Obstruction of ESA audit is unbecoming

Iowa taxpayers provided about $104 million last school year directly to parents choosing to send their K-12 children to private schools. 
The price tag for these education savings accounts, or vouchers, is expected to climb to $294 million this school year as more families become eligible. During the 2025-2026 school year, when income eligibility standards are removed, the cost is expected to reach $344 million, the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency estimates.
I am not here to debate the merits of this program. Others can do that.
But there should be no room for debate over whether this use of tax money for education savings accounts should be subject to unfettered scrutiny by the state auditor’s office, any more than the auditor should have authority to examine the Iowa Judicial Branch’s mishandling of court fees paid by litigants, or the Iowa Department of Transportation’s lax inventory controls, or the University of Iowa’s 50-year lease of its utilities system, or any other use of state tax money. 
Our president and his supporters across the nation have emphasized how important it is to root out waste, fraud and abuse within federal programs. That mission is just as important in state government, too, and it is immaterial which party’s initial comes after the state auditor’s name.
This desire for accountability for government spending decisions is not some idea that was cooked up just recently in Iowa by politicians who object to the education savings accounts. In fact, this oversight has been part of Iowa government for nearly 170 years.
The state auditor’s office was created when the Iowa constitution was adopted by the voters in 1857. The constitution laid out the office’s duties and powers — including that the auditor is responsible for ensuring that government officials use taxpayer money properly and that government is accountable to its citizens.
The office has presented itself as the taxpayers’ watchdog under the leadership of Republican auditors and Democrats alike. The auditor’s official seal has long featured a dog with its paws draped over a key next to a locked strongbox.
The authority of the state auditor has been in the news since Rob Sand, the current auditor, released his office’s report last week on the internal financial controls that are in place, or not in place, in various state departments. His harshest criticism was directed at the education savings accounts.
“The bottom line is this,” Sand told reporters. “This administration won’t let us audit the controls on $100 million of your tax money going out to the voucher program. That program is likely to grow to over $300 million next year, and we cannot say that it has appropriate and reasonable controls for waste and abuse.”
Gov. Kim Reynolds and officials at the Department of Education and Department of Revenue have balked at Sand’s requests for certain documents about the financial controls established to administer the school vouchers. Officials claim they are prevented from providing the records because of the way they were requested.

Sand is not buying that explanation — nor should taxpayers.
Sand told reporters, “We can’t say that the state has sufficient controls to detect financial reporting errors or waste, fraud and abuse. The mission of this office is to shine a light on how the state spends your money, hold government agencies and lawmakers accountable, and help prevent waste and abuse. 
“We can’t do that when the governor gives her approval to hiding documents and thumbing their nose at transparency for Iowans.”
The governor defended her administrators’ responses. She said Sand’s opposition to the education savings accounts has rendered his audits biased.
“The auditor should be nonpartisan, non-biased,” Reynolds told reporters. “But … he’s not a nonpartisan auditor. He’s a political actor. He’s using his office for political gain.”
Setting aside the questions about Sand’s political goals or motivations, let’s look at the transparency issues wrapped up in the discussion of the education savings accounts. Yes, Rob Sand is a Democrat. Yes, Kim Reynolds is a Republican. But transparency and citizen accountability should be nonpartisan.
The question of whether the eligibility requirements for the education savings accounts are being properly followed is not a partisan question. The requirements and procedures are either being followed — or they are not. 
Odyssey is a New York company hired by the Reynolds administration to manage the applications and payments to voucher recipients. The question of whether Odyssey’s processes are meeting its contract obligations is not partisan. The contract is either being followed — or it is not. And it is the state auditor’s job under the Iowa constitution to offer his analysis to state leaders and the public.
If the president’s DOGE, his government efficiency initiative, is analyzing the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to see if it has abused its authority — authority laid out by bipartisan votes in Congress — then it is difficult to understand how the Iowa state auditor’s examination of the new education savings accounts is somehow improper because of Sand’s political views or party registration.
The goal for Republicans and Democrats in Iowa should be the same when it comes to the private school vouchers: The review by Sand’s staff will either (a) detect shortcomings in the administration of the program and suggest changes that are needed, or (b) find the program is properly managed.
The optics of opposing an unfettered examination by the state auditor is unbecoming of our political leaders.
Randy Evans can be reached at DMRevans2810@gmail.com.