Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Tag: governor

Schweikert is a spoiler in the GOP primary for governor

Peter Clark

Tensions are rising in the 2026 Republican primary race for governor, and what was already shaping up to be a tight contest has taken an unexpected turn.

Longtime Rep. David Schweikert has now thrown his hat in the ring for the 2026  GOP gubernatorial primary. 

Karen Taylor Robson has the backing of the GOP establishment, and Congressman Andy Biggs has strong grassroots support, making Schweikert the wildcard.

While Schweikert may believe he can save Arizona, without a rubber stamp of approval from Trump or Turning Point, does he stand a chance?

Schweikert vying for the governor’s seat is a fool’s errand. It would be a move better for Schweikert to join Robson’s ticket for the lieutenant governor’s spot. 

Instead of striking out on his own, an alliance with Robson would be the best option because he doesn’t have a shot at the nomination, his policies would dovetail with Robson’s platform, and it would be better from the standpoint of optics.

Schweirkert’s bid for the GOP nomination is not a safe bet. He’s entering a crowded ballot with formidable candidates. 

Granted, he has beaten the odds in the past. He secured his congressional seat by narrow margins in 2022 and 2024. But how will he fare when it comes to fundraising?

Will donors be flocking to his campaign without much fanfare from the party or conservative organizations?

Robson already has a massive head start on fundraising, and Biggs has the backing of national advocacy groups.

With no significant backing, Schweikert will act as a spoiler in the primary. Siphoning votes away from viable candidates and tapering Robson’s modest lead.

Schweikert teaming up with Robson would be beneficial to both candidates. Robson possesses the coveted Trump endorsement, which gives her more credibility among political donors and voters. 

Plus, her business-focused policies would have more reach among independents and moderates than Schweikert’s hard-nosed brand of conservatism.

Surprisingly, despite Schweikert being more conservative than Robson, his policies complement her platform effectively. Both candidates are solution–oriented and boast pragmatic approaches to policy.

His status as a budget hawk and passion for deregulation are well-suited for Robson’s focus on business-friendly policies. Fostering a set of policies emphasizing economic responsibility and growth, Schweikert also patches one of Robson’s biggest blind spots, her conservative credentials. Some commentators have suggested that Robson has flip-flopped on policy and view her as an establishment conservative.

For primaries, the rules of a general election don’t apply. It is one of the few instances in Arizona politics where being a staunch ideologue is beneficial. Few can dispute  Schweikert’s credentials, as he has a ”98.28% Lifetime Score with ACUF” and a 90% rating from Heritage Action. If Robson had selected him as her running mate for lieutenant governor,  it could improve her image among hardcore conservatives.

One of Schweikert’s most concerning Achilles’ Heels is his proclivity for generating controversies and scandals. Aside from the typical criticisms a political candidate confronts, Robson is relatively scandal-free in comparison to Schweikert. Robson’s cleaner image makes her more electable than her provocative opponent.

Several years ago, Schweikert faced fines for “campaign violations.” Needless to say, in the mudslinging leading up to the primaries, this incident will be thoroughly scrutinized. But the cringe-worthy blunders don’t end with this quagmire. Unfortunately, he also tends to put his foot in his mouth — for example, the defamation lawsuit over the Elijah Norton political advertisement.

Even as of this year, Schweikert continues to indulge in incendiary rhetoric. He referred to the criticisms of the Medicaid changes in the Big Beautiful Bill as “whining and bedwetting.” There are more tactful and professional ways to address these criticisms; these off-the-cuff comments will be red meat for his primary opponents. 

While abandoning his campaign and joining Robson’s ticket won’t make these issues disappear, it will take some of the heat off of him, as Robson would be the focal point. 

Schweikert leaving his seat in Arizona CD1 for a long-shot campaign for the Governor’s Office seems like a faster track to the unemployment line. He will be more likely to have a seat at the Capitol teaming up with Robson than striking it out alone. Maybe he will have better luck in 2030.

Peter Clark is an Arizona-based writer.

Cannabis lawsuit against ADHS, governor and chief of staff dismissed

Key Points: 
  • Judge dismisses lawsuit over alleged improper dispensary license
  • Court finds plaintiffs lacked standing and rejected two claims on merits 
  • Plaintiffs attorney declines to say whether they plan to appeal 

A judge dismissed a lawsuit alleging the state health department, governor and her chief of staff worked to improperly award a dispensary license outside deadlines set in state law. 

Mason Cave, owner of Arizona Wellness Center Springerville, sued the Arizona Department of Health Services, Gov. Katie Hobbs, chief of staff Chad Campbell and rival marijuana company Sherri Dunn, LLC for alleged violations of state law and past court orders. 

In a ruling from the bench, Judge Joseph Kreamer found Cave and his company lacked standing to file in the first place. And, even if successful in establishing standing, he rejected the allegation that a license awarded via a settlement violated the Gift Clause or any prior court order.

“I agree with the defendant’s arguments down the line,” Kreamer said. 

The voter measure legalizing adult-use cannabis in 2020 set off a statutory process to award dual-use licenses, which would allow existing medical marijuana dispensaries or an applicant operating a dispensary in a county with fewer than two existing dispensaries to sell to both medical and adult-use customers. 

Under state law, the Department of Health Services could only accept applications for licenses from early applicants between Jan. 19, 2021, and March 9, 2021. 

But before securing a dual-use license, an applicant first must have a Dispensary Registration Certificate. Sherri Dunn, LLC, first applied for a certificate in 2016 to operate in La Paz County, alongside three other applicants. 

The department declined to award a certificate to any of the three applicants, as there was an existing dispensary in La Paz County. One of the applicants then sued the department over the decision after the single dispensary in La Paz moved outside county lines.

A ruling from the Arizona Supreme Court eventually concluded the Department of Health Services had violated state law by denying certificates to qualified applicants from a county without a dispensary. 

Though Sherri Dunn, LLC, never joined the suit, the company was still issued a delayed certificate in December 2021. The company then applied for an establishment license on Jan. 3, 2022. 

The Department of Health Services accepted the application and its attached $25,000 application fee, but denied the license because it was submitted outside the statutory window. 

Sherri Dunn, LLC, litigated the issue, arguing that it should have initially received its certificate in 2016, rather than in 2021, but to no avail. An administrative law judge and a superior court judge found no exemptions from the January to March 2021 window. 

The legal battle then escalated to the Arizona Court of Appeals. But in weighing the Arizona Supreme Court’s decision to issue Sherri Dunn, LLC a certificate, the Department of Health Services anticipated an eventual loss on appeal and agreed to enter a settlement agreement awarding an establishment license to Sherri Dunn, LLC. 

Cave alleged a lobbyist for Sherri Dunn, LLC’s parent company, Trulieve, was in communication with the governor’s chief of staff, Chad Campbell, over the issue prior to the license award, which Cave alleges ultimately culminated in the settlement. 

The complaint from Cave alleged the license award violated the Gift Clause and court orders, or an ultra vires claim. 

In a hearing today, Kreamer began with the issue of standing, stating that he did not necessarily see Cave and his company demonstrating a personal stake with a concrete harm or a warranted claim as taxpayers. 

“It appears to me that the plaintiffs have a generalized desire to compete, that’s not good enough,” Kreamer said. “I just don’t see you getting there either way. I don’t see the concrete personal stake, and I don’t see, under the taxpayer standing doctrine, you getting there.” 

Ross Meyer, attorney for Cave, alleged Arizona Wellness Center Springerville suffered harm in being denied the same license because they were not afforded the same application process as Sherri Dunn, LLC. 

And, in the taxpayer vein, he noted Cave had both benefitted from programs funded by tax revenues from cannabis sales and bought recreational marijuana himself, making him both a contributor and recipient.

As for the Gift Clause, Kreamer said the language contained no mention of regulatory licenses and could lead to a complicated precedent if the court greenlit the challenge. 

“They give out professional licenses all the time, and they don’t get challenged. That’s just part of what happens if we open up the door to challenging licenses like this. You want to challenge a driver’s license?” Kreamer said. 

Kreamer was also unconvinced by the alleged court order violation, noting that no ultra vires claim exists under Arizona law. He added agreement via settlement to be a standard part of any litigation. 

“Isn’t that the point in litigation?” Kreamer said. “It happens all the time in litigation where the parties have to say, ‘You know what, we may resolve this, because if we get beat at the appellate level, we’re going to owe attorney’s fees, and the pain associated with resolving is less than the pain associated with trying to see that through and perhaps losing it’ … I just see that as normal litigation.” 

Meyer said he would agree with the court if it involved private parties, but he claimed ADHS could not enter a settlement in conflict with state law. 

“The department is not free to ignore statutes,” Meyer said. “Whether it’s part of an application that is not allowed, or in a settlement conference, when the government is settling, it has statutory regulations that it must follow.” 

Kreamer said the plaintiffs were not necessarily moving him in any direction on standing, nor the two claims. And he said he was not feeling any better after hearing from an attorney for ADHS. 

“In order to challenge something, you have to have a claim. We’ll start there. They don’t have one. I’ve never been in a situation where you don’t have a claim, but you also don’t have standing anyway. And things are unripe, but they’re also moot,” Craig Morgan, attorney for ADHS, said. “We are in a legal quagmire in that way.” 

Throughout the hearing, the court and attorneys only briefly touched on the allegations of Campbell putting a thumb on the scale in the settlement agreement. 

Kelly Mull, attorney for Hobbs and Campbell, said there was no real claim against the governor or her chief of staff. She called the allegations “insulting” and “specious.” 

In his ruling from the bench, Kreamer said he remained unconvinced by the plaintiffs’ arguments in court. 

He agreed Cave and Arizona Wellness Center Springerville did not have standing on either front. 

“That personal stake is missing. I don’t think that the plaintiffs have established that they were ever in a position to receive the license that Sherri Dunn received. I don’t believe that they have set forth reasonably that they could, in the future, be in that position, or that there will be another license available,” Kreamer said. “The plaintiff’s relying on a chain of hypotheticals.” 

He concluded a regulatory license could not fall under the Gift Clause, and the lack of an existing ultra vires route in state law defeated the claim of an improper settlement.

Kreamer granted all motions to dismiss, though acknowledged the likelihood of appeal. 

Meyer declined to comment on the ruling, nor the route forward following the hearing. A spokesperson for the governor declined to comment as well. 

Schweikert lays out his plan to fix the AZ GOP in latest interview

Key Points: 
  • Schweikert sees path to victory running as a true conservative
  • Recent polling shows Schweikert training Biggs and Robson
  • Schweikert’s decision based in part on frustration with Washington 

On Sept. 30, U.S. Rep. David Schweikert said he wants to be Arizona’s next governor, shaking up what was already expected to be a contentious race among Republicans who want to try to unseat incumbent Democrat Katie Hobbs.

Schweikert, who has served as a state legislator and Maricopa County treasurer before being elected to Congress in 2010, has become a significant factor in what until now has been a head-to-head contest between fellow GOP Congressman Andy Biggs and business owner Karrin Taylor Robson.

It also makes him the only Republican who does not have the endorsement of President Trump in the party.

Schweikert, however, told Capitol Media Services that he sees a path to victory despite the strength of the Make America Great movement, particularly given his record of being elected multiple times in a congressional district considered one of the most politically competitive in the state.

“I think if you run as an actual conservative instead of your perceived anger, I think that works,” he said. “And I actually have polling that says that works.”

And that, Schweikert said, comes down to messaging.

“I’m with the free market,” he said.

“I believe prosperity is moral,” Schweikert continued. “Doing better in life is our mission.”

But the other half of his decision to leave Congress is based on his frustration with how things operate in Washington.

“It’s more than frustration,” he said. “I am at a point where I am livid all the time and I come home angry.”

And much of that is aimed at members of his own party who have controlled the House for all but four years since he was elected.

“I actually introduced the bills that have ‘Medicare’ in the title,” Schweikert cited as an example.

“You’re not allowed to do that,” he said. “And I can’t get a single other member to sponsor.”

There’s something else.

Schweikert, at 63, is the parent of two adopted children, ages 9 and 3.

“When you’re gone 60% of the time, and your wife, their mother, is home alone with the kids, there’s some unhappiness,” he said.

But there’s another side to his decision. Schweikert said he believes he can fix the GOP in Arizona which he said has been broken for four election cycles.

He noted that Democrats won statewide races in 2022 for governor, secretary of state and attorney general, as well as for the U.S. Senate despite the fact the GOP has a voter registration edge in Arizona. The GOP also lost the race for Senate last year.

And it goes back even farther, he said, to the inability of Republicans to deliver the state to Donald Trump in 2020 or hang on to a Senate seat in 2018.

Schweikert contends that if he heads the GOP ticket in 2026, he will draw out more Republicans than either Biggs or Robson.

Robson, in a prepared statement, said she welcomes Schweikert into the race, saying it will give voters a clear choice between “a Trump-endorsed conservative outsider who built her success in the private sector, or yet another career politician.”

Biggs responded with a survey conducted earlier this month — before Schweikert made his announcement — that shows he has the support of 48% of likely Republican voters in a three-way race, with Robson at 26% and Schweikert at 11%.

Schweikert acknowledged the numbers. However, he said he doesn’t see that as significant at this point, stating that he has a message he believes will resonate with voters.

“I would argue there’s a difference between populism and conservatism,” Schweikert said.

And he said his resume is more extensive than Biggs, with more time served in Congress than anyone currently in the Arizona delegation.

“If you’re an Arizonan and you need something to move in Congress, I’m the one you bring it to,” Schweikert said.

Still, Schweikert has some baggage, including being found guilty of various campaign finance violations going back to 2010. That includes reporting a $100,000 loan that didn’t exist, failing to disclose another loan, and money spent by his chief of staff that was reimbursed by the campaign.

The House Ethics Committee accused him of providing misleading statements and being slow to produce documents, allowing the statute of limitations to expire. In 2020, the panel fined him $50,000.

Two years later, the Federal Election Commission, after conducting its own probe, entered into a deal with Schweikert to pay a $125,000 fine.

Schweikert said all that “doesn’t move numbers,” as shown by his ability to get reelected since all that broke despite the issue being used by his Democratic foes.

“I think it’s partially because we were remarkably open about it,” he said, citing his many town hall meetings.

Schweikert also may find himself out of sync with Arizonans on another issue: abortion.

By a 3-2 margin, voters in Arizona approved inserting a provision in the Arizona Constitution guaranteeing a “fundamental right to obtain an abortion.”

“I may be out of step,” Schweikert said. “But I am a classic pro-lifer.”

He said he was born in a home for unwed mothers — as were his brother and sister. And then there are the two adopted children.

“I campaigned against that initiative because I think it was also presented in a dishonest fashion,” Schweikert said.

His position, however, should not hurt in the Republican primary as both Biggs and Robson also have said they oppose abortion. Where it will matter for whoever emerges from the GOP primary is in the general election against incumbent Hobbs who supported Proposition 139.

Another factor that could influence the election is money.

Schweikert declined to say how much he would need to raise to survive the primary.

“We’ve built budgets,” he said. But Schweikert noted how much he will need to raise will depend on how much outside groups will spend on his behalf.

“You can’t coordinate, you can’t talk to,” he noted of these independent expenditures. “But you can actually see what their purchases are,” allowing him to tailor his own spending.

Robson, sitting on a personal fortune, already has put more than $2.2 million of her own cash into the 2026 race — and that’s after spending $17 million in personal wealth in 2022 only to lose the GOP primary to Kari Lake.

Biggs, who got a later start in the 2026 gubernatorial race, reported $437,000 in the bank as of July, the latest campaign finance report. But he is getting a financial boost with nearly $459,000 spent on his behalf by Turning Point Action.

Schweikert said he isn’t worried, saying Democrats have outspent him in their efforts to oust him from Congress.

The really big money could be in the general election: Hobbs, who has been fundraising for years and continues to do so, including at out-of-state events, reports having nearly $4.7 million in cash on hand as of July.

Schweikert’s decision not to seek reelection to the House in Congressional District 1 creates something that hasn’t occurred since he first got the seat in 2010. And that could help Democrats who have been trying to get elected there in a district that runs from north central Phoenix through Scottsdale, Cave Creek and Fountain Hills into the Tonto National Forest, a district that the Cook Political Report has shown to just barely edge Republican.

“An open seat is always an opportunity,” he said.

And who does he think should replace him?

“Some of the people I think have the ability, the intellect to do it well don’t seem interested in running,” Schweikert said. Nor, given his own experience, can he blame them.

“Congress is a battle zone,” he said. “And you’ve got to be mentally and emotionally fairly tough to deal with the absurdity that has become Congress.”

Will Robson be the new face of Arizona conservatism?

Peter Clark

In a strange turn of events, a recent Noble Predictive Insights poll has found that Republican gubernatorial contender Karrin Taylor-Robson is “10 points ahead of competitor” Andy Biggs. Robson was once estranged from the MAGA wing of the GOP and is now the frontrunner in the primary race.

Some commentators believe Robson’s early lead is not sustainable on the long campaign trail to the 2026 primary. Due to her lack of grassroots support, being viewed as a political insider, and flip-flopping on policy, she potentially weakens her dominance.

What would it mean for the AZ GOP if Robson wins the nomination? Both candidates have the endorsement of President Trump, but represent different factions of the GOP.

Robson presents Arizona with a MAGA-lite flavor of conservatism, favoring solution-focused policies and practicality.

Meanwhile, Biggs is a MAGA firebrand. Uncompromising and resolute when it comes to upholding conservative principles.

The current status of the GOP primary could be a shift in Arizona politics. While MAGA is still a predominant strain of conservatism, it’s losing steam. From March 2025 to June 2025, Republicans nationally identifying as MAGA declined to 49%.

Robson’s current lead could be the ripple effect of national trends bleeding into Arizona’s political landscape. Voters currently preferring Robson could be a sign of a shift toward moderate politics, supporting AZ First policies, and a demand for solutions over fiery rhetoric.

Arizona is far from a secure right-wing stronghold. The diaspora of transplants from deep-blue states has loosened the GOP’s grip on AZ. Outside of registered Republicans, the second largest voter demographic in the state is independents, making up 34.13% of the electorate. 

Republicans really need to reach persuadable moderates if they want to win elections – 59% of Arizona voters believe that “both political parties are too extreme.”

As we saw in the 2022 midterms, extremism is a vice when it comes to winning elections. Independent voters were unswayed by the quirks of far-right MAGA candidates Kari Lake and Blake Masters. Lake even failed to engage moderates in her 2024 Senate bid.

Robson side-steps the “Kari Lake Problem” by marketing herself as MAGA-friendly, but avoiding inflammatory rhetoric that is off-putting to moderates. Her balanced approach has so far paid off. She even leads with “Trump-first Republicans.” Showing that even some of Trump’s diehard supporters recognize the GOP needs to change course to win Arizona.

A whopping 60% of AZ voters don’t believe politicians focus on the most critical issues.

Robson, positioning herself as being business-oriented while focusing on matters of local concern, such as the economy and public safety, is a laudable attempt to avoid the trappings of the national political scene. Establishing a political brand that is Arizona-First.

Biggs is America-First, not Arizona-First. He’s as Trumpian as you can get. Instead of focusing on issues of concern to the state, he may import policies that achieve the grand strategy of the national MAGA coalition. 

The rising nationalization of state and local politics is evident with national advocacy groups weighing in on low-profile local elections.

As governor, you must put the state before your party; otherwise, you will be doing a disservice to Arizonans. 

Conservatives have succeeded in implementing tax cuts, border enforcement, and rolling back DEI. But they’ve lost ground due to infighting and their hostility toward bipartisanship.

Arizonans are not impressed by the theatrics of bomb-throwing ideologues – they prefer results. Only 29% of Arizona voters prefer politicians who refuse to reach across the aisle on principle.

On her campaign website, Robson has highlighted the public’s frustration with “bipartisan gridlock,” signaling that she will be willing to approach the issues facing the state pragmatically. 

I can only hope that Robson is sincere in her efforts to put Arizona first. However, with the primary 11 months away, we can only hope she doesn’t succumb to the pressure from external interest groups. However, her milder brand of conservative politics appears to be already resonating with voters. If she stays on course, she could be a new force in Arizona politics.

Peter Clark is an Arizona-based writer.

Arizona agencies request pay hikes for employees

Key Points:
  • State agencies request salary increases for staff in their fiscal year 2027 budget requests
  • Gov. Katie Hobbs’ proposal for a 2% to 3% raise for all state employees was rejected earlier this year
  • Agencies say years of rejected raise requests are leading to high turnover rates and low employee morale

Several state agencies are requesting salary increases for their staff after a proposal for a 2% to 3% raise for all state employees fell through earlier this year.

According to agency budget requests submitted to the Governor’s Office for fiscal year 2027 — which starts July 1, 2026 — several state entities are requesting employee salary increases ranging anywhere from 4% to 10%. 

All of the agencies asking for salary increases cited high turnover rates and low employee morale, with some requests noting that employees are actively seeking employment elsewhere or working two jobs to meet basic needs. Smaller agencies, like the Board of Dental Examiners and the Arizona Historical Society, are particularly struggling with low salaries. 

“The (Board of Dental Examiners) staff are currently disappointed due to the lack of pay increases, the increasing workload, and reading the news about other state agency salary increases that rely on (the board’s) shared 15% to the general fund,” the board’s request states. “While staff members continue to work overtime, when available, this has not alleviated the issues. They are tired and frustrated by the lack of resources.”

Gov. Katie Hobbs proposed enacting a 2% to 3% raise for all state employees in her executive budget proposal, but the raise was not included in the budget she ultimately signed for fiscal year 2026. Hobbs told the Arizona Capitol Times that it is too early to speak of specific budget plans for next year, but state employee pay is something she is always looking to increase.

“This is a huge challenge and one of the things that keeps me up at night,” Hobbs said. “My message to state employees is that I appreciate the work you do on behalf of Arizonans every day. I know it is not easy, and we’re doing what we can to make sure that you’re compensated for what you do.”

Many of the agencies asking for salary increases for their employees are fee-funded and would use the revenue from those fees to fund pay bumps, avoiding any costs to taxpayers. Requests for a 5% increase at the Board of Dental Examiners and 10% increases at the Board of Pharmacy and the Board of Chiropractic Examiners would not dip into the state’s general fund, which is supported by income and sales taxes. 

However, excess revenue generated by the boards goes into the general fund, meaning any increase funded by fees would take money away from the revenue lawmakers and the governor use to fund new initiatives or cover costs at other agencies. And Hobbs is already warning that there will not be much general fund money to go around next year with federal spending cuts and the dwindling of Covid recovery funds. 

That isn’t stopping agencies from asking for pay raises financed by the state’s general fund though. 

The Arizona Historical Society’s request for a 10% increase would cost around $310,500 annually from the general fund. But AHS says raises are necessary because it estimates one quarter of its staff will resign without them.

“Many of the agency’s staff have been forced into secondary employment to meet their basic needs,” AHS’s request states.

Other, larger agencies are also asking for general fund money to support staff salary increases. The Department of Juvenile Corrections and the Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry are asking for 4% raises, while the Attorney General’s Office and the Administrative Office of the Courts are asking for 5% and 10% raises respectively.

ADCRR submitted the largest general fund request for salary increases at $26 million. The Administrative Office of the Courts, which encompasses the Superior Court, Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, asked for one of the largest pay bumps at a cost of $5.8 million to the general fund. 

The AOC said in its budget request that many of its staff are currently underpaid.

“Our latest review found that Judicial Branch employees are paid 19% below the comparable court job market, making it increasingly difficult to recruit and retain a skilled workforce,” the AOC request noted. 

Almost all of the agencies asking for salary increases attribute low employee pay to a combination of inflation, the Covid pandemic and other economic factors. But some agencies noted that their requests for pay increases have been ignored for years, allowing the cost of living to outpace salaries. 

The last statewide salary increase of 10% was enacted in fiscal year 2023. State troopers and firefighters saw a 5% and 10% pay raise respectively in the current fiscal year. 

The requests for state employee salary increases also come after lawmakers discussed raising their own pay during the 2025 session. Sen. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, championed a measure that would have asked voters to approve raising lawmaker salaries from $24,000 to $48,000, while other lawmakers also offered proposals for increasing their pay. 

But most proposals for pay increases for lawmakers have also gone ignored for years, making it unlikely that either elected officials or state employees can expect a raise anytime soon. 

Schweikert considers bid for Arizona governor

Key Points: 
  • US Rep. David Schweikert mulls running for GOP nomination for governor
  • Congressman’s chances, motive are questioned
  • Crowded Democratic field lines up in CD1 to challenge Schweikert

Arizona Congressman David Schweikert is considering entering the state’s gubernatorial race. If the decision is made official, he would join a crowded GOP lineup and vacate a congressional seat in one of the nation’s most competitive districts. 

Schweikert’s political consultant Chris Baker told Punchbowl News, a nonpartisan outlet that covers Congress, that Schweikert is mulling his chances in the race and will make a decision by the end of the month. 

A declaration to run would shake up a primary now headed by two frontrunners, U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs and Karrin Taylor Robson, and add a new element to the Arizona GOP’s bid to challenge Democrat Gov. Katie Hobbs. 

Some are not convinced Schweikert will make an official declaration. 

“I can’t imagine him doing that,” said GOP consultant Chuck Coughlin. “I don’t see that as being a significant play … What lane would he fill?”

Schweikert’s campaign didn’t return a request from the Arizona Capitol Times for comment.

After his first election to Congress in 2010, Schweikert has been Arizona’s longest-serving congressman. However, the 1st Congressional District he represents has only grown more competitive throughout his career. His seat has been heavily targeted by Democrats, and although he defeated Democrat Jevin Hodge in 2022 by less than 1% of votes and carried a greater margin of victory of nearly 4% against Amish Shah in 2024, his advantage remains slim. 

Arizona Freedom Caucus Republicans have expressed support for Biggs in the governor’s race. The group’s founder, Sen. Jake Hoffman, R-Queen Creek, wrote in an Aug. 18 X post that Schweikert running would put a vulnerable House seat at risk for Republicans. 

“Schweikert can barely win his own House seat,” Hoffman wrote. “He’ll never win a statewide general (election).”

Congressional Republicans are attempting to hold on to their majorities in the U.S. House in the 2026 midterm election, and midterm elections have historically seen the White House’s majority party lose seats. 

Coughlin said Schweikert’s strategy to tease gubernatorial candidacy could be an attempt to negotiate for something in Congress. 

Shah, a former Democratic representative in the state House, is running again to challenge Schweikert. His campaign has already jumped on Schweikert’s consideration for governor as an opportunity to raise funds in text messages from the campaign on Aug. 18. 

“(Schweikert) knows he can’t defend his record against a strong Democratic challenger like Dr. Amish Shah,” Shah’s campaign wrote. “When he shows up, Schweikert keeps voting for policies that hurt working families — from the ‘Big Ugly Billionaire Bill’ that slashed Medicaid and raised health care costs, to an agenda that drives up inflation and strains Arizona’s rural hospitals.”

Only one Republican other than Schweikert, Brandon Sproles, has filed a statement of interest for the GOP nomination in CD1 by Aug. 20.

By contrast, twelve Democrats have filed statements of interest to try to win the Democratic nomination and challenge Schweikert, including Shah and Marlene Galán-Woods, who lost to Shah in the 2024 Democratic primary race. 

Other Democrats who are considering running in the district include Andres Barraza, the former Tempe Union High School District governing board president who recently gave up his leadership position to focus on his congressional run; and voting rights activist and attorney Mark Gordon Robert. 

Democrats have lost some ground in voter registration in CD1 since 2022, according to registration statistics compiled by the Secretary of State’s Office. 

During Schweikert’s narrow victory over Hodge in 2022, 37% of voters in the district were registered as Republicans, while about 33% were “other” and 28% of voters were registered Democrats. 

The most recent voter registration statistics from July 2025 show 38% of voters are registered Republicans, while registered Democrats have fallen to 26%. And 33% of registered voters are other and the No Labels, Libertarian and Green parties have less than 1% of voters for each party. 

Karrin Taylor Robson edges out Andy Biggs in fundraising for 2026 governor bid

Key Point:
  • Robson reports $575,000 in individual donations and $2,500 from PACs
  • Biggs receiving outside funding support from political action committees
  • Incumbent Democrat Katie Hobbs has nearly $4.7 million cash on hand

Karrin Taylor Robson has edged out Andy Biggs in campaign fundraising for their upcoming bid for the Republican nominee for governor in 2026.

However, the donations tell only part of the story as each hopes to take on incumbent Democrat Katie Hobbs, who is seeking another four-year term.

New reports filed on July 21 show Robson, who made an unsuccessful bid to become the GOP nominee in 2022, listing nearly $575,000 in individual donations and another $2,500 from political action committees.

Biggs, a former state senator and now a member of Congress, had about $429,000 in donations. He also has $50,000 left over from a former campaign for the Legislature.

Robson, however, reports she loaned her campaign more than $2.2 million in the past quarter following an extensive media campaign that virtually all of it touting her endorsement from Donald Trump. In fact, her report states that it has spent $2.2 million on advertising.

So, even with that self-borrowed money, her cash on hand is now about $876,000.

This isn’t the first time Robson, who has never held elected office, has self-funded an election. She loaned herself $16.9 million in 2022 in her unsuccessful bid to be the GOP nominee, only to lose to Kari Lake — who, in turn, lost the general election to Hobbs.

Biggs, off to a slower start, spent only about $180,000 in the past three months, with most of that amount going toward mailing services and consultants. That leaves him with about $437,000 in the bank.

But Biggs has the lead on something that doesn’t show up in his report: Spending on his behalf.

Turning Point Action, which supports conservative candidates, reported it has already spent nearly $459,000 on behalf of Biggs. That includes $352,00 for TV ads.

Much of the PAC’s funds were funneled through 1Ten LLC, owned by state Sen. Jake Hoffman, a Queen Creek Republican who heads the Arizona Freedom Caucus. Hoffman describes his operation as a full-service agency handling everything from TV, radio and cable TV ads to social media and mail.

These independent expenditures are not subject to state law limitations. There is only a requirement they be listed and that the organizations behind them cannot coordinate with the candidate.

Robson is also getting the benefit of outside spending, this from Building a Better Arizona, a political action committee that was formed specifically to help Robson get the nomination. Former state Senate President Karen Fann chairs it.

In a January press release, Fann said she and Robert Graham, former chairman of the Arizona Republican Party, believe Robson has the best chance of ousting the incumbent, something that “has not happened in over 60 years.”

In her own report, Hobbs reported receipts of $1.3 million. That includes nearly $53,000 from Copper State Values, a separate political action committee set up to spend money on her behalf for election related “shared expenses.”

Her spending in the past quarter was close to $810,000, leaving her with nearly $4.7 million cash on hand.

Correction: This story has been updated to correct the dollar amount of Biggs’ campaign donations.

Session Wrap: Gov. Hobbs on 2025’s victories and ongoing battles

Gov. Katie Hobbs managed to score legislative wins and sign a bipartisan budget during her third legislative session on the Ninth Floor, but not without lengthy battles with Republicans and a new veto record.

Hobbs sat down with the Arizona Capitol Times to recap what she calls a “very successful session” that saw movement on groundwater legislation, extended funding for individuals with developmental disabilities and the passage of a $17.6 billion budget.

But several issues were left on the table when lawmakers adjourned at the end of June, like school voucher reform, education funding and affordable housing initiatives. The governor hopes more can be done to address those areas when the Legislature reconvenes in 2026.

What do you consider your biggest wins of this session?

When we saved the funding for the developmentally disabled population, I think that set a really good tone for the budget. But in and of itself, it was a huge win. And we all watched these families come to the Capitol day after day, and the House Republicans refusing to give them a chance to speak in committee. I had a round table and just heard their stories. It was gut wrenching, and that’s why it was such a priority to save that program, and we did. I think my best day of the session was when we had that bill signing.

Some of your priorities weren’t addressed this session, which are you hoping to keep working on?

First of all, I’m really focused on what we did get done. If you look at the budget that we passed, and what I talked about in my State of the State — laying out the “Arizona Promise” — we covered a lot of those priorities. Giving state police and firefighters a much needed raise, continuing local border support and efforts on border security, investing in child care, Homes for Heroes. So there’s certainly a lot we can build on. Obviously, we didn’t get any reforms on ESAs, and that’s still going to be a priority, as well as getting a Prop. 123 to the voters that invests in public education and gives teachers a raise, I think that’s a huge priority. And then we have more to do on housing. Housing is a big one, and Low Income Housing Tax Credits. It was really unfortunate that we couldn’t get a champion there but we’re not giving up. And the rural groundwater reform is also still critical. I certainly am really proud of the work we did on the urban groundwater with the Ag-to-Urban bill, but making sure that we’re not taking that as a win and going away because rural groundwater is still a really critical issue.

What kind of changes are you hoping to see in the state’s ESA program?

Everything’s on the table. I think the plan we proposed this year was very reasonable, and something that even supporters of the program could get behind. We’re not trying to eliminate the program. We want it to go back to its original purpose and help kids with disabilities, kids in low-performing schools. The more reporting we see on the abuses, the more ammunition, for lack of a better word, it gives a reasonable proposal. It’s really mind boggling to me that Republicans want to continue to defend these abuses.

It seemed like groundwater was also going to go unaddressed this session, but the Ag-to-Urban bill came in at the last minute. What did it take to get that to the finish line?

I think it was having Senator (T.J.) Shope as the champion, and him being willing to usher that through. Last year, the bill that got to my desk … it was rushed through, and it wasn’t the right compromise. And so we came back to the table. The legislative process is always weird, and sometimes things just sail through, and sometimes they stop, and then at the end is when you see the flurry of activity. I’m really glad we got the compromise that worked to make this a good program, and I think it just took the leadership of Senator Shope to get it done.

A few of the bills you signed this session had Democratic opposition and aligned with policies proposed by conservative groups. What was the reasoning there?

I have focused on not looking at the partisan solutions, but things that are addressing problems. An example is the age verification for online content. I vetoed a similar bill last year, and I’ve heard from more and more parents who are really concerned about content that their kids are exposed to. And this seemed like the right balance, and I have no idea that it was possibly aligned with right-wing things. To me, it’s something that’s addressing an issue that a lot of parents are struggling with.

I have to ask about the veto record. Why do you feel like that isn’t the best way to measure your legislative effectiveness?

There was definitely an orchestrated attempt to run up the score on that veto record. Like I vetoed bills this year that I vetoed one or two times before, and nothing’s changed about the bill or my position on it. I’ve been really clear, I’m going to be a backstop against extreme legislation that attacks fundamental freedoms of Arizonans. And a lot of those bills did that. But I think if you point to the work that we did, when people are willing to come to the table and compromise, we can get big things done. Ag-to-Urban, the DDD funding, the Axon bill, the Diamondbacks bill, the bipartisan budget — those are all things that have impact and and those are fewer and further between than the partisan stuff that goes on. Being willing to stay at the table is a lot harder than just ramming something through that you know is going to get vetoed. And I didn’t come here to veto bills, but I’m going to continue to be the backstop when I need to.

You had to play hardball this session with your bill moratorium and vetoing two different budgets. How do you feel about those decisions looking back?

What we saw with the developmental disability funding and with the two House rogue budgets (was) that they decided that they didn’t have to work together and that they could just do whatever they wanted and not need my support. But I’m the person that signs bills into law, and it seemed like they weren’t willing to understand that. Hopefully now they do.

What lessons did you learn from this session and what lessons do you hope the Legislature learned?

We had a very successful session, and I think it’s because we’ve been willing to do the hard work of staying at the table, not just our office, but legislators on both sides of the aisle. We worked really hard to have support on both sides of the aisle for our budget. I think this may be the most successful budget we’ve had of the three. It’s just that compromise is important and it’s important to stay at the table even when it gets really hard. And I don’t know that those are lessons that were learned or just reconfirmed again this year.

Conflict defined the 2025 legislative session, will it set the stage for 2026?

Key Points: 
  • House left adrift by loss of chief of staff 
  • Conflicts followed, but likely won’t stick 
  • Election cycle to flare tensions next session

Conflict — whether between lawmakers, caucuses or chambers — is a natural fact of any legislative session, and this session was no exception.

Beyond intraparty splits and squabbles over bills, some observers noted key events colored this session and stand to shift the next. One of the most prominent events was the loss of the House of Representatives majority chief of staff and the ousting of the Senate majority leader after a series of seconds on unwelcome budget amendments. 

But, despite pointed press releases, barbed floor speeches, failed bills, a particularly fiery budget process and a last minute change in leadership, lobbyists, consultants and a lawmaker say any wreckage left after the end of session typically becomes long forgotten by the time lawmakers convene again in January. 

Still, 2025 created a point of reflection for political analysts. Which lawmakers fared well? Which stoked proverbial fires? What factors came to impact legislation and budget negotiations? And how does all of that stack up for the future? 

And with the election approaching, tensions are likely to flare again, mirroring the national political landscape as lawmakers polish their portfolios for voters. 

“I don’t know that I’m going to observe anything earth shattering, beyond common sense here, that both sides are going to get dug in even more,” consultant Jason Rose said. “So the sausage making might be even more colorful next year because of the election than it was this year.” 

The session started out standard. But in February, longtime House Chief of Staff Michael Hunter departed his post, leaving a key position in the chamber vacant.

Nick Ponder, senior director of Government Affairs at High Ground Consulting, said Hunter’s departure effectively left the House a “ship without a rudder.” 

“The abrupt departure of Michael Hunter remained a challenge for the House,” Ponder said. “It would be for almost any legislative body, because of his depth of knowledge and experience.” 

The House persisted without a chief of staff, but not without its share of obstacles.

Members clashed over supplemental funding to the Division of Developmental Disabilities, specifically after stonewalling from Rep. Matt Gress, R-Scottsdale, and Rep. David Livingston, R-Peoria. That only ended after Rep. Julie Willoughby, R-Chandler, cut out of the caucus and worked across the aisle to get a clean continuation passed.

There were also some terse exchanges between Republicans over legislation to impose higher penalties for stolen valor, and the Axon saga, a conflict spawned by the business’s efforts to create a massive headquarters in Scottsdale, drew further lines in the sand between lawmakers. 

And then came the budget — marked by a House head start, fractured fiscal approaches, some knock-down, drag-out soliloquies against the opposing chamber, an Italian wedding and a premature sine die. 

But it all led to a budget with the blessing of both chambers and the governor. 

“Two thirds of chambers voted for the budget. Not everyone’s happy. But how many budgets are people really happy (with)? Especially when you have divided government,” consultant Barrett Marson said.

 Though Gress missed the final budget vote, he said the end of the year sparring is par for the course. 

“Every legislative session ends with tension. Bills die, bills get voted down. Bills never get heard,” Gress said. “The interim is a healing time for members. They go back to their districts, they can decompress from activity at the Capitol, and then we all rally again on opening day. We’re excited to see each other and regroup.” 

Marson similarly noted the need to have some semblance of a bounce back in the Legislature.

“If every little slight is going to be the armageddon for you, you’re not going to live a productive legislative career,” Marson said. 

At the end of the session, though, the powers that be saw a shift, specifically with Senate majority leader Janae Shamp booted and replaced with Sen. John Kavanagh — a change consultants say could alter the dynamics of the Senate and create new tension.

“It doesn’t matter if you’re in the Arizona State Senate or you’re working at Circle K, demotions are not wonderful for the locker room, so it’ll be interesting to see her approach with the team over the next year,” consultant Jason Rose said. “When you look at someone like John Kavanagh, who is both very conservative but also sagacious and practical, you clearly see a chamber and a body that’s looking to and leaning on that.” 

The next session also brings lawmakers closer to an election, which could change the dynamics among elected officials, especially those seeking higher office. 

Rose pointed to Senate President Warren Petersen as one example, noting that he is running for attorney general while concurrently serving as the Senate President.

“(Attorney General Kris) Mayes is among the most talented elected officials, like her, or not, in the last 20 years in Arizona, and that positioning battle between those two is really going to be something,” Rose said. “That’s Pay Per View political Arizona television, right there.” 

In reflecting on the legislative session as a whole, Rose said, like any legislative session, the results ranged from “good to goofy to outrageous” but said neither Republicans, Democrats nor Gov. Katie Hobbs is unlikely to see any real impact politically.

“I don’t think the Governor and the Democrats or the Republicans did anything earth shattering that’s going to affect their prospects,” Rose said. 

Affordable housing: An issue yet unsolved

Key Points:
  • Lawmakers had ambitious goals for housing in 2025
  • Very little consequential legislation passed on the issue
  • Certain initiatives set to expire in 2026

Gov. Katie Hobbs outlined ambitious goals for Arizona’s housing policy during her State of the State Address in January, but some stakeholders think lawmakers punted those issues with little accomplishment. 

Hobbs had a major win with Senate Bill 1611, the “Ag-to-Urban” bill that allows high-water users like farmers to convert their farms into lower density housing, a far less water intensive alternative. According to the governor’s office, the measure could result in the construction of up to tens of thousands of new homes and conserve nearly 10 million acre-feet of water. 

The sponsor of the measure, Sen. T.J. Shope, R-Coolidge, called the new law the “most consequential piece of groundwater conservation legislation” since the 1980 Groundwater Management Act. Incidentally, the legislation could also have the dual effect of alleviating housing shortages by providing developers more leeway with water restrictions.

“Hard-working Arizonans will be able to pursue their American dream of homeownership as home supply increases in Maricopa and Pinal counties and prices naturally ease. Our farmers, who are ready to retire, can reap the benefits of their land while also allowing the state to save water,” Shope said in a news release after Hobbs signed the bill. 

Several housing policy advocates still felt unsatisfied with the 57th legislative session after the state’s Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program didn’t receive new funding for an extension.

Hobbs called for a LIHTC extension in January, along with cutting “red tape that’s driving up” the cost of housing and a $15 million appropriation for the Housing Trust Fund, but lawmakers accomplished little on those goals. 

A group of Republican and Democrat lawmakers formed a bipartisan housing caucus at the beginning of the session to work on the “Arizona Starter Homes Act,” Senate Bill 1229, and other housing issues. 

The Starter Homes Act proposed targeted municipal regulations on the construction of new homes, but lawmakers were unable to reach an agreement with cities, which believed the issue overrode their zoning authority, and the measure never received a vote in the House. 

The measure would have prohibited cities from requiring design features of homes like the inclusion of garages or specific amenities and floor plans. It called for minimum lot sizes of 3,000 square feet with the idea of allowing developers to build smaller homes with design features that homebuyers could afford. 

This was the third consecutive year that a comprehensive zoning bill was introduced at the Legislature. Former Republican Sen. Steve Kaiser watched as his zoning reform bill failed in the Senate in 2023, and Hobbs vetoed the 2024 Starter Homes Act after it received heavy opposition from municipalities.  

The League of Arizona Cities and Towns proposed its own Starter Homes Act bill in 2025 with Senate Bill 1698, but that measure wasn’t supported by legislators and failed to get a committee hearing.

All of this points to a complex issue being punted further and further down the road by legislators unable to reach a reasonable agreement with stakeholders. 

“We had a responsibility this session to deliver on affordable housing, and we failed,” Sen. Analise Ortiz, D-Phoenix, said during her vote for the state budget. 

The league’s bill would have limited starter homes to individuals or families with incomes below 120% of the area median income, and it would have limited occupancy for up to 15 years, while allowing cities to have more control over density in neighborhoods than SB1229 offered. 

League officials argue these provisions guarantee homes are sold to Arizona residents instead of being bought by corporations which would then turn around and list the homes on the market at a higher price while maintaining local communities.

“Buying an affordable house is a legitimate challenge across Arizona,” said the League’s Executive Director Tom Belshe in a news release. “We are looking out for the needs of Arizonans and are asking legislators to ensure that hard-working residents are able to buy homes – not out-of-state investors and speculators.”

Although the major housing goals for the governor and other lawmakers were punted to 2026, Democrats celebrated some small housing wins. 

Senate Minority Leader Priya Sundareshan, D-Tucson, noted in her budget vote that it includes $16.5 million for homelessness services such as eviction prevention and shelter operations for youth and families. 

Hobbs’ Homes for Heroes initiative also got $2 million, and that program helps keep military veterans from being unhoused. 

All of this equates to affordable housing remaining a key issue in 2026 for legislators looking to make the American dream a little more realistic for Arizonans.

Hobbs’ appointee gets new $170K contract at DES amid staff layoffs

Key Points:
  • Dana Allmond to receive $170,000-a-year contract renewal at DES
  • The agency recently eliminated 5% of staff due to federal grant reductions 
  • An opponent of Hobbs calls the contract a ‘slush fund’ for governor’s friends
Dana Allmond (2023 photo from Arizona Department of Veterans’ Services)

Dana Allmond is going to get another $170,000-a-year contract in a job created by the Hobbs administration after the governor replaced her as head of the Department of Veterans’ Services.

The Department of Economic Security confirmed to Capitol Media Services that it is renewing the contract for Almond to be a “senior executive consultant” for the agency. Christian Slater, press aide to Gov. Katie Hobbs, said she is part of the DES “senior engagement team” helping veterans access the services they need from the agency.

The new contract comes as DES has just announced the elimination of 5% of its regular staff due to both the reduction of federal grants and the federal government’s shifting of costs to the state. The fired workers got a 2 1/2-week notice with their final day last week, just days after Allmond’s new contract took effect.

Slater, however, said that development is irrelevant to Allmond’s new contract.

“The workforce reduction at DES was an unfortunate consequence of the Trump administration’s reckless cuts that endanger DES’s work to combat fraud and efficiently deliver the critical services Arizonans rely on,” he said.

And what of the money being spent — not only on Allmond, but on a $114,00-a-year separate contract for Marcus Trombetta, to work with her, while DES staffers are losing their jobs?

“To conflate the two is nonsensical,” Slater said.

This is her third position with the state in less than three years.

Hobbs hand picked Allmond in 2023 to run the Department of Veterans’ Services after the Marana Democrat, a retired Army lieutenant colonel, lost a 2022 bid for the Legislature.

Last year, the governor had a fight with Sen. Jake Hoffman and the Republican-led Senate over getting her nominees approved, including Allmond. After a judge ruled that the governor had illegally avoided the required Senate confirmation, Hobbs agreed to resubmit most of their names for proper consideration.

Allmond, however, was not on that list.

Instead, Hobbs withdrew her nomination and replaced her with John F. Scott, who had been her deputy. Allmond was demoted to deputy but allowed to keep the same $170,000 salary.

Then, at the beginning of this year, DES created a new position for her, also at the same salary.

The issue came up earlier this year when Michael Wisehart, appointed to head DES, was quizzed during his own confirmation hearings. Hoffman, who chairs the Committee on Director Nominations, asked him about what exactly Allmond was being paid to do.

Wisehart responded that she was going to help connect veterans with services.

Hoffman countered that was the responsibility of the Department of Veterans’ Services. Wisehart did not dispute that, but said DES also has programs that work with veterans.

Wisehart also made it clear during that hearing that hiring Allmond wasn’t his doing. He said she was already under contract when Hobbs named him DES director in January.

The renewed contract caught Hoffman’s attention.

“Katie Hobbs’ jaw-dropping, nearly $600,000, handout of taxpayer money to a former Democrat politician and her assistant for newly invented jobs reeks of corruption,” he told Capitol Media Services.

And Hoffman noted that, unlike the first contract, the renewal came while Wisehart was in charge.

“Wisehart could previously wipe his hands of Hobbs treating Arizona’s government like her personal friends-and-family slush fund,” he said.

And now?

“He’s lost his ability to distance himself from her corrupt and wasteful hiring schemes,” Hoffman said.

But Slater, defending the contract renewal, said that Allmond and Trombly are needed even though DES already has a program designed to help veterans and eligible spouses obtain employment and job training.

“As many veterans continue to face economic challenges, this is important work that will help Arizona better serve the brave men and women who served us,” he said. Slater said the pair are helping military veterans and their families “navigate the range of services available to them, and identifying barriers they face in obtaining assistance.”

However, he would only dismiss as “nonsensical” any questions about why the state awarded new contracts to the pair during the layoffs.

Wisehart said those layoffs were necessary.

“We have been closely monitoring our fiscal situation with a strong commitment to avoiding staff reductions,” Wisehart said in a statement prepared for Capitol Media Services about the job cuts. “Despite implementing cost-saving measures to maintain workforce stability while addressing budget constraints, the financial challenges have persisted, making it impossible to sustain our current staffing levels.”

And that will affect the Arizonans whom the agency is supposed to serve, not just with job training and unemployment compensation, but also other DES-administered programs like food stamps.

“We cannot compensate for millions in funding cuts without significant impacts to clients,” he said.

Layoffs alone may not solve the agency’s financial issues.

Generally speaking, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program is paid for with federal dollars, with the states sharing in the cost of administration.

Now, the new federal budget is shifting a greater cost to the state, boosting administrative costs to the state by $38 million, to $113 million.

And the federal budget also includes a new charge to states based on their payment “error rates.” Here, too, DES is expected to absorb about $115 million a year.

Hobbs breaks state veto record thanks to budget bills

Key Points:
  • Hobbs broke her own veto record on June 25
  • The new record is 169 bills in one session
  • Veto number could climb amid ongoing budget negotiations

Gov. Katie Hobbs set a new veto record June 25 with the help of House Republicans’ budget bills and some repeat offender bills.

After vetoing 28 budget bills, Hobbs’ 2025 veto record shot from 140 to 168. She also vetoed one other piece of legislation after the budget bills, bringing the grand total to 169 and beating her own record of 143 bills vetoed in a single session.

Hobbs blamed House Republicans for the vetoes after repeatedly promising to veto both budget packages because they did not align with the bipartisan deal her office worked out with the Senate.

“It’s now time for House Republican leadership to set the political games to the side and work with their colleagues in a productive fashion to deliver a bipartisan solution for the people of our state,” Hobbs wrote in a veto letter. 

Republican Rep. David Livingston sponsored the 28 budget bills, 14 of which consisted of House Republicans’ preferred budget and another 14 of which made up the “skinny” continuation budget. He celebrated setting a different kind of veto record in a post on social media.

“I set the State of Arizona record for most bills vetoed in a single day!” Livingston wrote on X. “28 budget bills vetoed by Governor Hobbs today.” 

And though Hobbs broke her own record, she did not veto 169 unique pieces of legislation this session. According to an Arizona Capitol Times analysis of bills Hobbs has vetoed during her three years in office, at least 18 were also vetoed in 2023 or 2024.

Those bills were all introduced by Republicans and cover a range of issues from elections and firearms to LGBTQ+ rights and school boards. Some of the bills received slight tweaks after meeting the veto stamp, but others were reintroduced without any changes at all. 

The governor previously told reporters that she believes Republicans are hoping to portray her as “obstructionist” by pushing legislation she has already vetoed or has stated she would not support. Hobbs’ spokesman, Christian Slater, defended her use of vetoes in a statement.

“The governor didn’t get elected to veto bills, and she has a long record of bipartisan accomplishments,” Slater said. “But she won’t hesitate to stand up to extreme and partisan legislation that attacks everyday Arizonans. That’s exactly what she has done throughout her term and that’s what she will continue to do so long as she’s governor.”

Republican Sen. John Kavanagh of Fountain Hills is one of the more prolific sponsors of previously vetoed bills. He has reintroduced the same three bills related to LGBTQ+ students, pronouns and restroom use every year of Hobbs’ tenure. 

Many bills vetoed in 2023 were reintroduced in 2024 as ballot measures, only to be rejected by voters in November. Other 2023 vetoes were reintroduced in 2024, but failed to make it to the governor’s desk. 

And Sen. Wendy Rogers’ infamous bill banning red light cameras is currently awaiting action from the governor thanks to a late night vote in the House on June 24. It is almost certainly headed for a veto after receiving one in 2023 and failing to make it to Hobbs’ desk or the ballot in 2024. 

Excluding budget bills, Rep. Gail Griffin is currently leading Republicans in the most bills vetoed by the governor at 17. Griffin also took home that trophy in 2024 due to her introduction of groundwater legislation that Hobbs pledged to veto during both sessions. 

As of publication, Hobbs has signed 225 bills this session. That’s more bills than the 205 she signed in 2023, and fewer than she signed in 2024 – 259. 

Republican Sen. J.D. Mesnard currently has the most legislation signed by Hobbs in 2025, with 15 of his bills making it across the finish line so far. Democratic Rep. Alma Hernandez leads her caucus in the number of bills signed, with four under her belt this session. 

Lawmakers are still sending legislation to Hobbs’ desk — including the Senate’s budget proposal — so the numbers are not yet set in stone. As of the afternoon of June 26, 14 bills are awaiting the governor’s action.

You don't have credit card details available. You will be redirected to update payment method page. Click OK to continue.