Nearly 13 months after the first confirmed Covid-19 infection in the US, President Biden held a memorial as the country surpassed 500,000 deaths attributed to the pandemic. Mourning a great tragedy, President Biden noted these casualties surpass the lives lost during WWI, WWII, and the Vietnam War combined.
While alarmingly high fatalities signify a time of immense suffering, recent developments suggest the worst of the pandemic may be behind us. Covid-19 fatalities, cases, and hospitalizations are decreasing. Many universities plan to offer more in-person instruction during this fall. Texas ended its lockdown and mask mandate.
Some of these promising signs can be attributed to vaccination. According to the Wall Street Journal, over 100 million Americans have received at least one Covid-19 vaccine. Although the Pfizer and Moderna Covid-19 vaccines require two injections spaced two weeks apart, studies confirm that one injection provides effective immunity. Even as Covid-19 variants begin to appear across the US, t-cell tests confirm that the available vaccines can protect against mutations.
While there are many reasons to be optimistic that the worst of the pandemic is behind us, there have also been several signs governmental powers granted during the pandemic may not return to pre-Covid levels.
A bill proposing to strengthen election integrity was withdrawn from a Senate committee this week, after passage in the House. It was introduced by State Representative Jake Hoffman (R-Queen Creek).
The bill would have prohibited any government officials from changing election-related dates, on the threat of a class 6 felony. Specifically, no state officers or agents, political subdivisions, or agencies could modify deadlines, filing dates, submission dates, or any other statutory election dates.
Class 6 felonies are the least harsh of all felonies, and may entail a year’s prison time.
The bill passed the House in a close, party-line vote 31-29.
An amendment to the bill would provide an exception to the proposed bill if a court ruling were to come into play. However, it would prohibit election officials from agreeing to modify deadlines and other election-related dates as part of a settlement agreement.
Last year, the state saw a spike of over 52,000 voters added to the rolls after an 18-day extension for voter registration. The initiative was cut short after a federal appeals court ordered the extension to end over a week early. Even with the order, the court allowed citizens a two day grace period to continue registering.
The challenge to the extension largely arose from the additional burdens that such an extension caused to local election officials. The extension would have allowed voters to register up to a little more than one week out from Election Day. In the past, election officials had nearly a month before the election to process registrants.
Currently, the state is pending an audit for the 2020 election. The audit would focus on Maricopa County, where The Senate hired four companies to review around 2.1 million Maricopa County ballots. Last November, the Senate issued subpoenas for all county ballots and voting machines for another audit. A federal judge ruled that the county didn’t have to comply with that request, since the Senate had improperly filed it.
Once the Senate refiled, legislators and county officials engaged in a heated battle over transparency. The judge quickly ruled on the side of the Senate.
It is unclear the reason for the bill’s withdrawal. Following the 2020 election, Hoffman was banned from Twitter and Facebook.
Corinne Murdock is a contributing reporter for AZ Free News. In her free time, she works on her books and podcasts. Follow her on Twitter, @CorinneMurdock or email tips to corinnejournalist@gmail.com.
To secure enough votes to ensure about half of Arizona’s legislators receive what they say is a much needed increase in their travel and meal per diems, the other half needed to get something too.
That appears to be the tradeoff agreed to for securing enough votes for a striker bill, HB2053, introduced by Sen. David Gowan (R-LD14). The bill passed the Senate Appropriations Committee on Wednesday, and if signed by Gov. Doug Ducey would provide a long sought after adjustment to the daily subsistence payment rates (aka per diems) for legislators who live outside Maricopa County.
Gowan’s bill brings the current $60 per diem for non-metropolitan area legislators in line with what federal employees receive in the same type of travel and lodging situation: $207 per day, $151 for lodging and $56 for meals. And every time federal employees see their travel per diems adjusted, the same would happen for Arizona’s legislators.
Wednesday’s vote came during a meeting chair by Gowan who lives in Sierra Vista on the southwest side of Cochise County. He has a one-way commute of nearly three hours to cover about 190 miles to Phoenix, about the same distance Sen. Lisa Ontondo (D-LD4) has to drive from her home in Yuma.
But to get enough votes from Maricopa County area legislators, Gowan and other rural lawmakers had to promise significantly higher per diems for legislators who currently receive $35 a day for meals and drive home each night. That promise came in the form of the same $56 a day meal allowance.
Those per diems will be paid out every day the legislature is in regular session or special session, even for weekends and holidays when nothing is happening at the Capitol. And the bill contains a provision which declares HB2053 to be an emergency measure “necessary to preserve the public peace, health or safety and is operative immediately as provided by law.”
That emergency designation allows the new per diem rates to kick in upon Ducey’s signature, assuming the governor does not veto the legislation like he did in 2019 when presented with a different rate plan.
Arizona’s 100-day legislative session runs from January to April, with most committees not meeting on Fridays nor the weekends. The statutory base salary for a legislator is $24,000, an amount which can only be increased by voters, who have approved only two legislative salary hikes in the last four decades.
