Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Tag: Republicans

GOP budget close: Kavanagh claims party is less than two weeks from proposal

Key Points:
  • Republicans say they are close to a state budget proposal 
  • Negotiations occurring amid ongoing bill moratorium by Gov. Katie Hobbs
  • A Prop.123 extension hangs in the balance

Republican negotiators say they’re close to sending the governor a state budget, signalling a potential end to Gov. Katie Hobbs’ recent bill moratorium.

Out of frustration and with no budget in hand, Hobbs declared on April 13 that she would reject any measure that made it to her desk until Republican lawmakers delivered her a proposal. That challenge was echoed by her spokesman Christian Slater, who again demanded a budget on April 21 — the 100th day of the legislative session. 

“It has been a month since Governor Hobbs called on legislators to show their budget to the public, and Republican leadership has given Arizonans nothing but evasive answers and empty promises about their budget proposal,” Slater said in a prepared statement. “It’s time for Republican leadership to show the people of Arizona their plans and come back to the negotiating table to pass a bipartisan and balanced budget.”

Now, less than two weeks after that announcement, GOP leaders say they are close to a plan.

Senate Appropriations, Transportation and Technology Committee Vice Chairman John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, told the Arizona Capitol Times that it could come within the next “week or two,” although he said he wouldn’t be surprised if what’s proposed is vetoed by the governor. 

“This is an offer we’re making to her. Short of lacing the tower water supply of psychedelic drugs, we expect there will be some changes,” Kavanagh said.

Last week, Senate Pro Tempore T.J. Shope, R-Coolidge, also confirmed Republicans were aiming to get a budget done around the 100-day mark of the session. 

The effort to coordinate a budget has been complicated by recent reports of lower-than-expected state revenue for January. The Joint Legislative Budget Committee’s updated April 16 forecast now projects $378 million in available resources rather than the $577 million originally estimated last year, a nearly $200 million reduction which staff attributes to the ongoing U.S. conflict with Iran, disruptions in oil markets and changing consumer behavior. 

The forecast does not take into account conforming the state’s tax policy to President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, an already-approved federal tax measure expected to reduce general fund revenue by more than $400 million if the state fully conforms.

Kavanagh said he expects the reduced revenue projections to have a minimal impact on budget negotiations since they’re working with more than $17 billion. 

“We hate to lose the estimate, but I think it’s a transient loss,” Kavanagh said. 

Republicans have also signaled they don’t intend to send a ballot referral to voters this year to renew Proposition 123, which Hobbs and Democrats have pushed as a way to free up about $300 million for the state budget. With Prop. 123 expired, the Legislature has had to backfill education funding for the voter-approved school funding measure using money from the state’s general fund. 

Still, Capitol observers are optimistic that a Prop. 123 referral could be passed this year — and they may not have a choice. 

HighGround Political Affairs Consultants CEO Chuck Coughlin said he believes lower revenue projections might force lawmakers to turn to a Prop. 123 renewal for additional revenue. 

“That’s where my head would go,” Coughlin said. “If I’m the Democrats, I would say what do I need to give up here to go get that money and put it in the bank.”

But Republicans have been divided on what a Prop. 123 renewal should look like. Rep. Matt Gress, R-Phoenix, previously told the Arizona Capitol Times that there isn’t agreement on the issue within the caucus and Republicans don’t want to bet $300 million at the ballot. 

With uncertainty abound, lawmakers will likely look to make cuts to last year’s budget. Kavanagh said he expects “minor” cuts all across the state government, except for public safety. 

“Government has grown since the last round of big cuts when we had the Great Recession, so there’s probably a little slab here and there that can be excised without pain,” Kavanagh said. 

Whatever budget is first produced will likely just be a starting point between GOP lawmakers and the governor. 

“(Hobbs) will be standing at the door of the Capitol with her veto stamp,” said lobbyist Barry Aarons. 

The Legislature has until June 30, the end of the fiscal year, to pass a budget and avoid a government shutdown. 

Correction: This article was updated to reflect Sen. John Kavanagh’s position on the Senate Appropriations, Transportation and Technology Committee.

Survey: What makes a good election in the eyes of Arizonans?

Dr. Sybil Francis
Dr. Sybil Francis

Elections matter. Voting matters. That’s what we learn in school. But changes being proposed to how Arizonans vote at the national and state levels would make your civics teacher cry. But even more importantly, the proposed changes — most designed to make voting more difficult — fly in the face of what large majorities of Arizonans say matters to them when it comes to voting and elections. I know this from multiple public opinion surveys we have conducted over the years.

For over two decades, we at the Center for the Future of Arizona have asked Arizonans across the state for their thoughts on issues critical to Arizona’s future, including education, health care, immigration and the environment. Our aim is to advance the voices of Arizonans on what matters to them and to our state’s future. We want to help leaders in our state see that Arizonans agree on many important issues, even when their voices get drowned out by partisan politics.

Our most recent survey explores what Arizonans believe a good election should deliver — regardless of party, candidate or outcome. 

We started with a very basic question. Do Arizonans think fair and secure elections are important to a healthy democracy? The answer is virtually unanimous: 97% of Arizonans agree. This is the highest level of agreement we have seen in two decades of public opinion research. And a significant majority of Arizonans believe that their vote makes a difference, with 79% believing that it does. The voices seeking to undermine trust in elections and claims of voter fraud have not eroded these fundamental beliefs.

And what do Arizonans think about some of the proposed changes to how elections are run? Do these hot button issues resonate with Arizonans? Where do Arizonans stand on limiting or eliminating the option to cast their vote by mail, cutting off early ballot drop-off before election day, speeding up reporting of election results, or reverting to precinct voting?

The disconnect between these proposals and what Arizonans actually want could not be greater.

With regard to voting by mail, 81% of Arizonans want to keep their option to do so. That’s a supermajority and includes majorities of Republicans, Democrats and independent/unaffiliated Arizonans. In 2024, 81% of ballots in Arizona were cast using returned mail-in ballots.

And while Arizonans certainly think receiving timely results is great, nearly seven in 10 prefer preserving their option to drop off their early ballot up to, and on, election day. We asked if they preferred this option even if it means election results take longer to report, and the answer was clear: yes. In 2024, an estimated 8% of Arizona’s votes were mail-in ballots returned in person on election day. 

With regard to voting centers, 89% of Arizonans want more voting centers, including 91% of Republicans, 95% of Democrats, and 83% of independent/unaffiliated Arizonans. These and other trends in our survey results show that Arizonans want more and more convenient options to vote, not fewer.

Finally, we asked Arizonans what makes a good election. What should a good election deliver regardless of your party or whether or not you like the outcome? How do you want to experience voting? Among nine core principles we asked about, three clear priorities rise to the top: accuracy, trustworthiness and transparency. Other priorities considered essential include voter access, fiscal responsibility, voter participation, preserving multiple ways to vote and the safety of voters and election workers.

Only one principle fell below 50% support: speed of reporting results. Speed is important to voters, but it’s not as important as accuracy, trustworthiness, transparency or other priorities such as voter access and convenience.

What does this mean for current debates about how elections are designed and run?

Arizonans have spoken on these issues. Will leaders listen? What will this mean for current debates about how elections are designed and run? Will the policies advanced reflect the interests of the voters or run cross-wise with them?

Listening to Arizonans and understanding their priorities doesn’t end debate, but should inform it. As changes to elections are considered, we should ask whether they align with what voters say are hallmarks of a good election. Arizonans know what matters to them, and that should matter to everyone, including our elected leaders.

Sybil Francis, Ph.D. is chair, president & CEO of Center for the Future of Arizona, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that brings Arizonans together to create a stronger and brighter future for our state.

When Washington cuts taxes for billionaires, Arizona pays the price

Mitzy Epstein

Funding for education and roads in Arizona is always under threat, and now Republicans in Congress have made revenue problems even worse for states like Arizona by passing the federal budget bill, HR1. Congress gave big unfair tax cuts to big corporations and individuals making millions per year while adding $4.5 trillion to the national debt. At the state level it is also wreaking havoc: a big loss of state revenue. Because Arizona’s state income tax starts with the federal adjusted gross income, this federal welfare for the wealthy flowed through to our state’s general fund, hurting our state’s bottom line.   

Every year the AZ Legislature must make a choice to conform to Congressional tax changes or not, and we almost always do! But this year, it would cause the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars. The AZ Legislature is likely not to agree to add all those tax cuts for billionaires to our income tax code this year, just as past Legislatures have chosen to do on some of these exact same corporate tax cuts — due to their high cost and unfair treatment of non-corporate taxpayers.

In November, Gov. Katie Hobbs issued an executive order for the Arizona Department of Revenue to publish tax forms with the Arizona standard deduction to be increased to match the federal deduction. It will give a small tax cut to 90% of Arizona taxpayers who do not itemize their deductions. The forms are published, and tax filing season is underway.  

Current law (ARS 43-107) protects taxpayers from penalties or interest who rely on and file the tax forms as written, even if the Legislature changes tax law due to this conformity issue. Do not fall for the Republican false narrative of tax filing chaos. This is just an excuse to justify their desire to enshrine the federal corporate tax cuts into state law. 

If the state Legislature added all the tax carve-outs from HR1 into our state tax code, we would have to make $438 million in cuts to vital things like education and roads to balance the budget. Nonetheless, Republicans in the Legislature have tried not once, but twice to pass a tax-cut bill this year without planning how to pay for it.  

After accounting for all of the spending needs the state is required to fund, Arizona has a deficit in the ballpark of $1 billion, on a total budget of $18 billion.  We do not have spare change to provide more welfare for the wealthy. Arizona Democrats side with the taxpayers of Arizona, not corporate interests and their failed theory that more tax cuts will “trickle down” to everyone else.  

This essay is not tax advice in any form. It is an explanation to dispel any worries that state Republicans may have caused while crying, “wolf!” when there is no wolf in the tax forms. Republicans in Congress caused the tax problems with giveaways to Wall Street, and Gov. Hobbs took action to help the working people of Main Street.  

Mitzi Epstein is the Senate representative of Arizona’s 12th Legislative District. 

As crossover week nears, Democrat and bipartisan bills finally debut

Key Points
  • Democrats struggle to get Republican committee chairs to hear their bills
  • As crossover week approaches, a handful of Democratic and bipartisan bills have passed committees
  • Of the bipartisan bills, many would benefit certain Arizonans, especially in health care

Throughout the session and up until the last minute, Democrats have begged Republican committee chairs to hear their bills, and finally, some pleas have been heard. 

At least 14 Democratic bills have passed committee or are awaiting a hearing, but none would address the affordability crisis that Democrats have used as a rallying cry for much of their work. 

Crossover week starts Feb. 23, and successful Senate bills and House bills will cross the great divide and be assigned to the opposite chamber’s committees. Although nothing ever truly dies at the Legislature, if the bills don’t make it through the next committees, they’ll be stopped and only a bill, never a law. 

There are at least five bills in which the Democrat is the prime sponsor, with at least one Republican lawmaker signing on as a co-sponsor, and all but two of those bills passed. There are at least seven bills with Republicans as the prime sponsors, but a Democrat signed on as a co-sponsor and all but two passed committees. 

Sen. Theresa Hatathlie, D-Tuba City, passed three bills out of committee so far, which is the most of any Senate Democrat, according to Senate research staff.

None of the Democrats’ bills heard focused on their unified message of “An Arizona We Can Afford,” a message they have pushed all session. Caucus members said their bills would address housing issues, education and myriad rising costs in health care, child care and utilities. 

They’re going for quality over quantity, Senate Minority Leader Priya Sundareshan said.

“I’m certain that we have not held back,” she said. “We, continually, are finding new issues that crop up that we want to address with new bills, and then, of course, there is the backlog of Democratic bills that Republicans never hear.”

Meanwhile, Republicans have introduced their own bills they say would address affordability, though it’s likely some of those bills could meet Gov. Katie Hobbs’ veto pen. 

Sen. John Kavanagh previously told the Arizona Capitol Times that the parties just have too different philosophical ideologies to find bipartisan support on affordability. 

“Republicans want to grow the economy by cutting taxes so people have more money and businesses can grow. Democrats want to deal with the needs by increasing taxes so the government can run programs,” he said.

Republicans have also introduced a number of bills relating to culture wars and ones that wouldn’t seem to address affordability. A news release from Opportunity Arizona, a nonpartisan organization, said the bills would make Arizona unaffordable and unsafe, while legislation that could actually help is being dismissed. 

Some of the bills mentioned are Senate Bill 1638, one of the tax conformity bills proposed by Sen. J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler. Another is Senate Bill 1051, which would require hospitals to collect immigration status, filed by Sen. Wendy Rogers, R-Flagstaff. And a third, Senate Bill 1333, would propose to fix the state’s 8.84% error rate on the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) or penalize the Department of Economic Security if it’s not below 3% by 2030, filed by Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, but Democrats argued it would further strain the department. 

“The legislation that Arizona MAGA extremists at the Legislature are prioritizing is doing the opposite of lowering costs,” Executive Director Ben Scheel of Opportunity Arizona said. “Their corporate welfare agenda is handing out billions to multinational corporations — all on the backs of working Arizonans’ tax dollars so the rich can hoard more wealth and ICE can terrorize mothers and children.” 

So what do Democrats and bipartisan bills focus on?

Despite the affordability topic seemingly being pushed aside for now, the Democrats’ bills and the bipartisan bills are aimed at benefiting certain groups of Arizonans – if signed into law. Here’s a handful of examples.

Senate Bill 1295, filed by Sen. Brian Fernandez, D-Yuma, and co-sponsored by four Republicans, would allow eligible inmates who have a debilitating illness, including ones that are terminal, life-threatening, functional or cognitive impairment or inability to independently live daily life, to receive care at a contracted facility. Written confirmation from the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (Medicaid) would be required that the inmate qualifies for enrollment in the Arizona Long-Term Care System.

Senate Bill 1630, filed by Sen. Hildy Angius, R-Bullhead City, and co-sponsored by a mix of Republicans and Democrats, would establish a home and community-based service program for adults who are seriously mentally ill under the state’s Medicaid program. 

Senate Bill 1803, filed by Sen. David Gowan, R-Sierra Vista, and co-sponsored by Sen. Kiana Sears, D-Mesa, would establish prohibitions, requirements and procedures for people who assist veterans with their benefits and limit any compensation received for providing assistance. Though this bill did receive pushback from the Arizona VFW and the American Legion Department of Arizona, Gowan said it’s a step in the right direction. 

Another bill relating to health care is Senate Bill 1776, which would allow traditional healing services covered by Medicaid to be delivered through an urban Indian organization. Sen. Sally Ann Gonzales, D-Tucson, filed the bill, along with other Democratic co-sponsors.

Senate Bill 1740, filed by Sen. Theresa Hatathlie, would require each law enforcement agency to develop and conduct employee training on the Turquoise Alert System and the issuance of a Turquoise Alert. Along with four more Democratic senators signing on, Sen. TJ Shope also co-sponsored the bill. 

Democrats attempt affordability bills in Republican-controlled committees

Key Points:
  • Democrats file 257 bills this session, emphasizing affordability 
  • Many affordability bills will require bipartisan support for approval
  • Approval would impact health care, education, housing and other industries

Arizonans are facing an affordability crisis, but Democrats are determined to address at least some of those issues if they can only get their bills heard in committee. 

Democrats started the legislative session with a unifying message of “An Arizona We Can Afford,” which includes tackling housing issues, education, and myriad rising costs in health care, child care and utilities.

The minority party has introduced at least 257 pieces of legislation (including resolutions), far fewer than the Republicans’ 600 bills, according to an Arizona Capitol Times analysis. But they’re going for quality over quantity, Senate Minority Leader Priya Sundareshan told the Capitol Times earlier this year. 

“I’m certain that we have not held back,” she said. “We, continually, are finding new issues that crop up that we want to address with new bills, and then, of course, there is the backlog of Democratic bills that Republicans never hear.”

Senate Democratic bills are rarely heard in committees these days. Many of the bills are assigned, but the Republican lawmakers leading the committees haven’t put them on the agenda and so they go unheard. 

At a news conference on Feb. 5, legislative Democrats, along with the advocacy organization Opportunity Arizona, reiterated this issue. They pointed out several pieces of Republican legislation that won’t help affordability, such as Sen. Janae Shamp’s Senate Bill 1070, which would direct the Department of Health to study so-called “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” and several senators’ bills that would support anti-immigration efforts. 

“We are in the minority, but we are also critical votes for many important things that need to happen in this state. We eventually need to sign a budget, so we will be looking at all of the tools available to us to ensure that these affordability bills are heard,” Sundareshan said. “Republicans need to give these bills a hearing so that we can have an Arizona that we can afford.”

It’s unlikely though, as the philosophical divide hasn’t been crossed too many times this session. 

“Republicans want to grow the economy by cutting taxes so people have more money and businesses can grow. Democrats want to deal with the needs by increasing taxes so the government can run programs,” Senate Majority Leader John Kavanagh, said. “We’re philosophically different. Never the twain shall meet.”

There will be a large number of bills that are not controversial, such as those needing changes to accommodate for changing conditions or changing federal law, and likely a good number of bipartisan bills that will make it to the other chamber and possibly Gov. Katie Hobbs’ desk, he said. 

The plethora of bills paves the way to mid-term elections, allowing voters on both sides to see what their parties supported or opposed. It also speaks to what bills Hobbs approves or vetoes. 

“We send bills up knowing they’ll be vetoed. The people see what the governor vetoed, and if they agree, they can vote for the governor. If they disagree, they can vote against the governor next time,” Kavanagh said.

With two parties standing on the philosophical divide over how to address affordability, Arizonans are caught in the middle, still fighting rising costs of living. 

“The hope here is that Republican legislators will start to talk with Democrats about our affordability ideas, either hear our bills or incorporate our ideas into the bills that they’re moving forward so that the governor actually can sign them and help address, give relief to Arizonans who need it,” Sundareshan said. 

But nothing gets done in a divided government, Kavanagh said. 

Both parties have introduced bills that would impact affordability for many people, and the following list is the best example of each category, according to an Arizona Capitol Times analysis.

Democrats:

Housing:

Senate Bill 1442 would prohibit a corporation from purchasing single-family homes unless the home has been on the market for more than 90 days or there is a change in the asking price. It would also require annual reporting of single-family home purchases and sales by corporations and impose a $20,000 fine per violation for noncompliance. 

Sen. Analise Ortiz, D-Phoenix, authored the bill and it has been referred to Regulatory Affairs and Government Efficiency (RAGE) and Rules, but hasn’t been heard. 

Health care:

Senate Bill 1797 would prohibit price gouging for manufacturers and wholesale distributors of essential generic drugs. The attorney general would be able to investigate significant price increases, require cost and access expansion disclosures and enforce penalties. If found guilty, manufacturers may be required to sell the drug to the state medical assistance program participants at pre-violation prices for up to one year. 

Sen. Kiana Sears, D-Mesa, is the author, but the bill has not been assigned to any committee. 

Child care:

Senate Bill 1597 would amend eligibility and funding provisions for child care assistance, including income thresholds, prioritization of waiting lists and criteria for denial or termination of assistance. It would also allocate money to eliminate the current waiting list and provide assistance to eligible families with incomes up to 165% of the federal poverty level. 

Sen. Lela Alston, D-Phoenix, is the author, but the bill has not been heard in either Health and Human Services, Appropriations, Transportation and Technology or Rules. 

Utilities:

Senate Bill 1384 would prohibit utility companies and corporations from using ratepayer funds for political contributions, charitable giving, advertising, lobbying and other nonrecoverable expenses. 

The author is Sundareshan and the bill has not been heard in the Natural Resources Committee. 

Republicans:

Housing: 

Senate Bill 1431 would prohibit municipalities from imposing certain design or aesthetic standards on single-family homes and accessory dwelling units in subdivisions or developments, unless federally mandated. It would not apply to historic districts, tribal lands and military noise zones. 

The author is Sen. Shawnna Bolick, R-Phoenix, and there is bipartisan support for this one, as Sen. Flavio Bravo, D-Phoenix, also signed on. It has not been heard in RAGE or Rules. 

Health care: 

Senate Bill 1316 establishes the Arizona Rural Health Transformation Fund, which would be managed by the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System. It would use money from the Rural Health Transformation Program, a federal program that promotes rural health innovation, strategic partnerships, infrastructure development and workforce investment. The bill would require three public meetings in each of Arizona’s largest metropolitan areas to gather input and feedback on how the money should be spent. An expenditure plan must also be submitted to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee for approval. 

The author is Sen. Hildy Angius, R-Bullhead City, and the bill passed the Health and Human Services Committee on a 4-3 vote, with Democratic senators voting against it. 

Child care: 

Senate Bill 1867 would amend laws related to the Empowerment Scholarship Accounts. If a parent does not renew their student’s ESA, any remaining money will be returned to the Department of Education and the account will be closed. After a student graduates high school, the funds can be used for college but any unused funds would go back to the state. 

Sen. Jake Hoffman, R-Queen Creek, is the author, but the bill has not been assigned to a committee. 

Utilities: 

Senate Bill 1558 addresses regulations for mobile home parks and the requirement that landlords specify utility charges. It also provides remedies for tenants, including giving a written notice to a landlord and then filing a civil complaint. 

Senate Majority Leader John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, is the author, but the bill has not been heard in RAGE or Rules. 

Lawmakers face re-election amid shifting political landscape

Key Points:
  • Democrats see 2026 as their best chance to gain majority in state Legislature
  • Republicans hold 17-13 Senate majority and 33-27 House majority
  • Democrats are targeting seven legislative districts in their re-election efforts

State lawmakers are running for re-election this year, and after a red wave in 2024 that expanded Republicans’ majorities in both legislative chambers, Democrats are confident they can gain ground in November. 

“This year truly is the best chance that Democrats have at taking the majority,” House Minority Leader and Arizona Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee Co-Chair Oscar De Los Santos told reporters and constituents in a Zoom call on Jan. 5. “The conditions are there. The country is fed up with Donald Trump’s obsession with petty politics and nonsense and distractions.”

The Governor’s Office and several other federal and state executive offices will be up for grabs in November, as well as the entire state Legislature. Republicans currently hold a 17-13 majority in the Senate and a 33-27 majority in the House. 

De Los Santos said the state Democratic legislative campaign committee is targeting seven legislative districts.

Legislative District 2

The north Phoenix district is represented by two Republicans and one Democrat. Sen. Shawnna Bolick, R-Phoenix; and Reps. Justin Wilmeth, R-Phoenix; and Stephanie Simacek, D-Phoenix, have all filed statements of interest with the Secretary of State’s Office to run for re-election. 

Bolick defeated former Democratic state Rep. Judy Schwiebert in the 2024 election by more than 3% of votes when Schwiebert tried to move seats from the House to the Senate. Simacek got the most votes in the district’s House race and Wilmeth just finished ahead of fellow Republican Ari Bradshaw by .10% of votes. 

Bradshaw has also filed a statement of interest to run again for the House in LD2, but Simacek is the only Democrat to have filed so far. Other candidates include Republicans Linda Brickman, Neil DeSanti, Danielle Skranak and Arizona Independent Party candidate Tom Simes. 

Two Democrats, Krista Andrews and Daniel Toporek, have filed statements of interest to run for the Senate in the district, and two other Republicans, Timothy Ferrara and Christian Hinz, have filed paperwork to run against Bolick. 

Republicans make up about 35% of registered voters in the district, according to the most recent report from the Secretary of State’s Office published in October. Another 26% of voters are registered Democrats and the rest are registered as independents or affiliated with other parties. 

The Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission has labeled LD2 as a highly competitive district, giving Republicans a 3.80% advantage. 

Legislative District 4

This Scottsdale and northeast Phoenix district flipped entirely to Republican control after the 2024 election when it was previously represented by two Democrats at the Legislature in the prior election cycle. 

Reps. Matt Gress, R-Phoenix; and Pamela Carter, R-Scottsdale, defeated Democrats Kelli Butler and Karen Gresham. Carter had the closest race and beat Butler by 1% of votes, while Sen. Carine Werner, R-Scottsdale, defeated former state Sen. Christine Marsh by almost 4% of votes. 

Aaron Lieberman, a former Democratic state representative who unsuccessfully ran for governor in 2022, has filed a statement of interest to challenge Werner for the LD4 Senate seat. 

The district’s House race has six candidates who are interested in running, including Gress, Carter and Gresham. Republicans Sandra Christensen and Jeffrey Nelson have also filed statements of interest along with Democrat Tank Hanna. 

Republican voters make up about 39% of registered voters in the district, and Democrats account for 26%, but a sizable independent voter base could determine how the district is represented after 2026. 

The Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission also considers LD4 as highly competitive, with Republicans holding a 3.42% advantage.

Legislative District 9

The west Mesa district of LD9 was the only competitive district in 2024 where Democrats took all three legislative seats. 

Reps. Lorena Austin, D-Mesa; and Seth Blattman, D-Mesa, both narrowly defeated their Republican opponents, Kylie Barber and Mary Ann Mendoza, in 2024, with Austin emerging as the top candidate with 26% of the vote. 

Blattman announced in December that he won’t seek re-election to instead pursue a new professional opportunity with greater “long-term stability” than his House seat and endorsed Democrat Jacob Martinez to replace him.

“Serving the people of LD 9 has been the honor of my life,” Blattman said in a statement. “Together we launched Arizona’s first Micro-Business Loan Program, putting many mom-and-pop shops on a more solid footing, and supported our public schools. I’m proud of what we accomplished and confident that Arizona’s best days are ahead.”

Austin has also filed a statement of interest to run again for her seat, and Republican Bradley Bettencourt is the only Republican seeking a House seat in LD9 so far. 

Former Democratic state Sen. Eva Burch beat Republican Robert Scantlebury by more than 3% in 2024, but Burch resigned during the 2025 legislative session. Her appointed replacement, Sen. Kiana Sears, has filed a statement of interest to run against Republican Bridget Fitzgibbons for the Senate. 

While LD9 was Democrats’ greatest performing competitive district in 2024, Republicans still hold a voter registration advantage of nearly 32% compared to Democrats’ near 29%. 

LD9 has one of the tightest advantages among highly competitive districts. The redistricting commission gives Democrats a 2.6% advantage over Republicans despite Republicans leading in voter registration. 

Legislative District 13

The Chandler district of LD13 was another that lost all Democratic representation in the Legislature in 2024, with all three seats going to Republicans. 

Reps. Jeff Weninger, R-Chandler; and Julie Willoughby, R-Chandler, both defeated their Democratic opponents, Brandy Reese and Nicholas Gonzales, in 2024, as both Republicans received nearly 26% of the vote each to lead all candidates in that race.

Willoughby is now seeking to flip chambers as Sen. J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler, will be termed out of his seat after this year. Weninger is running for Chandler Mayor, and current Republican Chandler Mayor Kevin Hartke is running for the state House in LD13. The only other candidate running for Senate in the district is Democrat Kristie O’Brien.

Weninger’s wife, Janet Weninger, announced in September she’s running for the state House as a Republican in the district. 

“As a mom, foster care advocate, and entrepreneur, I have spent my life helping others succeed. Arizona is well-positioned for success, but there is more work to be done. From repairing the Department of Child Safety, to fighting for law enforcement, to ensuring parents can make decisions in the best interest of their kids, our best days lie ahead,” Janet Weninger said in a statement when she launched her campaign.

Reese and Democrat Racquel Armstrong will be running for the House and Republicans Debra Schinke and Joe Granado have also filed statements of interest for House seats.

Despite Republicans accounting for almost 36% of registered voters in the district, LD13 has an even tighter redistricting commission vote spread than LD9, with Republicans holding a 1.56% advantage in the highly competitive district. Democrats make up about 27% of registered voters in the district.

Legislative District 16

Republicans also took all three seats in LD16, which includes Casa Grande. 

Former Democratic state Rep. Keith Seaman lost his 2024 bid for reelection by about 2.5% of votes to Rep. Chris Lopez, R-Casa Grande. Rep. Teresa Martinez, R-Casa Grande, took home the most votes in the House race and Seaman’s daughter, Stacey Seaman, lost to Sen. T.J. Shope, R-Coolidge, by 12% of votes.

Shope is running for re-election and Democrat Elaine Aldrete is the only other candidate in the Senate race. 

De Los Santos said some districts would only see one Democratic candidate running as a “single-shot” candidate for the House in an attempt to focus the voter pool on one candidate for at least one House seat. Only Democrat Dean Dill has filed paperwork to run for the House, while Martinez and Lopez are the only Republicans who are running so far. 

About one-third of registered voters in the district are Republicans and 27% are Democrats. LD16 is another one of the redistricting commission’s highly competitive districts and Republicans have a 3.62% advantage. 

Legislative District 17 and Legislative District 23

Neither of these districts is considered competitive by the redistricting commission, but both saw upset victories over the parties that held advantages in each. 

In LD17, which includes Oro Valley, Marana and Tucson, Rep. Kevin Volk, D-Tucson, beat former Republican Rep. and Freedom Caucus member Cory McGarr by more than 2% of votes in the district as a single-shot candidate despite Republicans holding more than 8% advantage in the district, according to the redistricting commission. 

Volk is running for re-election along with his seatmate, Rep. Rachel Jones, R-Tucson. Democrat Matthew Coelho has also filed a statement of interest for a House race, but Democrats narrowly lost to McGarr and Keshel in 2022 when they ran two House candidates instead of single-shotting. 

Republicans Kirk Fiehler, Avery Block and John Winchester have also filed statements of interest for the House. 

Sen. Vince Leach, R-Tucson, is not seeking re-election in LD17. He beat the late Democrat John McLean by 2% of votes shortly before McLean’s death. 

Republicans Christopher King and Anthony Dunham have filed paperwork to run for the Senate in LD17, along with Democrat Hunter Holt.

In LD23, Rep. Michele Pena, R-Yuma, has won both her 2024 and 2022 elections despite Democrats having nearly a 17% advantage, according to the redistricting commission. Pena was the top vote-getter in the district’s House race with more than 34% of votes while Rep. Mariana Sandoval, D-Yuma, took the other House seat.

Pena is joined by two other Republicans, Gary Garcia Snyder and James Holmes, in filing paperwork to run for the House. Sandoval is running for re-election and Democrats Emilia Cortez and Juan Manuel Guerrero are also running for the House.

Linley Wilson: The legal arm of the Arizona House

Linley Wilson, general counsel and deputy chief of staff for Arizona House Republicans, joined ahead of the 2022 session as the Legislature made it a more standard practice to wade into legal battles to defend state law.  

Now, after three years, Wilson is leaving her post to join the political and election law firm Holtzman Vogel. Carrying legislative expertise and a background at the Attorney General’s Office, Wilson hopes to leverage her experience with constitutional issues and with the firm’s new State Attorneys General practice, with a focus on clients facing investigation and enforcement by state attorneys general.

Her first day was Oct. 21. But before leaving, Wilson spoke with the Arizona Capitol Times, reflecting on her work in the Legislature, her passion for state government and the work ahead in private practice. 

Answers have been lightly edited for clarity. 

What has been your career path so far? 

My entire career has been spent in state government. I’ve had the honor of working in all three branches of state government in Arizona, and I’ve loved my career in public service. I spent over a decade at the Arizona Attorney General’s Office under Republican leadership, and I was thrilled when this opportunity became available to me at the Arizona House of Representatives. I’ve now spent three legislative sessions here, and I’m really proud of all of the work that the House has accomplished. We’ve taken a larger role in litigation, which you may have noticed over the past few years. We have extensively defended the constitutionality of state laws passed by the Legislature over the years, when challenged in state and federal courts. Really, it’s been a highlight of my career to be at the Legislature. 

What have been your biggest takeaways from your time at the Legislature? 

Personally, the insight into the legislative process and policy decisions that our elected leaders make on a daily basis on issues of statewide importance, just gave me a very deep appreciation for how state government works. I think that will translate really well to the private sector just in general. And of course, on the types of cases that I’ll be working on at Holzman Vogel. 

To be an effective litigator or legislator, you have a good understanding of how the legislative process works in any state. It’s one thing to talk about the separation of powers, but to truly be firsthand and see how laws are made and why they’re important, and that this body has collectively decided that this should be the policy for Arizona, I think, as transitioning now to be a litigator at the firm, I think that background is critically important when we are litigating constitutional rights — interpreting the Arizona and the federal constitutions. I’m so thankful that I’ve had that experience to bring with me into the private sector.

What have you been most proud of during your tenure at the Legislature? 

I’m really proud of the work on the Secure the Border Act that was referred to voters last year, which the voters passed on the ballot. The Legislature recently prevailed in court. It was challenged, and the legislative leadership intervened to defend it. The lawsuit was just dismissed there this week. So I think that really reflects the will of the voters. And border security is obviously so important for Arizona. So I really enjoyed working on that legislation.

Another one that stands out to me is the election timeline bill … Representative Kolodin sponsored the bill, and it was really important to put up some of Arizona’s deadlines for when certain election processes had to take place … I think that’s another really great accomplishment of the Legislature in the past couple of years.

What do you make of the Legislature more actively defending state laws in court? 

That’s probably my proudest accomplishment. The Legislature just had another ruling come out of the Arizona court reaffirming that the Legislature has standing in court to bring claims if the House and the Senate believe that its institutional powers or authority under the Arizona Constitution is being violated by another actor, an executive branch or in intervening to defend interests of the House and Senate when a law isn’t being defended in court. 

We’ve certainly taken the lead in the last few years. And that’s important, because those are laws that have been on the books. Prior Legislatures passed those laws, and I do believe it’s a duty of the Arizona attorney general to defend them in court when they’re challenged, and certainly that was my experience when I worked under Republican leadership at the Arizona Attorney General’s Office. 

I think it’s important for the judicial system, too, for judges to have an adversarial process when a law is challenged in court. I don’t think judges want just a one-sided presentation of the facts and the law, and so it’s a valuable part that the Legislature played in that in litigation over the last few years. I just think it’s good for the entire system that that authority exists for the Legislature to step in when the attorney general, for whatever reason, decides that she doesn’t want to defend the law. 

What kind of cases and issues are you going to be focused on in this new role?

I’m obviously excited to contribute to the firm’s appellate practice. So that’s something I’m really looking forward to. And litigation of constitutional rights. The cases that involve emerging technology and privacy interests are really fascinating. 

Fundamentally, those issues will continue to emerge in the courts when you think about AI technology. And in Arizona, privacy interests are even more protected than they are at the federal level. So I think those issues are really fun to litigate, and they’re just very important all around for Arizonans. And again, that goes to the protection of constitutional rights. 

While I was at the Attorney General’s Office, I was also involved in election integrity matters. I’m looking forward to gearing up for the election next year and expect that the firm will be involved in a fair amount of election litigation. 

Why Holtzman Vogel? 

I really admired the work that they’ve been involved in. To me, it really is very unique to come in at a time when the Phoenix office is still in a growth unit. So it’s really just an outstanding opportunity to help grow the direction of the Phoenix firm and even just bolster all of those areas that have already aligned with my background really well. 

In a more existential sense, why do you think your work in public policy, and now in private practice, is important? 

When we’re discussing constitutional rights and making arguments to set a precedent in Arizona for how courts will need to uphold and reflect additional rights in various contexts, I can’t imagine more rewarding work than that.

That’s why I’ve done this type of work for so long, and why I’m so excited to join the firm. As a lawyer in this space, I just find it incredibly rewarding to be talking about constitutional rights and doing whatever we can to protect them.

What would be your advice for your replacement in the House?

The job requires creativity, sometimes an open mind, and certainly a collaborative attitude and great communication skills. And it’s just incredibly fun. I look back on my time here and truly enjoyed being the general counsel for the Republican majority. I had the ability to meet all the elected leaders throughout the state, reach their goals, and create a good product for the people of Arizona. It’s really unlike any other job. I guess I would tell the next person to keep an open mind, to be supportive in this role, and help essentially write laws for the state that would be long lasting and be so important in years to come.

What guides you in this work? 

My husband and I have two children, and they’re nine and 11 now. They’re being raised in Arizona. Of course, through my line of work, I think of them, and I think about the future that we’re creating in Arizona. And of course, that’s always my motivation and my guiding star.

What is something the average person might not know about you? 

My interest these days is being a soccer mom. Both of my kids play competitive soccer. And to bring it back briefly, to how that relates to my job, is that it comes to mind that when the speaker and the president intervene to defend Arizona’s Save Women’s Sports Act … that really hit home for me, because I have a nine year old daughter who plays in a competitive sport. I just think fundamental fairness in girls sports is so important because I see it, you know, in my own life.  

And so those issues do really hit home for me … I’m a soccer mom. I’m usually running kids around to soccer practice at least a few times a week … We just really enjoy this phase of life with them. They’re wonderful kids, and they keep us young.

Airports nationwide, including Arizona’s, refuse to air Noem’s government shutdown video

Key Points:
  • The federal budget impasse has led to flight delays nationwide
  • Arizona airports reject Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s video blaming Democrats for delays
  • Democratic leaders seek to restore health care funding amid the budget stalemate

Travelers will be able to get through TSA security at Arizona’s two major airports without hearing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem blame Democrats for delays.

“Consistent with airport policy, Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport declined to post the video,” said Jon Brodsky, the airport’s communications and outreach administrator. And he said the reason is simple.

“The policy does not permit political content,” Brodsky said.

Nor will those leaving Tucson International Airport be subjected to Noem’s video saying that many airport operations are impacted because “Democrats in Congress refuse to fund the federal government.”

But Austin Wright, the airport’s chief communications officer, said in the case of his facility, it was an easy call.

“We have no screens in the TSA checkpoints where the video was requested to be played,” he said. “So we have no capability to play it.”

Wright said, though, it would not have mattered even if there were video screens available.

“Technically, it would be advertising,” he said. “And our advertising policy prohibits political speech of any type in the airport.”

The two Arizona facilities are joining others across the nation who have rejected Noem’s bid to play her message on video screens near Transportation Security Administration checkpoints.

She starts with a general statement that it is the “top priority” of the TSA that travelers “have the most pleasant and efficient airport experience as possible while we keep you safe.”

But where it crosses the line, according to airport officials here and elsewhere, is when she tells travelers it is the fault of Democrats.

“Because of this, many of our operations are impacted, and most of our TSA employees are working without pay,” Noem said.

The message is far different than what is normally available near checkpoints. These tend to be more informational, like explaining the screening process, what can and cannot be carried on to aircraft, and why a Real ID is necessary to board even domestic flights unless someone has a passport.

Noem’s message, however, has hit a sour note — and not just at airports in Arizona.

The Washington Post reports that facilities in Buffalo, Charlotte, Los Angeles, Cleveland, Seattle and Portland also are refusing to air the video.

Some are saying it violates internal policies about showing political messages to travelers. But there’s also the question of the Hatch Act, which bars the use of public resources for political purposes.

The shutdown essentially has created two classes of federal employees.

Most in non-essential positions were furloughed without pay.

But essential workers — including those at TSA checkpoints and staffing the control towers — were told they still have to work without pay.

Tricia McLaughlin, assistant homeland security secretary, was not apologetic. In fact, in a message to Capitol Media Services, she doubled down on what Noem is saying, repeating that “Democrats in Congress refuse to fund the federal government,” resulting in TSA employees working without pay.

“It’s unfortunate our workforce has been put in this position due to political gamesmanship,” she said. “Our hope is that Democrats will soon recognize the importance of opening the government.”

The House already has approved the budget extension. But the measure is stuck in the Senate, where it takes 60 votes to advance, and Republicans control just 53 seats.

Authorization to spend federal dollars ran out at the end of September, resulting in the furloughs of most federal workers and the requirement for others, like TSA screeners and control tower staff, to continue working without pay.

Democratic leaders are using the inability of Senate Republicans to enact a new spending plan without them as leverage to push the GOP to restore funding for health care that was cut in the “Big Beautiful Bill.”

They specifically want the restoration of premium tax credits that underwrite the cost for many who receive their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act. They have argued that coverage will become unaffordable for many without the federal dollars.

Republicans, however, are refusing to budge.

The stalemate has resulted in some flight delays reported nationwide.

And Tucson?

“We’re one of the lucky ones,” said Wright.

“Everyone’s coming to work here and we appreciate it,” he said. “The tower’s staffed, TSA is staffed. It’s business as usual.”

When conservatives need them, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club falls short

Craig Berland

For many years, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AZFEC) served as an important watchdog for conservative causes, engaging at all levels to protect Arizonans from the overreach of big government and the harmful policy ideas of the left. However, as of late, the one-time bellwether of the right has lost its way, compromising its principles and abandoning conservative causes when Republicans need them most. 

Shelby Busch

The AZFEC describes itself as “the leading organization in the state dedicated to advancing a pro-growth, limited government agenda in Arizona.” While the AZFEC is involved in many policy issues, recently they’ve placed a particular focus on stopping legislative efforts that misuse taxpayer funds or promote corporate welfare. To bring attention to the issue, the group has a dedicated webpage that exposes policy proposals that aim to redistribute funds from taxpayers to large corporations. Conspicuously missing? Any mention of HB 2704 — a bill signed into law by Gov. Katie Hobbs in June that allocates up to $500 million in taxpayer funds for renovations to Chase Field. While the Arizona Freedom Caucus did all they could do to stop this bill, the AZFEC was nowhere to be found, turning a blind eye to crony capitalism and abandoning the conservative cause. 

When an organization such as this ignores its principles on a particular issue, how do you determine the cause of the hypocrisy? Follow the money! Advocacy groups usually do not take up causes that go against the interests of their wealthy donors. A quick look through an organization like AZFEC’s publicly available tax filings often reveals the donors, and therefore the true motivations, behind their actions.

Unfortunately, the AZFEC’s abandonment of conservatives is not limited to just the Arizona Legislature. Despite being very vocal in their opposition to Green New Deal-style energy policy, the AZFEC has been missing in action to support (and in fact sometimes a hindrance to) the Arizona Corporation Commission as it has moved to roll back environmental mandates and enact an energy dominance agenda in the state. 

Since 2023, the past and current ACC have killed wasteful solar and EV programs and proposals that would’ve effectively banned natural gas use in homes while it approved four new or expanded natural gas power plants, among other conservative reforms. Perhaps most notable, this month, the ACC voted to repeal Arizona’s Renewable Energy Standard — a conservative energy policy achievement 19 years in the making. In all of these instances, conservative commissioners executed their agenda in the face of heavy pressure and theatrics from special interest environmental groups like the Sierra Club, Chispa Arizona and SWEEP. Despite several opportunities to advocate in support of these conservative energy policies and push back on the radical far left groups, the AZFEC was completely absent. 

The AZFEC boldly proclaims that they are “fearless when it comes to taking on the establishment and the left.” However, their failure to stand up to their wealthy donors, the embodiment of Arizona’s establishment, and their unwillingness to support the conservative revolution at the ACC calls into question their dedication to fighting the radical policies they claim to oppose. Until AZFEC does more to support conservative policy, it is reasonable for Republicans to wonder if the organization is not driven by principles, but rather just another lobbying vessel for those who can afford to use it. 

Craig Berland serves as the Chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Committee. He is a retired aerospace CEO, lifelong conservative Republican, and community leader in Gilbert, Arizona. He is an active political volunteer and pilot who uses his aircraft to support veterans and Republican candidates.

Shelby Busch serves as the 1st Vice Chair of the Maricopa County Republican Committee. She is a lifelong Republican, grassroots organizer, and party leader focused on strengthening election integrity, legislative engagement, and collaboration between the Maricopa County Republican Committee, local precinct leaders, and community organizations.

Session Wrap: Sen. Sundareshan, policy priorities and partisanship

For Senate Minority Leader Priya Sundareshan, the legislative session contained its share of accomplishments and challenges for the Democratic caucus.

Some of the victories included working with Gov. Katie Hobbs and Republicans to ensure the Division of Developmental Disabilities program was fully funded, securing some of their funding priorities in the state budget and remaining unified in opposition to Republican bills they considered extreme.

However, many of the caucus’ priorities were unaddressed, including affordable housing, curtailing the state’s Empowerment Scholarship Account program and passing legislation to address rural groundwater shortages in the state.

Sundareshan spoke with the Arizona Capitol Times about these issues and future priorities.

What would you consider some of the biggest accomplishments from this session for you and your caucus?

A major accomplishment for my caucus was in sticking together on issues of value to the Democratic Party and our members, including on many of the extreme pieces of legislation that the Republicans put forward. Our caucus often was the caucus holding together. We were able to show the unity of our opposition, and when those bills then made it to the governor’s desk, that made it pretty clear to the governor that those were easy to veto because those were not in line with our Democratic values.

You supported the Ag-to-Urban bill, which had bipartisan support, despite concerns from some Democratic lawmakers regarding groundwater replenishment obligations. Why did you believe it was a good bill?

So ultimately, I felt comfortable voting for the language in the Ag-to-Urban bill. For one thing, and I think this is reflective of many of my caucus, as well as the House Democratic caucuses’ concerns, is that we should be addressing the big problem, which is rural groundwater. This had nothing to do with that. That problem remains outstanding, and there continues to be no solution, thanks to the intransigency of the Republicans who control the committees. So that’s one major issue. Two, there remains a significant concern about the ability for the Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District (CAGRD) to fulfill its existing obligations in replenishing groundwater that has been pumped through because of development up to now, and they are in the process of submitting their 2025 plan of operations for the next 10 years and the Department of Water Resources still has to evaluate it. There already are concerns about where they’re going to find that replenishment water, because we know that the Colorado River is dwindling. There are significant parts of their plan that are no longer able to be counted on. And then, on top of it, what further impact does the Ag-to-Urban bill have on their replenishment obligations? And I think that’s a significant concern that I was raising during the negotiations of the Ag-to-Urban bill, and I continue to have concerns about the groundwater replenishment district.

I was glad to see the involvement of the Gila River Indian Community in this process, because…as part of this negotiation, they are willing and interested to enter into negotiations to sell some of their water rights to the (CAGRD) in order to support those replenishment obligations. Will that be sufficient? That’s an outstanding question that we’re going to have to keep an eye on. But, for now, I was able to support the bill because I felt that the compromise that was reached included a significant number of necessary guardrails to ensure the land that was converting from farm to development to single family housing would altogether — with all of the guardrails, there would be something that could result in groundwater savings over the next 100 years. 

So what were some of the biggest challenges from this session?

So many things left unresolved yet again by the Republican majority in the Legislature. We can just rattle them off. For example, we were just talking about water. Rural groundwater remains unaddressed and it was very clear mid-session that there was no desire on the part of the committee chairs to continue negotiating any kind of bill that would do that. That is a huge disappointment and really tragic because there are people in rural Arizona who continue to face the issues of finding their wells running dry thanks to the unlimited ability for large corporate pumpers to just come in and leave the residents high and dry, literally.

Another thing that was left undone is Prop. 123. We had a lot of back and forth over the course of this session about how to ensure a ballot referral to the voters to renew Prop. 123 in a way that would support our education system. And that got bogged down unnecessarily by partisan bickering. I will again say that the House and Senate Republicans had decided that they wanted to start attaching unrelated policies to the Prop. 123 proposal, like voucher protections and other things, when we already have a very, extremely permissive voucher program in Arizona.

Why has it been so hard to address the rural groundwater issue?

What I’ve come to realize is that the reality of rural Arizona residents is just not being represented by even their own elected officials in this Legislature. I represent a suburban-to-urban district, but I have compassion for the people who are not my constituents, who are facing these water crises, and yet their own representatives are seemingly unmoved. Rep. Mathis and I introduced a bill that had Republican support from Republican elected officials in these rural areas across the state. This was something that was a bipartisan effort that we knew was reflective of the negotiations we had had with Republican legislators from last year. We worked together with other Republican elected officials from rural Arizona to put forward this proposal, and yet, that still could not get any hearing by the chairs of the committees.

Were you surprised by the budget process?

Certainly, it is a bit surprising to see the fractures within the Republican parties and the Republican caucuses display themselves so openly. I think what we observed with this budget process was to what extent the Freedom Caucus is willing to take everyone hostage — the entire state hostage — in order to achieve some of their goals, and how much of a hold they have over the Republican Party, because … they were flexing their power, and they showed that they are making demands of the broader Republican caucuses that needed to be addressed before we could move forward. 

What enabled the Senate Democrats to be able to work with the Senate Republicans and the governor to reach some of the compromises in the budget?

Senate Democrats had significant concerns with the budget process, as we have for many years, because Republicans do not directly negotiate with us and so we worked with Governor Hobbs and her team to ensure that our Democratic priorities were reflected in the budget. I think we were able to significantly achieve a lot of what we were asking for by working with the governor, but we also were very dissatisfied with the failure to again address universal vouchers, which has a huge impact on the budget. Over $1 billion in the next year that is just going again to this unaccountable, fraudulent program and wasteful because it’s going to people who do not even need educational support and have simply sent their kids to private schools. 

But, on the other hand, we also had a number of wins by negotiating for the budget. I’ll point to things like the Area Agencies on Aging that support seniors as they age and provide meals on wheels for seniors. That was a significant point that our caucus was fighting for. Another point is other services broadly for those who need it the most … refugee support and homelessness issues, there was very little funding available to put towards that. And I know many in my caucus would have loved to see a lot more go towards that but what we did see go towards that was due to the engagement of my caucus.

So what do you anticipate as the biggest democratic priorities for the next session?

So much of our affordability agenda was left untouched. We put forward many bills that would have helped Arizonans with affordable housing, with affording everyday necessities and none of those bills received hearings. So I anticipate that our focus on affordability will continue. So that’s one major thing we’ll focus on next session. In the water space, like I said, so much remains unaddressed in protecting our water and protecting our security to live here in Arizona. 

Child care investments (were) a huge priority for our caucus, as was for the governor, and there was an investment in this year’s budget, but not to the extent that had been proposed. I think about less than half of that investment was funded. So we will continue to be pushing for that investment and … things that support everyday Arizonans.

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.

Session Wrap: Warren Petersen’s priorities ahead of AG race

For Senate President Warren Petersen, the next legislative session will likely be his last opportunity to help advance the Republican caucus’ legislative policy priorities.

Petersen is running for state attorney general in 2026, so he will look to work with his Senate Republican colleagues to revive legislation that either stalled or was previously vetoed, support the federal government on policies affecting Arizona and solidify the Senate’s relationship with House Republican leadership after the two chambers clashed during budget negotiations.

The following are responses provided by Petersen after inquiry from the Arizona Capitol Times. Answers have been edited slightly for clarity. 

What do you consider some of the biggest accomplishments from this session?

Power and water are foundational elements that contribute to our population and business growth here in Arizona. We were able to pass meaningful legislation to help us keep up with the demand, which was shown with our historic water policy, enabling us to conserve and grow, using less water even with our growing population. In response to projections showing a 60% increase in power demand over the next 30 years, we passed legislation to strengthen our infrastructure and ensure Arizona families and businesses continue to have access to reliable and affordable energy. We made significant investments in public safety to keep Arizona communities secure and delivered tax cuts to support small business owners.

What were some of the biggest challenges?

One of the biggest challenges this session was the lack of efficiency, particularly with how long it took to pass the budget. There was clear frustration over the delays, and unnecessary division within the party made the process more difficult than it needed to be. In the end, the budget that passed was the Senate’s initial budget plan with some extra spending amended on by the other chamber.

Were you surprised that House leadership didn’t engage in the budget negotiations and instead released their own budget?

It was par for the course for this session. We saw the chaos unfold with the (Division of Developmental Disabilities) bill and how that was handled, so I’m not necessarily surprised, but I’m disappointed that the session was drawn out with unnecessary division in our party. Two years ago, we put a budget on Hobbs desk in February. The hope is we get back to that level of efficiency.

Where did some of that disagreement come from, especially during the budget?

I’ll just leave it at my (previous) statement. It’s the normal stuff. I think human nature can creep in. But there’s other things too. Anybody that was there … if you ask five people what it was, I think five people would probably all say similar things. So I’ll just leave it where it’s at. I mean, we’ve shown what we can do with divided government. Two years ago, we had budgets up on the governor’s desk in February with divided government. So (we can) be efficient, and hopefully, we’ll return to that next session.

What will it take for the House and Senate Republicans to solidify that relationship in time for next year’s budget?

I‘m confident the next session will look different. By bringing on Grant Hanna as the new Chief of Staff, the House is positioned to operate with significantly greater effectiveness.

Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed a number of border bills, including the AZ ICE Act that you sponsored. You mentioned that you could bring the bill back as a ballot measure or wait to see if a new governor is elected. Is that still a possibility?

That’s a discussion we will have early on next session as a caucus, to see if it’s something we want to put on the ballot. I do feel confident that we will have a new governor in 2026 who will sign the legislation.

What were some of the other big issues that went unaddressed this session?

Two major issues that were left unaddressed are immigration and election reforms. We sent the AZ ICE Act to the governor’s desk, a bill that would have empowered local law enforcement to remove dangerous criminals from our streets, but she chose to veto it, putting both public safety and ICE agents in a more vulnerable position. She also vetoed our Florida-style election system bill which would have ensured faster, more transparent results on election night. Because of that veto, Arizonans will continue to face delays and uncertainty in our election process.

There were a number of bills that were introduced this session with the intention of expediting election results. Can those bills return next session?
We would definitely like to see those bills come back. We’re monitoring. All eyes are on 2026, and we’ll see how things are progressing. I think we’ll have a Republican governor. And you know, it may be best to just put our energy into making sure we get a Republican governor. And then 300 bills a session that are getting vetoed will get signed.

So anyway, we’ll look at it. I think it was close to a signature. So maybe … the bill gets tweaked a little bit and gets a signature, but we’ll see. We’ll have those discussions as we head into next session with the numbers.

What made this such an abnormal session?

The length. There’s absolutely no reason to be wrapping up the session on June 25. So mainly the budget.

What do you anticipate will be the most significant Republican priorities for the next legislative session?

Water will definitely be a key topic in the next session, but our primary focus will remain on protecting individual rights, supporting small businesses, and upholding core conservative values. A top priority will also be addressing staffing shortages in public safety, especially within the Department of Corrections, to ensure we can add and retain the people we need to keep Arizona safe. We’re also committed to advancing Prop 123 and working with the Trump Administration on federal regulations that impact our state. Additionally, we will continue to step in and defend laws that our current AG refuses to defend.

This will be your last session as Senate President before you run for attorney general. Is there anything you want to accomplish before you focus on that campaign? 

We have the Arizona ICE Act, the Florida style elections. I have an SCR that I worked on that I would like to see passed that protects the taxpayer by a higher threshold for counties and cities to pass taxes. All three of those are important. Of course, we also have just the overarching issues that are important for Arizona: water, power. I’m sure I’ll get very involved with the water discussions as we go forward, continuing to deal with that. I don’t know that I’ll point to one bill that has to happen before I leave the Legislature. But those are things I’ll probably work on next session if there’s a path for a signature. I do like to spend my time on bills that have a good chance … that will be signed. Really, really, really, good chance of being signed. We’ll see what happens as we move forward.

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