A bill requring schools to use students’ real names and biological pronouns is making its way through the Arizona legislature.
SB 1002, sponsored by Arizona Senator John Kavanagh (LD-3), would prohibit school districts, charter schools employees, or independent contractors from referring to any student by a pronoun differing from their biological sex or a name other than their legal name without parental consent. It also prevents a school district or charter school from requiring an employee or independent contractor to use a pronoun that differs from a person’s biological sex, if doing so is contrary to their convictions.
The bill has moved to the Arizona House of Representatives where it awaits approval by the caucuses and a final vote.
Explaining the bill in a video, Sen. Kavanagh said that his bill “has to do with school staff and teachers using a pronoun or a nickname for a student that is not aligned with that student’s biological sex. The bill says that no school personnel can call a student by such an inappropriate pronoun or nickname unless the parents consent. And in addition when the parents do consent, no school employee can be forced to call the person by the pronoun that does not align with their biological sex if it violates the employee’s religious or moral beliefs.”
He continued, “This is important because students that want to be called by a different name or pronoun than their biological sex, or so-called transgendered students, many of them have a condition called gender dysphoria, which causes a lot of anxiety, sometimes even suicidal thoughts. So, the parents may know about this and may have the child under psychiatric care and the child’s doctor may have told the parents do not entertain a different pronoun or name that’s different from the from the child’s real sex because it could harm the child. So, we certainly don’t want school personnel harming children and threatening their psychological well-being or driving them to suicide. So, we’re going to require parental permission because also it’s a matter of parents’ rights. Parents determine what’s good for their children, not a school staff member or a school teacher, however well-meaning they may be.”
As noted in the text of the bill, Arizona’s Parental Bill of Rights “reserves parental rights to a parent of a minor child without interference from the state, a political subdivision or other governmental entity or any other institution.” Among the rights enshrined in the laws A.R.S. §§ 1-601 and 1-602 are parental rights to direct their children’s “education, upbringing and moral or religious training,” and making healthcare decisions on their behalf.
The Arizona State Senate is considering a bill that would prohibit Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients from using their benefits to purchase soda. House Bill 2165 (H.B. 2165) directs the state’s Department of Economic Security (DES) to seek a waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to implement the restriction.
The measure, which has already passed in the Arizona House of Representatives by a vote of 32-27-1, would require the DES Director to request the waiver. If granted, the purchase of carbonated beverages containing more than one gram of added sugar or artificial sweeteners would be banned for SNAP recipients. If the waiver is denied, the bill mandates that Arizona reapply annually until it is approved.
SNAP, formerly known as the Food Stamp Program, is a federally funded initiative that assists low-income households in purchasing groceries. The program currently allows for the purchase of a variety of food products, including bread, meat, dairy, and infant formula, but excludes items such as alcohol, tobacco, vitamins, and non-food goods.
Supporters of the bill argue that it promotes healthier choices for low-income families and ensures that taxpayer-funded benefits are used for nutritious food. Critics, however, contend that the restriction unfairly targets SNAP recipients and could create logistical challenges in enforcing the ban.
The bill was assigned to the Senate’s Health and Human Services (HHS) Committee for further consideration. If passed and signed into law, the restriction would take effect following the USDA’s approval of the waiver.
The financial impact of the legislation is expected to be minimal, as no additional costs to the state’s General Fund have been identified. The debate over the bill is expected to continue as lawmakers weigh the balance between nutritional policy and personal choice.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
The three Democratic candidates for the recently vacated State Senate seat for District 9 answered a brief questionnaire on misconduct, antisemitism, housing, and elections.
Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Chairman Thomas Galvin submitted the questionnaire to the candidates and released their responses on Monday.
Below were the questions provided to the candidates:
1. In recent years, state legislators of both political parties have been accused, investigated, condemned, censured, or found guilty of the following acts while serving at the State Capitol: Sexually molesting a minor; Praising a white nationalist, Holocaust denier; Sexually harassing fellow legislators and staffers; Making threatening statements; Refusing to cooperate with an Ethics committee investigation over prior sex crime charges; Making a death threat against a city’s employee and misusing an elected position to prevent execution of a legal court order in a private custodial matter; Sexually harassing a lobbyist by sending explicit photos and text messages, and propositions for sexual encounters. The list above is not exhaustive. How can you assure the Board of Supervisors that, if appointed, you will not engage in disorderly behavior but will conduct yourself in a manner consistent with a proper code of ethics?
2. If you have served in elected office before, please detail any ethical or disciplinary actions related to your term in office. Please provide context on the events that led to those actions and what the outcome was regarding those proceedings.
3. Since the October 7th, 2023, Hamas attacks, there continues to be a dramatic increase in anti-Semitism, around the world and in Arizona. The disturbing rise of anti-Semitism can be found in all segments of society, on both ends of the political spectrum. These attacks are waged on the internet or are further acts of physical violence. Many Jews in Arizona are fearful, including college students who have been subject to abuse and vitriol. What will you do to combat and condemn anti Semitism in our community?
4. The housing crisis is an important issue in Arizona, and in LD 9. There have been recent attempts at the legislature to overhaul zoning laws. What reforms do you think the legislature can get passed to address the housing issue?
5. Maricopa County, like all 15 counties, is responsible for carrying out the administration of elections. In recent cycles, election volunteers were under considerable pressure because of state election laws that drag out ballot processing and tabulating for up to two weeks after election day. Reform is sorely needed. What reforms do you think are essential to speed up the tabulation of votes by election night?
Metcalfe lost the Maricopa County Superintendent’s race last year, and sits on the East Valley Institute of Technology District’s board. Metcalfe has earned endorsements from the pro-abortion organization Arizona List, gun control group Moms Demand Action, and Save Our Schools Arizona.
Sears lost last year’s race for Maricopa County Justice Court’s North Mesa Precinct judgeship, and previously lost a race for the Arizona Corporation Commission. In last year’s race, Sears campaigned on key progressive initiatives on abortion, LGBTQ+, climate change, and diversity, equity, and inclusion. Sears served on the Mesa Public Schools Governing Board and presided over the East Valley NAACP. Sears is the assistant director of Arizona State University’s Faith Based Outreach and Community Partnerships. Sears also earned an Arizona List endorsement.
Winkle lost last year’s mayoral race for the city of Mesa. Previously, Winkle served briefly on the Mesa City Council; he was voted off the council in 2017 following a DUI — his second in a decade. Winkle is the part-time executive director of the Arizona Fair Housing Center and runs the search engine optimization company, Max Search Visibility Pro. Contrary to his questionnaire answers on anti-Semitism, Winkle advocates for a “Free Palestine.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
On Monday, Common Sense Institute (CSI) Arizona released a new report on Arizona’s water resources. In the report, CSI made a determination that contrasts wildly with commonly preconceived notions that a supply scarcity issue is Arizona’s largest problem. Instead, the group called out gaps in “infrastructure and ingenuity.”
In a press release, CSI advised, “If Arizona opts to address its water future by ending growth and limiting development, rather than investing in infrastructure and addressing water policies, the Grand Canyon state faces the potential of billions in lost economic activity and thousands of new jobs.“
Glenn Farley, CSI Arizona’s Director of Policy & Research explained, “In general, Arizona’s water challenges are not just about scarcity; they are about infrastructure and ingenuity. For centuries, Arizona’s dry central valley has thrived through engineering solutions that move water from areas of plenty to areas of need. Leaders today have options that could lead to very different outcomes for the future economy of our state. Our data finds that investing in innovative infrastructure and giving property owners the legal and physical flexibility they need to access the water our economy demands, will result in increased economic growth for the state of Arizona.”
In particular, the report took aim at the home-building moratorium in the Phoenix Active Management Area (AMA) imposed by Governor Katie Hobbs’ administration. According to CSI, should the moratorium be maintained for the next decade, Arizona could see a catastrophic $2 billion in lost GDP. However, the report adds, “Augmenting water supply by 300,000 acre-feet could create $4.7 billion in net state product.”
The report details that the expansion of “legal and physical infrastructure to move and trade water can help increase water availability without forced cuts or forced reallocation.”
CSI Arizona highlighted a 2018 controversial water deal between an investment firm representing the owners of farmland in Cibola, Arizona, near the Colorado River, and the town of Queen Creek that enabled Queen Creek to pay a private landowner $24 million for an annual allotment of 2,033 acre-feet of water. In other words: “the voluntary retirement of legacy agricultural farmland” through a private sale allowed a city without assured water rights through the Phoenix AMA to obtain the water needed to grow.
The report found: “Political and legal structures that acknowledge and facilitate, rather than impede, these kinds of transactions can help manage Arizona’s ongoing transition and continued growth. Furthermore, the ensuing injection of money and capital into the rural sources can be used for local economic development, creating a win-win.”
The think tank also called upon Arizona lawmakers to seek out alternative external sources of water citing the potential for desalination operations in Mexico at the Sea of Cortez, just 250 miles from Phoenix.
Citing the successes of Israel and Singapore to develop such systems, CSI noted, “While existing studies suggest the cost of desalination is high, approximately $2,000/acre-foot, costs may decline as the technology matures. Additionally, consumers may be more willing to pay if existing scarcity issues are not resolved.” Indeed, Israel currently relies upon desalination from the Mediterranean and Red Seas for over half of its fresh water supply.
According to a USA Todaystory from 2021, officials from Arizona, Nevada, California and Mexico have been exploring collaboration on such a project in exchange for trading some of the drinking water produced for a portion of Mexico’s allocation of the Colorado River.
Is DEI a good thing? Is being Hispanic an accomplishment? We must challenge these prevailing narratives and advocate for a more empowering discourse.
In today’s America, the conversation around racism has been hijacked, not by those who genuinely seek equality, but by a group that benefits from keeping minorities in a constant state of victimhood. As a proud Hispanic, I’ve seen how this narrative has been weaponized, not to uplift us but to keep us boxed into stereotypes that do more harm than good. These narratives harm us and undermine the progress toward a truly equal society.
We hear it constantly: “Speak up; you are a victim!” But have we ever stopped to ask who is looking down on us? Who is genuinely being racist? It’s not the hardworking Americans who see us as equals.
The Danger of the Victimhood Mentality
For too long, certain groups have pushed the idea that minorities, especially Hispanics, are perpetual victims who need special protection. This is evident in how some media outlets portray us, in the rhetoric of specific political figures, and in the policies that are supposed to help us but often end up reinforcing this narrative. But here’s the truth: this narrative doesn’t empower us; it chains us and, quite frankly, is abusive. When we accept the label of victim, we surrender our power. We allow others to dictate our worth instead of defining it through our achievements.
This is precisely what they want to control. They want minorities to feel oppressed so they can appear as “saviors or heroes” and expand government power under the premise of helping us. But we don’t need them; they perpetuate issues with no solutions. We don’t need pity. We need equal opportunity, which doesn’t divide us but unites us in a more inclusive America.
DEI policies could unintentionally perpetuate the victimhood narrative. These policies appear to be designed under the pretense of helping minorities, but they could end up hurting us the most. Take affirmative action and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, for example. These policies don’t level the playing field; they manipulate it. They make it seem like our success is only possible through handouts rather than hard work. They make companies prioritize skin color over competence.
And let’s not forget the devastating impact of government policies that fail to address fundamental issues affecting our community, like crime, border security, and drug trafficking. The very same people who cry about protecting minorities are the ones who have allowed cartels to flood our neighborhoods with drugs, endangering our youth. Policies that weaken law enforcement or ignore the crisis at our border don’t help Hispanics; they harm us.
When the real, actual cases of racism are reported, those are not taken seriously because of this abuse of making everything racist.
A dangerous byproduct of this divisive ideology is the rise of reverse racism. For years, we were told that discrimination is wrong, yet now, some openly advocate for hostility toward white Americans. They justify it by saying it’s “retribution” for past injustices. But racism, no matter who the target is, remains wrong.
How can we ever expect to move forward as a united nation if we keep fueling resentment and division? Instead of blaming one group for the struggles of another, we should recognize that success comes from hard work, responsibility, and perseverance, values that transcend race.
We must have a path forward for Hispanics not to feel like victims. We are entrepreneurs, professionals, veterans, business owners, and leaders. Our value doesn’t come from DEI policies, handouts, or political talking points; it comes from our contributions to this country. It’s time we reject the labels imposed on us and demand recognition for who we are: Americans who have earned our place through merit, not privilege.
Let’s stop allowing politicians and activists to define our identity for us. Let’s stand up against the dangerous rhetoric that keeps minorities trapped in victimhood. And most importantly, let’s ensure that future generations of Hispanics grow up knowing that their potential is limitless, not because of government assistance, but because of their hard work and determination. It’s time to change the narrative.
