by Staff Reporter | Feb 1, 2025 | News
By Staff Reporter |
After Tuesday’s blunder from Arizona’s chief executive, those across the state are again questioning the competency of Governor Katie Hobbs and her staffers.
Hobbs submitted an error-ridden letter to the Arizona Congressional Delegation on Tuesday afternoon requesting their assistance in resisting the Trump administration’s federal funding freeze.
Hobbs’ letter failed to include two of Arizona’s congress members: Congressmen Abraham Hamadeh and Paul Gosar. Her letter also incorrectly claimed Trump’s federal funding freeze extended to federal assistance programs providing individuals with healthcare, public safety, veterans’ services, and financial assistance.
“Without these programs, Arizonans will be denied healthcare, families will struggle to stay housed, and communities will become less safe. The effects of this funding freeze will have impacts across the state, and weaken Arizona’s ability to care for its residents,” said Hobbs. “Congress must act. These actions directly violate the Constitution’s delegation of power of the purse to Congress and the Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Courts, including the Supreme Court, have made it clear that presidents cannot unilaterally withhold the funding appropriated by Congress for these services.”
Hobbs also threatened to sue the Trump administration over its funding freeze.
As the White House and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) clarified in a memo and other public statements preceding Hobbs’ letter, the federal funding freeze doesn’t affect programs providing direct benefits to individuals. The OMB supplemented its memo with a Q&A on the guidance.
“This is not a blanket pause on federal assistance and grant programs from the Trump Administration. Individual assistance that includes […] Social Security benefits, Medicare benefits, food stamps, welfare benefits […] will not be impacted by this pause,” said Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt during Tuesday morning’s White House press briefing.
The following executive orders pertain to the federal funding freeze: “Protecting the American People Against Invasion,” “Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid,” “Putting America First in International Environmental Agreements,” “Unleashing American Energy,” “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing,” “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” and “Enforcing the Hyde Amendment.”
An OMB memorandum meant to offer guidance on those executive orders, M-25-13, prompted an eleventh-hour federal court injunction on Tuesday. The federal funding freeze was scheduled to take place at 5 pm on Tuesday.
On Wednesday, Leavitt confirmed that the OMB rescinded its memo to “end any confusion” created by the injunction. In effect, this provided the administration with a workaround to the court order. A follow-up OMB memo advising of its rescission directed agencies to contact their general counsel for implementation of Trump’s executive orders.
“The President’s [Executive Orders] on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented,” said Leavitt.
As first reported by the Arizona Daily Independent, other leaders took the effort to clarify the scope of the federal funding freeze — among them, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin.
“I’ve spoken to senior officials at the White House and confirmed the temporary pause by OMB does not impact individual assistance and will not interrupt disaster recovery efforts, school and childcare funding, healthcare for seniors or low-income families, funding for our roads, meals and lunches, or any of the other misinformation that has spread,” said Youngkin. “The partisan stunt to disseminate knowingly misleading information is dangerous fearmongering and completely wrong.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Feb 1, 2025 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A bill to better protect Arizona’s domestic violence survivors recently passed its first hurdle in the state Legislature.
On Thursday, HB 2177, which was sponsored by State Representative Julie Willoughby, was approved by the Arizona House Appropriations Committee, allowing the proposal to hit the floor of the chamber for a vote from the full body in the near future. The legislation “allocates $400,000 from the state’s General Fund in Fiscal Year 2026 to the Address Confidentiality Program Fund, ensuring victims of domestic violence, stalking, and sexual offenses have greater access to vital protections.”
In a statement accompanying the announcement about the bill’s progress, Willoughby, the House Majority Whip, said, “The last thing survivors should have to worry about is their abuser finding them. This program gives them a way to shield their home address and regain some peace of mind. Strengthening it is not just necessary – it’s the right thing to do. We must make sure this program has the resources to continue providing safety and security for those who need it most.”
According to information provided by Willoughby’s release, the Address Confidentiality Program “allows survivors to use a substitute address for government records, protecting them from being tracked down through public documents;” [and] provides mail forwarding services to ensure participants can safely receive essential correspondence without revealing their actual location.”
HB 2177 was approved by all seventeen members of the committee who were present for that vote. One member was absent. On the Arizona Legislature’s Request to Speak system, one member from the Arizona Coalition to End Sexual and Domestic Violence signed in to support the legislation.
The bill will soon be considered by the full body in the Arizona House of Representatives, where it is expected to pass and be transmitted to the state Senate for additional consideration.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Dr. Thomas Patterson | Jan 31, 2025 | Opinion
By Dr. Thomas Patterson |
The Left has done a great job of influencing the issue of birthright citizenship. Most Americans oppose granting automatic citizenship to children born to illegal immigrants, but they also believe that we’re stuck with this policy.
They’re told repeatedly that the practice is enshrined in the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, that it has been affirmed by the Supreme Court, that the jurisprudence around it is settled law, and that challenging the matter now is unconstitutional and disloyal.
None of that happens to be true, but in the meantime, we’re saddled with a logically incoherent immigration system. Yes, immigrants are central to America’s story. But immigration law must be dedicated to the common good, not the benefit of those willing to flout our laws.
Immigrants should be vetted to ensure that they are likely to assimilate and be of value to their adopted country. Instead, we incentivize illegal immigrant mothers to cross the border before birth so their offspring can be entitled to lifelong citizenship.
So, did the writers of the 14th amendment botch the job, subjecting their descendants to such a dysfunctional system? No. In language more commonly understood at the time, they plainly stated, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein in they reside.”
The 14th amendment was written in 1868 to clarify that the newly emancipated slaves were granted all the privileges and rights of citizenship. There is nothing in the historical record to suggest that the authors had the slightest intent to grant citizenship to all born on American soil, much less those with parents living here illegally. The jurisdiction language was added specifically to prevent such an interpretation.
Advocates of constitutional originalism should also note that the author, Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan, explained it was meant to describe “a full and complete jurisdiction, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now.”
He clearly is not describing an illegal alien. Senator Lyman Trumbull, an influential supporter of the amendment, also emphasized “jurisdiction meant not giving allegiance to anyone else.”
The legal scholar Lino Graglia points out that, as the authors would have understood it, those who are born to parents legally in the US “are subject to the jurisdiction there of and so would have constitutional claim to birthright citizenship.” Just as plain is the fact the 14th Amendment, as written, would not apply to those born to illegal aliens, soldiers posted in a foreign country, or foreign diplomats.
Birthright advocates claim that the 1897 Supreme Court case of Wong Kim Ark clinches their claim that children of illegal immigrants born here are entitled to the full citizenship. Wong had traveled back to China with his parents and was unjustifiably denied reentry until the decision was overturned by the Court. They ruled that to bar Wong would be “to deny citizenship to thousands of persons of [European] parentage who have always been considered and treated as citizens of the United States.”
That makes sense, since Wong had the necessary documentation and his parents had been on American soil legally at the time of his birth, there being no laws defining them otherwise at the time. This is exactly the reason why this much ballyhooed ruling does not apply to the practice of granting citizenship to the children of illegal aliens. In fact, the Supreme Court has never opined on the question.
The clear intent of the amendment, the language, and the historical record are all in accord. Yet the 14th Amendment has been completely untethered from its original meaning and impact. The Left and the Democratic Party have taken something meant to right a wrong and manipulated it to the advantage of those entering the country illegally.
There are at least 5 million children in America who have received citizenship inappropriately, or about one in eight U.S. births. That works well for those who relentlessly seek ways to produce millions of future Democrats.
The rest of us should continue to respect our Constitution and our history. The incredible privilege of citizenship should go only to those who merit it.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
by Daniel Stefanski | Jan 31, 2025 | Education, News
By Daniel Stefanski |
School funding is a hot topic at the Arizona Legislature as the 57th Regular Session prepares to launch into its second month.
Arizona lawmakers and the Governor’s Office are wrestling over the looming expiration date for Proposition 123, which has helped fund the state’s K-12 schools since it was established under the previous Ducey administration.
One legislator in particular, Senator J.D. Mesnard, noted this deadline in the weekly newsletter published by Arizona Senate Republicans, saying, “With a new session comes a new opportunity to work on bills that may not have reached the finish line in the year prior. As such, I’m again working on a Proposition 123 extension plan to send to the ballot. This measure was first approved by voters in 2016. It allows a larger percentage from the state land trust to be distributed to our K-12 schools. Prop. 123 is set to expire this summer. With this in mind, Republicans backfilled the money allocated each year to K-12 schools within the last state budget, nearly $300 million, so there are no disruptions to this funding stream.”
Mesnard added, “The new Prop. 123 I’m proposing would be additional dollars on top of what we backfilled. My colleagues and I would like this money to go directly to teacher pay raises, with a goal of each educator receiving an additional $4,000 annually. I will keep you posted on the progress of Proposition 123 as well as other commonsense legislation that will hopefully receive the Governor’s signature.”
In Governor Katie Hobbs’ recent State of the State address, she touched on the vital importance of Prop 123, saying, “We must address the impending expiration of Prop 123, which provides critical funding for public schools and teachers. Renewing it is essential. If we fail to act, we are throwing away an opportunity to fund teacher pay raises and give Arizona’s children the opportunity they deserve – all without raising taxes on a single Arizonan. When Prop 123 originally passed, it was a bipartisan success and proved that Republicans and Democrats could come together and do the right thing for our students, teachers, and parents. So let’s put our kids first again and provide the certainty they and our schools need. Let’s address the Aggregate Expenditure Limit to make sure schools stay open. Let’s pass a Prop 123 extension to fund our schools without raising taxes.”
Following the Governor’s speech to both chambers of the Arizona Legislature, Senate President Pro Tempore T.J. Shope offered one of the Republican responses to her proposal. He said, “We will take action to equip our K-12 schools with quality educators at the front of every classroom by using a Proposition 123 renewal to increase teacher pay above the national average.”
Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne has also weighed in on the Prop 123 debate. Earlier this month, he posted, “We must renew Prop 123 and increase the income from the land trust, which is overflowing with money, to increase teacher salaries.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Jan 31, 2025 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A southern Arizona lawmaker has introduced multiple bills to help restore transparency and accountability to a key state agency.
Earlier this week, State Representative Lupe Diaz announced that he had filed two proposals to “address the lack of transparency and regulatory overreach within the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR).” Those bills were HB 2692 and HB 2550.
According to the press release issued by Diaz, HB 2692 would “slash ADWR’s budget [and] explicitly direct the agency to prioritize its core responsibilities, such as updating its recent groundwater models with the latest information, quantifying the total volume of groundwater available in rural basins (measured in years), and defending Arizona’s water rights on the Colorado River.” HB 2550 would “accelerate ADWR’s sunset date to July 1, 2026…to prompt a thorough review of the department’s regulatory overreach and ensure accountability to the people.”
In a statement accompanying the announcement of his introduced bills, Representative Diaz said, “As Arizonans, we depend on our state agencies to follow the law, uphold their statutory duties, and stay within their lane – especially when it comes to managing our most critical resource: water. Unfortunately, ADWR, under the direction and control of Governor Hobbs, has been sidetracked by extrastatutory activities that lack legislative authorization. The agency has been diverting critical time and resources away from its core functions to frivolous policymaking councils and focus groups, driving up housing costs for thousands of Arizonans. My legislation sends a strong message that the agency must be held accountable to the people it serves. Arizona’s water policies should be guided by the law, not radical political agendas.”
Representative Diaz added, “If there is a ‘Deep State’ in Arizona, it is Governor Hobbs’ Arizona Department of Water Resources. By the stroke of a pen, unelected bureaucrats in Central Arizona are centralizing control over the state’s water resources by unilaterally adopting rules without proper statutory authority, picking winners and losers, and deciding which uses of land and water are worthy of economic development. Their actions are driving up the cost and limiting the availability of food and housing for thousands of rural and urban residents across the state. The Hobbs’ administration claims it must act unilaterally because it cannot work with the Legislature, but what it fails to understand is that the Legislature represents the will of the people.”
The two bills will be heard in committees and, if given a favorable recommendation, considered by the full House chamber this session. The proposals will likely be dead on arrival, however, in the Governor’s Office if passed by both bodies of the Arizona Legislature due to the political chasm between Hobbs and Republicans on water issues.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
