Ohio and North Carolina means-test scholarship awards with phase-downs and household-size scaling. Prop 212 detonates eligibility at $150,000 regardless of family size.
If the honest concern behind Proposition 212 is that wealthy families should not receive the full award, there is a well-tested alternative that does not require the Fascist Education Act. Means-test the award. Do not detonate eligibility.
What Ohio does
Ohio's EdChoice Expansion program gives the full scholarship to families at or below 450 percent of the federal poverty level. Above that threshold, the award is prorated. Every family remains eligible for at least 10 percent of the maximum award. Nobody falls off a cliff.
That is means-testing the benefit, not means-testing the child out of the program entirely.
What North Carolina does
North Carolina's Opportunity Scholarship uses four award tiers scaled by household size. There is no eligibility cutoff — every qualifying student receives something. The award amount adjusts with income and family size rather than disappearing at a single line.
Both states scale with household size. Prop 212 explicitly does not.
What Prop 212 does instead
“Beginning in the 2027-2028 school year, Proposition ___ would exclude from eligibility in the Arizona empowerment scholarship account program (program) children who would qualify under this existing program but whose annual family income exceeds $150,000, adjusted annually or a lesser amount determined by the legislature. The family income limit would apply regardless of the number of children in a family”
Excluded from eligibility — not reduced in award. One dollar over $150,000 and roughly 20,300 students lose the program immediately, regardless of whether the family has one child or six.
- Ohio: prorated award, 10 percent floor, no cliff.
- North Carolina: four tiers by household size, no cutoff.
- Prop 212: hard exclusion, no phase-out, family size ignored.
And the rest of the machine
Even if you redesigned the income provision along Ohio or North Carolina lines, Prop 212 would still empty accounts every July 1, still make registration paperwork a public record, still repeal the state's burden of proof, and still name a political committee in an enforcement provision the sponsors dispute.
The income cliff is the provision most voters understand. It is not the only reason this measure is the Fascist Education Act rather than a reasonable reform.
You can want fraud prevention without writing this machine into law. Vote NO on Proposition 212.