congress and was signed into law on July 4th terminated tax credits for electric vehicles, “energy efficient” home improvements, and residential solar this year. As for the much larger credits, those subsidizing grid scale solar and wind farms, it’s much more complicated.
Nothing undermines confidence in elections quite like discovering they can be compromised by foreign billionaires or botched altogether through complex schemes like ranked-choice voting.
This year, legislatures across the country took aim at both of these urgent threats to election integrity, as outlined by a recent report from Honest Elections Project. Altogether, eight states closed a critical legal loophole allowing foreign billionaires to flood ballot measure campaigns with foreign dark money. Meanwhile, six more states banned ranked-choice voting, the most legislative bans in a single year. In other words, conservative states have made 2025 a banner year for election reform.
Most Americans would be shocked to learn how vulnerable our elections are to foreign influence. Federal law forbids foreign nationals from donating to candidates or political parties yet offers no such protection for state or local ballot measures. This means that a foreign billionaire cannot influence a particular race, but he can spend millions to pass a constitutional amendment that rewrites the rules of the entire election system.
That loophole has been a gift to Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss. According to the watchdog group Americans for Public Trust, Wyss has directed roughly $280 million into the Sixteen Thirty Fund, which has simultaneously spent more than $130 million in foreign-tied funds into ballot campaigns in 26 states. As shocking as these figures are, they likely represent the tip of the iceberg. After all, the same loophole can just as easily be abused by foreign nationals doing the bidding of China and Russia.
Fortunately, conservative states are taking action to ensure that ballot measures are no longer a Trojan Horse for foreign interference. After Ohio led the way in 2024, eight states this year—Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Tennessee, and Wyoming—enacted new laws to ban foreign nationals and the groups they finance from funding ballot measure campaigns. Even Kentucky’s Democratic governor signed the bill into law, proof that defending elections from foreign influence should not be a partisan proposition.
That hasn’t stopped many on the left from fighting to keep these loopholes open for purely partisan gain. Marc Elias, Democrats’ top election lawyer, went to court in Ohio in 2024 and again in Kansas this year to block these bans. He lost both times, once in front of an Obama-appointed judge. States clearly have the authority to ban foreign funding, and every state should.
The same is true of ranked-choice voting, and 2025 was an incredible year in the ongoing fight to stop its spread.
Under ranked-choice voting, voters are asked to rank multiple candidates. Ballots are counted in rounds as losing candidates are eliminated and votes are redistributed. If a voter fails to rank enough candidates, the ballot is “exhausted” and thrown out. Candidates can win the most first-place votes but lose the election. Delays are inevitable; Alaska’s ranked-choice voting tabulation does not even begin until 15 days after Election Day. In California, a tabulation error once led to the wrong candidate being certified. Ranked-choice voting turns what should be a straightforward election into a complicated black box.
Fortunately, the public has seen the problems with this system from the start. In 2024, ranked-choice voting advocates spent nearly $100 million dollars on ballot measures promoting the scheme in six states. All failed. Only the District of Columbia adopted it, which is hardly a ringing endorsement.
Between 2022 and 2024, 11 states banned ranked-choice voting. And this year, six more – Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, North Dakota, West Virginia, and Wyoming – acted to make the scheme illegal. And in Utah, lawmakers allowed a failed pilot program to expire, meaning ranked-choice voting will come to an end there, too.
As extraordinary as this progress is, conservatives must not become complacent. States like Michigan, Florida, Nebraska, North Carolina, Montana, and Arizona have all seen significant amounts of foreign-tied money pumped into ballot issue campaigns, but so far have not acted. And progressives remain committed to pushing ranked-choice voting, especially after witnessing the scheme elevate a Democratic Socialist in New York. Ranked-choice voting lobbyists are working legislatures nationwide, and activists are already gathering signatures for another ballot measure in the presidential battleground of Michigan.
That should serve as a warning. When it comes to securing our elections, the job is never done. This was a banner year for election integrity. Conservative leaders must keep the momentum going in 2026 and beyond.
