Democratic Senator Proposes Bill to Overturn Federal School Choice as Advocates Counter Claims

Arizona Senator Proposes Repeal of Federal Education Freedom Tax Credit

Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona has introduced legislation to repeal the federal Education Freedom Tax Credit program, sparking intense debate over school choice policies and their impact on public education. The Democratic lawmaker’s “Keep Public Funds in Public Schools Act” aims to dismantle the tax credit program that was passed during the Trump administration last year.

In an op-ed announcing the bill, Kelly claimed that school choice initiatives are “busting our state budget” and forcing public schools to close – assertions that have drawn swift criticism from education choice advocates.

Jenny Clark, a former member of Arizona’s State Board of Education, called Kelly’s claims “completely embarrassing” and factually inaccurate. According to Clark, Arizona’s Education Savings Account (ESA) program allocates approximately $7,500 per student, significantly less than the nearly $15,000 per student in the public school system.

“The ESA program is only 90% of state funding per public school pupil and does not include federal money,” Clark explained in a video response posted on social media. “Every time a kid goes on an ESA, taxpayers save, and the money for the ESA program was already part of the Arizona K-12 budget. There’s no budget busting here.”

Clark also challenged Kelly’s assertion that students using Empowerment Scholarships to attend private schools are causing public school closures, pointing to data showing most student transfers occur between public schools rather than to private institutions.

While Kelly described Arizona’s program as a “failed experiment,” Clark highlighted its growth to over 100,000 students as evidence of success. The senator also claimed the program primarily benefits wealthier families and is plagued by “waste, fraud and abuse,” citing reports that 20% of program spending goes toward unallowable purchases.

Clark countered that the actual figure for improper spending is closer to 1%, not 20%, and noted that the program has stronger accountability measures than many other government initiatives in the state. She referenced findings from the Common Sense Institute indicating that “the majority of ESA parents are from middle-income households,” contradicting Kelly’s claims about who benefits from the program.

The debate extends to special education services as well. Kelly argued that students using school choice programs to attend private schools lose protections under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). While technically accurate, Clark, who has children with special needs, pointed out that ESA participation among special needs students (19%) exceeds their representation in public schools (14%).

“Those families are saying, ‘My kid is not getting what my child needs in the traditional system,'” Clark explained. “I’m better off using an empowerment scholarship for my child.”

School choice advocate Corey DeAngelis attributed Kelly’s position to political influence, noting the senator’s endorsements and financial backing from teachers’ unions. “The National Education Association funnels over 98% of its political contributions to Democrats,” DeAngelis claimed, suggesting this creates a conflict of interest in education policy debates.

Critics have also highlighted what they see as hypocrisy in Kelly’s position, noting that while he describes himself as “a product of public schools,” his daughter reportedly attended The Gregory School, a private academy in Tucson.

The proposed legislation comes as the federal Education Freedom program prepares to take effect in January. Already, 29 states have opted in, making their students eligible for scholarships. States choosing not to participate could forfeit access to as much as $23 billion in educational funding, according to some analyses.

Despite Kelly’s bill having the endorsement of “more than 160 education and disability rights organizations,” its passage faces significant challenges in the closely divided Senate. The upcoming November elections will ultimately determine the chamber’s composition for 2027-2028, potentially reshaping the debate over federal education policy and school choice initiatives.