Democrats like to believe they are the party of compassion and kindness, but the reality in most blue cities says otherwise. For years, homeless encampments have been springing up in liberal-run cities like Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. And in recent years, this trend made its way into Phoenix.
Just blocks from the state capitol, amidst what was once a thriving business district, a sprawling encampment of around 1,000 homeless has come to be known as “The Zone.” It’s a place where drug use, drug deals, defecation, urination, sexual acts, assaults, rape, and murder are frequently committed out in the open—often with little to no consequences. The problem has even gotten so bad that the Phoenix Fire Department won’t respond to calls inside The Zone without assistance from the Phoenix Police Department and assurance that the scene of the incident is secure.
But crime within The Zone is only one part of the problem…
Arizona’s bet on universal school choice is already paying off. At the same time that enrollment in the state’s Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program is surging, the state’s revenue surplus has gone through the roof.
In the first four months of 2023 alone, enrollment in Arizona’s ESA program has soared by 7,000 students, bringing the total number of children served to over 51,000. And now, new data released this past week by the nonpartisan Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) show that over a similar period, the state’s estimated revenue surplus has surged by an extra $750 million, putting the total state budget surplus this year at $2.5 billion.
Before Arizona’s historic universal ESA expansion took effect, just 12,000 students were participating in the program. This means that during the first school year where every family in the state can use their child’s public education dollars to customize that student’s schooling, nearly 40,000 new students have received ESA support for private or at-home learning opportunities. And all this is happening as state coffers have overflown with over $1 billion dollars more in revenue than originally forecast.
Sources: Arizona Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) FY 2023 Appropriations Report: $1,077,036,700 projected FY 2023 ending balance based on enacted budget. Arizona JLBC Finance Advisory Committee April 2023 Briefing Materials: $2,530,157,100 projected FY 2023 ending balance (revised). Arizona Department of Education ESA Program 2022 Quarter 4 Report: 12,127 ESA students. Arizona Department of Education ESA Program Homepage as of April 17, 2023: 51,849 ESA students.
Indeed, this extraordinary economic momentum comes in the wake of Arizona enacting the nation’s first fully universal ESA program. Sponsored by state Representative Ben Toma and signed into law by former Governor Doug Ducey last summer, the new legislation took effect in September 2022.
Since then, leftwing activist organizations such as Save Our Schools (SOS) Arizona have attempted to portray the program as financially ruinous. Yet this same organization—whose leaders were forced to admit that they had miscounted the number of signatures they collected in opposition to the program last fall by more than 50,000—has again opted for partisan wish-fulfillment rather than numerical reality.
With a typical ESA scholarship award around $7,000 per student—that is, about half of the roughly $14,000 spent on average per student in a public district school—the ESA program now serves roughly two kids for the cost of each one in a traditional public school district.
Unsurprisingly, when compared to the roughly $15 billion now spent each year on Arizona public schools, the ESA program makes up only a sliver of total K-12 spending. Scholarship awards for students who’ve joined the program under the universal ESA expansion amount to roughly 2% of the total spending on public school students. In fact, despite claims by SOS and other opponents of school choice that ESAs have drained public schools of funding, state lawmakers increased ongoing public school funding by more than $600 million in the same year that the universal ESA expansion took effect.
In short, the ESA program makes up only a small share of the state’s spending on education, but with over 50,000 participants and growing, it will continue to provide a lifeline for all students in need. It’s already done just that for students with special needs and other vulnerable populations ever since Goldwater created the nation’s first ESA program in Arizona more than a decade ago—delivering life-changing results at lower costs than public school offerings.
Despite such real-world impacts on families, critics have doubled down to suggest that the program’s success is a sign of failure and financial unsustainability. Indeed, teachers union-aligned groups have suggested that because more students have opted into the ESA program than originally estimated, it must be too expensive. (Note the sharp contrast to their usual take on education spending, which is only ever portrayed as an investment, rather than a cost.)
It is true that demand for ESAs has already beaten initial estimates, and it is true that the expansion, which passed in the final days of last year’s legislative session, was enacted separately from the state budget—meaning ESA awards were not incorporated into the projected costs of the original budget. But ESA award amounts have already been factored into the state’s updated budget projections released this January for the current and upcoming fiscal year. In fact, it’s the very same state budget analysts who assume that the program will grow even further to 57,000 students by the end of this school year who also report the state is now sitting on a $2.5 billion cash surplus for next year. (Of note, that surplus is in addition to the state’s $1.4 billion rainy day fund, which former Governor Ducey and conservative lawmakers also accumulated to cushion the state from any future economic turbulence.)
The state budget analysts were characteristically cautious in their recommendations to spread out the massive war chest. They suggested that if all $2.5 billion were spent this year, the state budget would simply break even next year, before the balance increases again to an estimated $600 million surplus by 2026. But in any case, their projections make clear that the same Arizona lawmakers who unleashed universal school choice have helped steward robust economic vitality and have created a situation where Arizona lawmakers are again weighing how best to spend or return excess tax revenues. Indeed, as the JLBC analysts reported in January—even before the latest upward revisions—the state has enjoyed “an increase of $1.06 billion over the original revenue estimate included in the FY 2023 budget enacted in June 2022” due to “significantly stronger revenue growth than originally projected.”
There is no doubt that global financial uncertainty, the risk of fiscal and monetary mismanagement from Washington D.C., and warnings of mild or severe recessions should perennially weigh on the minds of state legislators. But when it comes to ESAs and the state’s financial solvency, one thing is clear: universal school choice and successful economic stewardship easily go hand in hand.
Arizona has just proven it.
Matt Beienburg is the Director of Education Policy at the Goldwater Institute. He also serves as director of the institute’s Van Sittert Center for Constitutional Advocacy.
If you enjoy losing your freedom for a goal that is impossible to achieve, the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) has you covered.
MAG recently released its proposed measures to bring Maricopa County into compliance with ozone standards set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and it’s a total disaster. Along with a whole host of regulations on various business activities, the proposed restrictions include banning the internal combustion engine and gas appliances. That’s right, just like in California, they are coming for your cars and your gas stoves. But that’s not all. This proposal would also put limits on things like lawn and garden equipment, motorized boating, and water heaters…
Americans were outraged to learn of the Nashville school shooting, where a transgender female shot and killed three children and three adults at a Christian school.
As always, a fierce political debate broke out after the murders. Gun control advocates, mostly Democrats, again made impassioned and often vitriolic pleas for more stringent gun laws.
It would be a wonderful world if there were some laws we could pass, some clever strategy to keep criminals from having guns. The big problem is that gun control laws don’t work, much as we might wish otherwise. If they did, Chicago, Baltimore, and other big cities, with their strict gun laws on the books, wouldn’t be the murderous hell-holes that they are.
It’s been pointed out many times, but it’s still true: violent criminals don’t follow the law. The victims are the law-abiding citizens who bring knives to a gun fight.
Conservative commentator Matt Vespa recently wrote a thoughtful column advocating instead for posting “resource officers” in every school. He notes that it took 14 minutes for police to arrive at the Nashville shooting, and that other killers have had even more time before facing significant deterrence.
On the other hand, there are many accounts of officers in schools who were able to prevent potential murders just by being present.
But there’s a problem. There are approximately 115,000 K-12 schools in the U.S., according to Dun and Bradstreet. If we lowball an estimate of $50,000 yearly to support an FTE, that means placing an officer in every school would, according to my back-of-the-napkin calculator, cost at least $5 and $6 billion annually.
That would be a justifiable cost if we were facing an epidemic of school killings, but the numbers tell a different story. Although the especially traumatic nature of school killings and extensive media coverage make the shootings seem commonplace, for the last 35 years, school shooting deaths have hovered around 20–30 per year, less than one for every two states.
From 2010 to 2019, there were 305 incidents involving guns and 207 deaths—or about 20 per year. Arizona, with about 2,700 schools, has had one shooting death ever, in 1987, in addition to four suicides and one accidental death.
For American schools, this computes to an annual average of one shooting death for every 4,000 schools. Full-time school resource officers would, over the course of a career, have an infinitesimal chance of preventing even one shooting.
Throwing money at a problem without a sober cost-benefit analysis, however passionately we may feel about it, seldom works out. A more practical solution would be to authorize one or more teachers per school to carry concealed weapons.
These teachers would be volunteers who are licensed carriers and would undergo additional training in the very focused area (confronting an armed criminal in a school setting) that their duty might entail. They would receive a modest stipend.
Would recruiting be a problem? I like to think there are enough teacher-heroes with a heart for their students who would be willing and up to the task if called upon. Remember, it has often been teachers who answered the call when peace officers cowered in emergency situations, as in Uvalde and Parkland.
Moreover, the deterrent effect of armed teachers would be inarguable. Schools would be changed from soft targets with idiotic “Gun Free Zone” signs into places where criminals with bad intentions would know they were risking their lives by entering.
Unfortunately, the teachers’ unions have pitched a fit. Their purported worries include the safety of their members, the qualifications of the volunteers, and the image of teachers involved with violence.
Their arguments are easily rebuffed, remembering that no solution is perfect, and the point is to pick the best available. But the unions are powerful, tough competitors in public debate, even when the facts and arguments are against them, as when the schools were shut down during COVID on their demand.
Wasting a few more billion in a nation over $30 trillion in debt may not seem like much, but we have to start somewhere. Let’s believe in our educators and look to American resilience and resourcefulness to protect our children.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
Governor Hobbs has proposed a budget that is a radical’s dream. It increases funding for a laundry list of pet programs of the radical left, while at the same time cutting programs that are supported by the vast majority of Arizonans. The Hobbs budget expands funding for illegal immigrants and increases taxpayer funding of abortions. At the same time, Hobbs would kill the expansion of our popular parental school choice program and defund the Border Strike Force.
House Majority Leader Leo Biasiucci describes the Hobbs budget: “Attacking school choice, peddling state-funded abortions, and incentivizing illegal immigration in Arizona are all non-starters and, frankly, something you’d expect to see proposed by a politician in California, not Arizona.”
In response to Hobbs’ radical budget, Republicans passed a responsible, “baseline budget” which would continue state spending at last year’s budget levels, with adjustments to education and health care programs to account for inflation. When asked if Hobbs would reject the baseline budget Rep. Biasiucci responded, “If she does that, it’s party politics. This is everything we need to make sure that schools don’t shut down, make sure government stays open, make sure all our essential services stay open while we figure out what we need to do with the rest of the money.” Unfortunately, Hobbs vetoed the legislature’s reasonable budget. She is playing a game of chicken, threatening a government shutdown.
If Republicans stay united, the taxpayers will be protected from the free-spending Democrats. Given the one-vote margin in each house, we can’t afford to lose a single Republican vote. To protect us from Hobbs’ costly budget, it is essential that Republicans stick together.
I have heard disturbing reports that some Republicans are quietly signaling they are willing to cut a deal with the Democrats behind the backs of their leadership. That would severely weaken the bargaining position of Republicans as they negotiate for smaller government. More important, it would betray their constituents who voted for them based on their promises to limit the growth of state government.
Why on earth would Republicans be willing to cave to the Hobbs budget? There are a couple of possibilities. They could trade their votes for a pet project. Or they could be self-promoters with a messianic complex seeking acclaim from the liberal press as “rising above the partisan bickering.”
Believe it or not, it could happen here in Arizona. Around the country and in Congress, turncoat Republicans have made side deals to expand government spending. And though it seems odd, these quislings frequently represent “safe” Republican districts. Senator Romney comes to mind, and he is not alone.
In California, back when Jerry Brown was governor, a Republican representing the most Republican district in the state voted for the bloated budget after she had promised to oppose it. When asked why she flipped, she blithely replied that she got a new library for UC Irvine. Another Republican sold out for even less—Willie Brown promised him an office with a wet bar in it. Judas at least got thirty pieces of silver. As sure as night follows day, the press heaped praise on both of them for their “courage” in avoiding a budget impasse. But in truth, they voted against the interests of their constituents.
To avoid such a betrayal from happening here in Arizona, conservatives must press their representatives for a firm commitment that they won’t cut a side deal on the budget. We must lock in those commitments now and shut down any side deals before negotiations start in earnest.
My State Senator is Ken Bennett, and my representatives are Quang Nguyen and Selena Bliss. LD 1 is the most Republican district in the state. Conservatives shouldn’t have to worry about them keeping faith with their promises to the voters, but as President Reagan told us, “Trust but verify.”
Therefore, I am asking all three for a firm commitment that they will only vote for a budget that is supported by the rest of their Republican colleagues. The great conservative Senator Everett Dirksen famously said, “When I fell the heat, I see the light.” And I hope conservatives in all Republican districts will turn up the heat, so Republicans stay united to protect the wallets of the taxpayers.
Otherwise, it will be every legislator for themselves, and they’ll cut the hog fat. And we the taxpayers will be the hog.
Pat Nolan is the Director Emeritus of the Nolan Center for Justice at the American Conservative Union, and lives in Prescott.
We’re just over two years into President Biden’s presidency, and it appears the push for the Green New Deal is in full swing. They’re coming for your money. They’re coming for your cars. And now, yes, they are indeed coming for your gas stoves.
Of course, these Green New Deal activists don’t want you to know that. That’s why the mere mention of a potential gas stove ban draws eye-rolling responses from the left—like this piece from The New York Times that wants to assure you that the Biden administration is not planning a ban on gas stoves. Or the White House putting out a statement that the president does not support such a ban.
