Horne announced his candidacy for the statewide office of attorney general, the seat being vacated by Democrat Terry Goddard, in February 2010. Goddard chose to campaign for the governorship rather than seek re-election. After a lengthy and bitter primary campaign in which both candidates routinely exchanged scathing criticisms of one another, the results for the election were so close that the ultimate outcome would not be known for some time after the polls closed. Despite speculation to the contrary, Andrew Thomas refused to concede the primary nomination to Horne until every single vote was counted, a process that continued for a nearly a week after Arizona voters went to the polls on Tuesday, August 24, 2010. Finally, on Tuesday, September 1, he conceded the nomination to his primary opponent when, after all the votes had been recounted, it was determined that Horne had maintained a 899 vote lead over the former attorney.

Mortgage settlement transfer

Arizona was awarded a $1.6 billion share - the third greatest, after California and Florida - of the $26 billion settlement from the 49 state lawsuit brought against 5 major mortgage institutions over nefarious lending practices. When the settlement was reached in February, 2012, the terms of how the pot would be distributed among, and within, the lawsuit's member states were laid out; Arizona was to direct $1.3 billion of its share to homeowners whose mortgage debts exceeded their homes' value, $110 million in payments for those who already lost their homes to lender misconduct, $85 million for interest rate reductions, and, finally, $97.7 million to go straight to the attorney general's office. The $97.7 million, according to the language of the settlement, was reserved for the purposes of avoiding preventable foreclosures, easing the strain imposed on individuals and the economy by the foreclosure crisis, as well as prosecuting further related incidents of fraud.

Months later, Arizona lawmakers devised a plan to balance the budget via a governor-approved absorption of roughly half of that money into the state government's checking account. Horne lobbied against the decision, calling it "bad public policy". Despite informing the legislature and Gov. Jan Brewer that the money was intended for the victims of the crisis, not for general government purposes, he pledged to voluntarily comply with the $50 million transfer. "It would be suicidal for me to get into a war with [them] over a matter that is clearly constitutionally within their area of responsibility, namely the budget," Horne confessed- a statement with which Tim Hogan, an attorney for the Center for Law in the Public Interest, disagreed. In a letter to the attorney general, Hogan wrote that neither the Legislature nor Horne, as the fund's Trustee, has the right to voluntarily give half of the court-ordered trust fund to the state General Fund.

To legally justify the transfer, the bodies responsible for drawing up the budget invoked language from the settlement which permit a state to distill internally from the fund on the specific, necessary condition of compensating "for costs resulting from the alleged unlawful conduct of the defendants." They reasoned the state was covered under this contingency because, "general tax collections plummeted when the housing bubble burst and brought on a recession." Indeed, the crisis wreaked havoc on the state economy, but Hogan contended that provision was not broad enough to include the general costs of government and sought to block the transfer. Horne said he would oppose efforts like Hogan's, and, barring an injunction, intended to proceed with turning over the $50 million to the treasurer on July, 1, 2012, which began the next fiscal year. The money was putatively destined for prison construction.

FBI investigation of 2010 campaign-finance complaint

On February 11, 2012, a former Horne campaign volunteer and lawyer from the attorney general's Tucson office named Don Dybus filed a complaint with Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett alleging that Horne violated state campaign laws during his election campaign for attorney general in 2010. The FBI was charged with investigating the complaint, which contended that Horne flouted the state's law prohibiting coordination between campaigns and independent expenditure committees, and accused Horne of making a felonious deal with campaign supporter Kathleen Winn, promising her a post-election job in exchange for her alleged services as a coordinator of several of the cited illicit arrangements.

In his complaint, Dybus said Horne collaborated with manager Nathan Sproul of the firm Lincoln Strategy, independent committee Business Leaders for Arizona, and Winn, who was the committee's Chairwoman, to arrange a $115,000 contribution to Business Leaders for Arizona from Horne's brother-in-law in Santa Monica, California. Dybus also accused Lincoln Strategy of facilitating a $350,000 contribution to the independent committee from the Republican State Leadership Committee in Virginia. The independent committee implicated by Dybus reportedly spent roughly $500,000 on a series of advertisements smearing Horne's general election opponent Felecia Rotellini (D), whom Horne narrowly defeated in November 2011.

After Horne took office as attorney general, he hired Winn to serve as his Director of Community Outreach, a high-paid position within the office. As revealed in the Arizona Capitol Times, Dybus called for Winn to be removed from the payroll, and urged Gov. Jan Brewer to replace Horne: “This is a matter of grave concern to all citizens of Arizona who should not tolerate a law-breaking attorney general."

A spokeswoman from his office relayed Horne's explicit denial of any wrongdoing, insisting "the fact is that extraordinary care was exercised to avoid coordination," and referring to Dybus as "disgruntled."

On July 6, 2017, Cochise County Attorney Brian McIntyre cleared Horne of all remaining charges related to his 2010 campaign. As a result, Horne was no longer responsible for the $400,000 in repayment and $1.2 million in fines that he had been charged with paying.

Healthcare reform

In mid-September 2010, Horne, who, at the time, was in the midst of his campaign for state attorney general, announced his endorsement of Proposition 106 - The Arizona Health Insurance Reform Amendment, which would amend the State Constitution by barring any rules or regulations that would force state residents to participate in a health-care system. In addition to this, the amendment would also ensure that individuals would have the right to pay for private health insurance. On Tuesday, November 2nd, 2010, Arizona Proposition 106 passed with slightly over fifty-five percent of the public who voted on the measure approving it.

As part of his campaign, Horne promised to join the twenty-plus other state attorneys general in challenging the constitutionality of the newly enacted federal health care reform measures, in particular the "individual mandate" that requires all citizens to purchase health insurance.

Horne was first elected Superintendent of Public Instruction in 2002. He was re-elected to a second term in 2006.

Ethics Studies

Horne spoke strongly before the Arizona State Legislature in favor of the passage of Senate Bill 1069, which would ban ethnic-studies courses from the state's high schools. Under the law, "a district or charter school that allows such courses would lose 10 percent of its state funds each month;" the money, however, would be returned once the programs had been shuttered. The State Superintendent argued that it is the responsibility of the public schools "to develop the student's identity as Americans and as strong individuals" rather then to "promote ethnic chauvinism."

On Thursday, April 29, 2010, the Arizona House of Representatives passed the ban on ethnic studies programs in the state by a vote of 32 - 26. The measure made it "illegal for a school district to teach any courses that promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, promote resentment of a particular race or class of people, are designed primarily for students of a particular ethnic group or "advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals."

Illegal immigration

As State Superintendent, Horne was cited on record for supporting the use of $1.2 billion annually from Arizona taxpayers to pay for educating the children of illegal immigrants. Additionally, he called for a plan in which high school graduates who are in the United States illegally would be granted citizenship upon passing a simple standardized test. Critics argued, however, that this would only serve as an incentive for immigrants to break the law.

In April 2009, Horne opposed a bill "that would have Arizona schools ask students whether they were in the country legally." The legislation was designed specifically to serve as a legal challenge to the 1982 Supreme Court case, Plyler vs. Doe, that prohibited public schools from denying illegal immigrant students access to a public education.

Horne was first elected to the Arizona House of Representatives in 1996 and ultimately served two terms in office. During his tenure, he served as both the chairman of the Academic Accountability Committee and vice chairman of the Education Committee.

Abortion

Near the end of his tenure as a member of the Arizona House of Representatives, Horne voted against House Bill 2708, which closed a legislative loophole by banning "taxpayer funding for abortion."

School Choice

While serving in the state legislature, Horne opposed Arizona House Bill 2074 (HB 2074), also known as the Arizona Tuition Tax Credit Law. The measure, passed by the Arizona House of Representatives in 1997, allowed state taxpayers up to a $500.00 tax credit if they chose to donate to a private school scholarship fund. In addition to reducing state tax liability of private citizens, it facilitated parents more flexibility when choosing educational options for their children.

Arizona was awarded a $1.6 billion share - the third greatest, after California and Florida - of the $26 billion settlement from the 49 state lawsuit brought against 5 major mortgage institutions over nefarious lending practices. When the settlement was reached in February, 2012, the terms of how the pot would be distributed among, and within, the lawsuit's member states were laid out; Arizona was to direct $1.3 billion of its share to homeowners whose mortgage debts exceeded their homes' value, $110 million in payments for those who already lost their homes to lender misconduct, $85 million for interest rate reductions, and, finally, $97.7 million to go straight to the attorney general's office. The $97.7 million, according to the language of the settlement, was reserved for the purposes of avoiding preventable foreclosures, easing the strain imposed on individuals and the economy by the foreclosure crisis, as well as prosecuting further related incidents of fraud.

Months later, Arizona lawmakers devised a plan to balance the budget via a governor-approved absorption of roughly half of that money into the state government's checking account. Horne lobbied against the decision, calling it "bad public policy". Despite informing the legislature and Gov. Jan Brewer that the money was intended for the victims of the crisis, not for general government purposes, he pledged to voluntarily comply with the $50 million transfer. "It would be suicidal for me to get into a war with [them] over a matter that is clearly constitutionally within their area of responsibility, namely the budget," Horne confessed- a statement with which Tim Hogan, an attorney for the Center for Law in the Public Interest, disagreed. In a letter to the attorney general, Hogan wrote that neither the Legislature nor Horne, as the fund's Trustee, has the right to voluntarily give half of the court-ordered trust fund to the state General Fund.

To legally justify the transfer, the bodies responsible for drawing up the budget invoked language from the settlement which permit a state to distill internally from the fund on the specific, necessary condition of compensating "for costs resulting from the alleged unlawful conduct of the defendants." They reasoned the state was covered under this contingency because, "general tax collections plummeted when the housing bubble burst and brought on a recession." Indeed, the crisis wreaked havoc on the state economy, but Hogan contended that provision was not broad enough to include the general costs of government and sought to block the transfer. Horne said he would oppose efforts like Hogan's, and, barring an injunction, intended to proceed with turning over the $50 million to the treasurer on July, 1, 2012, which began the next fiscal year. The money was putatively destined for prison construction.

On February 11, 2012, a former Horne campaign volunteer and lawyer from the attorney general's Tucson office named Don Dybus filed a complaint with Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett alleging that Horne violated state campaign laws during his election campaign for attorney general in 2010. The FBI was charged with investigating the complaint, which contended that Horne flouted the state's law prohibiting coordination between campaigns and independent expenditure committees, and accused Horne of making a felonious deal with campaign supporter Kathleen Winn, promising her a post-election job in exchange for her alleged services as a coordinator of several of the cited illicit arrangements.

In his complaint, Dybus said Horne collaborated with manager Nathan Sproul of the firm Lincoln Strategy, independent committee Business Leaders for Arizona, and Winn, who was the committee's Chairwoman, to arrange a $115,000 contribution to Business Leaders for Arizona from Horne's brother-in-law in Santa Monica, California. Dybus also accused Lincoln Strategy of facilitating a $350,000 contribution to the independent committee from the Republican State Leadership Committee in Virginia. The independent committee implicated by Dybus reportedly spent roughly $500,000 on a series of advertisements smearing Horne's general election opponent Felecia Rotellini (D), whom Horne narrowly defeated in November 2011.

After Horne took office as attorney general, he hired Winn to serve as his Director of Community Outreach, a high-paid position within the office. As revealed in the Arizona Capitol Times, Dybus called for Winn to be removed from the payroll, and urged Gov. Jan Brewer to replace Horne: “This is a matter of grave concern to all citizens of Arizona who should not tolerate a law-breaking attorney general."

A spokeswoman from his office relayed Horne's explicit denial of any wrongdoing, insisting "the fact is that extraordinary care was exercised to avoid coordination," and referring to Dybus as "disgruntled."

On July 6, 2017, Cochise County Attorney Brian McIntyre cleared Horne of all remaining charges related to his 2010 campaign. As a result, Horne was no longer responsible for the $400,000 in repayment and $1.2 million in fines that he had been charged with paying.

In mid-September 2010, Horne, who, at the time, was in the midst of his campaign for state attorney general, announced his endorsement of Proposition 106 - The Arizona Health Insurance Reform Amendment, which would amend the State Constitution by barring any rules or regulations that would force state residents to participate in a health-care system. In addition to this, the amendment would also ensure that individuals would have the right to pay for private health insurance. On Tuesday, November 2nd, 2010, Arizona Proposition 106 passed with slightly over fifty-five percent of the public who voted on the measure approving it.

As part of his campaign, Horne promised to join the twenty-plus other state attorneys general in challenging the constitutionality of the newly enacted federal health care reform measures, in particular the "individual mandate" that requires all citizens to purchase health insurance.

2012

Tom Horne (Arizona) endorsed Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential election.

Superintendent of Public Instruction (2003-2011)

Horne was first elected Superintendent of Public Instruction in 2002. He was re-elected to a second term in 2006.

Ethics Studies

Horne spoke strongly before the Arizona State Legislature in favor of the passage of Senate Bill 1069, which would ban ethnic-studies courses from the state's high schools. Under the law, "a district or charter school that allows such courses would lose 10 percent of its state funds each month;" the money, however, would be returned once the programs had been shuttered. The State Superintendent argued that it is the responsibility of the public schools "to develop the student's identity as Americans and as strong individuals" rather then to "promote ethnic chauvinism."

On Thursday, April 29, 2010, the Arizona House of Representatives passed the ban on ethnic studies programs in the state by a vote of 32 - 26. The measure made it "illegal for a school district to teach any courses that promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, promote resentment of a particular race or class of people, are designed primarily for students of a particular ethnic group or "advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals."

As State Superintendent, Horne was cited on record for supporting the use of $1.2 billion annually from Arizona taxpayers to pay for educating the children of illegal immigrants. Additionally, he called for a plan in which high school graduates who are in the United States illegally would be granted citizenship upon passing a simple standardized test. Critics argued, however, that this would only serve as an incentive for immigrants to break the law.

In April 2009, Horne opposed a bill "that would have Arizona schools ask students whether they were in the country legally." The legislation was designed specifically to serve as a legal challenge to the 1982 Supreme Court case, Plyler vs. Doe, that prohibited public schools from denying illegal immigrant students access to a public education.

State Legislature (1996-2000)

Horne was first elected to the Arizona House of Representatives in 1996 and ultimately served two terms in office. During his tenure, he served as both the chairman of the Academic Accountability Committee and vice chairman of the Education Committee.

Near the end of his tenure as a member of the Arizona House of Representatives, Horne voted against House Bill 2708, which closed a legislative loophole by banning "taxpayer funding for abortion."

While serving in the state legislature, Horne opposed Arizona House Bill 2074 (HB 2074), also known as the Arizona Tuition Tax Credit Law. The measure, passed by the Arizona House of Representatives in 1997, allowed state taxpayers up to a $500.00 tax credit if they chose to donate to a private school scholarship fund. In addition to reducing state tax liability of private citizens, it facilitated parents more flexibility when choosing educational options for their children.