AZ Free News sampled 46 legislators’ latest campaign finance reports of the state legislature and found that 22 of 47 legislators sampled received 50 percent or more of their campaign contributions from either lobbyists or PACs.
PACs and lobbyists have significant footing in the legislature. That would explain why the first week of January is known as “hell week” within the legislature — not because they’re in preparation for the new session kicking off, but because lobbyists are scrambling to fundraise for legislators. Arizona law prohibits legislators from receiving lobbyist campaign contributions while in regular session.
The following are state legislators that receive 50 percent or more of their campaign funds from PACs and lobbyists combined:
In the House, Richard Andrade (D-Glendale), about 51 percent; Ben Toma (R-Peoria), about 56 percent; Lorenzo Sierra (D-Avondale), about 62 percent; Steve Kaiser (R-Phoenix), about 64 percent; John Kavanagh (R-Fountain Hills), about 64 percent; Rusty Bowers (R-Mesa), about 64 percent; Diego Espinoza (D-Tolleson), about 66 percent; Joanne Osborne (R-Goodyear), about 74 percent; David Cook (R-Globe), about 75 percent; Justin Wilmeth (R-Phoenix), about 79 percent; John Fillmore (R-Apache Junction), about 83 percent; Tim Dunn (R-Yuma), about 87 percent; and Kelli Butler (D-Paradise Valley), about 96 percent.
In the Senate, Vince Leach (R-Tucson), about 53 percent; T.J. Shope (R-Coolidge), about 56 percent; David Gowan (R-Sierra Vista), about 71 percent; Rosanna Gabaldon (D-Sahuarita), about 73 percent; Lupe Contreras (D-Avondale), about 75 percent; Sonny Borrelli (R-Lake Havasu City), about 79 percent; Tyler Pace (R-Mesa), about 82 percent; Sine Kerr (R-Buckeye), about 90 percent; and David Livingston (R-Peoria), about 91 percent.
Of note, all of Gowan’s 32 contributions came from outside of his district — 28 came from Maricopa County. Additionally, $5,000 of Gowan’s $8,950 non-lobbyist contributions came from Phoenix Coyotes owner Alex Merulo.
Butler received over $10,000 from the Tucson branch of one of the largest labor unions in the country: the United Food and Commercial Workers (UCFW). Her PAC contributions totaled $13,000, and $150 of her individual contributions were from lobbyists. There were several inactive lobbyist donors among the individual contributions totaling $250. In all, Butler’s total contributions were over $13,700.
Wilmeth’s ten non-lobbyist donors included three inactive lobbyists and one wife of an inactive lobbyist.
Five legislators sampled reportedly received less than 10 percent of funds from PACs and lobbyists: Morgan Abraham, about 4 percent; Quang Nguyen, about 7 percent; Judy Burges, about 7 percent; Amish Shah, about 7 percent; and Joseph Chaplik, about 8 percent.
There were several legislators sampled that we couldn’t review because their reports haven’t been filed yet — even though they were due well over two months ago.
State Representative Alma Hernandez (D-Tucson) still hasn’t filed her campaign finance report due April 15. Hernandez has been late consistently since her first year in office (2018), accruing $3,500 in fines altogether. Her latest campaign finance report, which she has yet to file, is 76 days late and she owed $1,675 currently — her highest single fine to date. It took Hernandez 69 extra days to file her 2021 cumulative finance report: it was due January 15, but she filed it March 25.
Just over half of Hernandez’s individual donors from her last report, the cumulative one for 2021, were from out of state and made up the majority of those contributions: $5,980 versus the $3,920 from Arizona. Among them were several prominent figures in the Jewish community including acclaimed author and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel’s son, Elisha Wiesel, as well as Broadway star Jonah Platt.
State Senator Stephanie Stahl Hamilton (D-Tucson) did file her report on time — but like Hernandez, over half of the individual contributors on her latest campaign finance report were from out of state.
It appears that the Hernandez siblings are alike when it comes to campaign finance reports. Since the year his sister took office, Hernandez grew increasingly tardy with filing the reports. For two separate 2020 reports, he accrued over $5,100 in fines. His 2021 cumulative report was filed late by 67 days, and he was fined $1,450 for that. Both the Hernandez siblings are 76 days late on their first quarter report.
Another perennially tardy filer is State Representative César Chávez (D-Maryvale). Like Hernandez, he is 76 dates late and owes $1,675, but for his senate campaign’s first quarter report. Chávez was also late by 58 days to file his senate campaign’s 2021 cumulative report, owing $1,225.
Similarly to Hernandez, Chávez has a history of late filings, the highest of which were 121 days late to file his 2020 pre-general election filing, 163 days late to file his 2016 pre-general election report, and 953 days late to file his 2016 first report for the fourth quarter and post-general election report.
One interesting campaign finance report came from State Senator Wendy Rogers (R-Flagstaff). The report totaled nearly 600 pages, with 586 dedicated to individual contributions alone that totaled nearly $360,000. No lobbyists could be discerned among the over 7,000 contributors, and over 1,600 of them were Arizonans. A vast majority were retired, nearly 4,500 of them, bolstered by the self-employed and small business owners.
Only one PAC donated to Rogers: the Save America PAC gave one contribution of $5,000 in January.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) approved an increase in school safety staff a week before experiencing an active shooter threat last Tuesday.
TUSD Governing Board member Sadie Shaw pointed to that threat as justification for supporting the increase, which some community members opposed. TUSD will hire five more school safety supervisors, two dispatchers, and one field lieutenant, adding to the 34 existing school safety department members. Only board members Leila Counts and Ravi Shah opposed the increase.
The TUSD community and South Tucson Police Department (STPD) presented different accounts of last Tuesday’s threat, the nature of the 911 calls, and the department’s response times.
In their version of the events to KGUN 9, STPD claimed that they received one call about the potential gunman at 7:05 am last Tuesday. They said that several men were reportedly arguing over a possible stolen car across from Mission View Elementary School, part of TUSD. Half an hour later, STPD claimed that a school monitor reported in a second call that one of the men may have been armed.
STPD didn’t respond until 9:05 am, a response time of about two hours in a city of just over one square mile. STPD reported that they didn’t find a gun.
However, Shaw and others offered a different account of events last Wednesday. Shaw stated that STPD didn’t respond for over three hours, that the alleged gunman was directly threatening the school, and that the school principal placed the calls to police. The board member thanked the TUSD safety team for protecting the students when police failed to arrive.
Shaw said that the experience was significant enough for her to vote to hire more school safety officers.
“I wasn’t on the governing board when they voted to arm school safety but in general I support this decision because these employees are sometimes tasked to respond to dangerous situations that happen at any TUSD site — 24/7,” wrote Shaw. “[Y]ou know what? I have a child that goes to school in this district and so do many of you. I don’t think we can afford to make idealistic decisions that ignore reality. This is America.”
In a subsequent petition to end school gun violence, which Shaw shared, the group “Protect Our South Tucson School” claimed that STPD didn’t respond for three and a half hours, and that the two calls were about, first, a “gun yielding [sic] angry gunman” standing outside the school and, second, an electronic threat sent to the school. Additionally, the group echoed Shaw’s claim that the second call came from the elementary school principal — not a school resource officer.
The entirety of the group’s account of event is reproduced below:
On Tuesday, June 21st at 7:15 am, 15 minutes before a summer school day started a gun yielding angry gunman stood outside of Mission View Elementary in South Tucson, a one square mile enclave of the much larger city of Tucson.
About an hour after the first call to 911 the school received a threat electronically.
The principal called 911 and pleaded again for law enforcement officers to come to protect the school while students participated in their summer school classes. Nobody showed up. Instead, the school district’s school safety team showed up in a heroic fashion and was able to secure the school.
It wasn’t until 3 and a half hours after the incident did South Tucson Police showed [sic] up to the mass shooting threat.
Every day in the United States a mass shooting occurs, just a few weeks ago in Uvalde Texas, a mass shooter ended the lives of many children and teachers. The lack of urgency in South Tucson PD’s response is unacceptable. We understand that South Tucson PD is understaffed, but when it comes to the potential threat of a mass shooting occurring it should be their number one priority. In the one square mile city, families and schools can only receive services first from South Tucson police. Tucson Police Department should be responding jointly to potential threats of gun violence to our schools regardless if the threat is in South Tucson.
We are calling on South Tucson, Tucson Unified School District and the City of Tucson to address this issue immediately and develop policies that improve lines of communication, and improve collaboration when it comes to protecting our students from gun violence.
AZ Free News reached out to STPD just before noon on Tuesday. We were referred to STPD Chief Danny Denogean; he didn’t respond by press time.
STPD admitted that their response time was too slow, which they asserted was around two hours. Denogean apologized on Monday in a statement to KGUN 9.
“We own this. We should have had a better response to that call. There’s no debating that. We needed to get there quicker.”
The neighboring Tucson Police Department (TPD) has also had slower response times, due to staffing shortages. Assistant Chief Kevin Hall toldKOLD in January that the issue has been plaguing them for about two years. Chief Chris Magnus reported that their fastest response time for foremost emergencies averages 4 minutes and 47 seconds, whereas lowest-level calls average about one hour and 37 minutes.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
On Tuesday, Republican gubernatorial candidate Matt Salmon ended his campaign, citing low polling numbers. Salmon received an average of 12 to 14 percent of the vote in recent polls against his top two contenders, Karrin Taylor Robson and Kari Lake.
“Unfortunately, numbers are numbers, and it has become clear to me that the path to a first-place victory is no longer a realistic possibility,” stated Salmon. “Republican primary voters deserve more than having their votes split on August 2nd, and so I am leaving this race for the same reason that I entered it: because it is what’s best for the people of Arizona.”
I've been blessed with the best supporters in the world – but numbers are numbers, and primary voters deserve more than having their votes split.
So, today, I am ending my #AZGov campaign for the same reason I entered it: Because it is what's best for the people of Arizona → pic.twitter.com/V2MaR10n9r
Salmon is the latest to drop out in the crowded Republican primary. Steve Gaynor withdrew at the end of April, also citing low polling numbers against top contenders Salmon, Lake, and Robson.
“This week I received survey results that showed I would have a high probability of winning against each of the other candidates in a head-to-head matchup,” wrote Gaynor. “In a three-way race, I would have a reasonable probability of winning. However, in a four-way race, my chance of winning is low enough to be unrealistic.”
— Steve Gaynor for Arizona Governor (@gaynorforgov) April 29, 2022
State Treasurer Kimberly Yee withdrew at the beginning of this year, deciding to run for re-election to her current office instead.
I am withdrawing from the Governor's race to stand for re-election as Treasurer. There is additional work to be done as the Treasurer of Arizona. As I transition my campaign, I want to thank my supporters and invite them to join me in my re-election efforts for Arizona Treasurer. pic.twitter.com/WiArCuBisQ
That leaves Robson, Lake, Scott Neely, and Paola Tulliani-Zen, along with several write-ins: Patrick Finerd, Carlos Roldan, and Alex Schatz. Robson and Lake are the top two contenders in the field at present.
The most recent poll from Trafalgar showed Lake with a 12-point lead over Robson.
However, Data Orbital polling from earlier this month revealed Lake with a four-point lead over Robson. The pollsters have an A/B rating from FiveThirtyEight.
Another poll from OH Predictive Insights this month showed Lake with an even smaller margin of two points.
Real Clear Politics averaged Lake at a seven-point lead ahead of Robson.
The Democratic primary is far smaller: Secretary of State Katie Hobbs is up against businessman and career politician Marco Lopez. Former state legislator Aaron Lieberman withdrew last month.
OH Predictive Insights has consistently shown Hobbs with a comfortable lead over Lopez. In May, the pollsters found that 43 percent of those surveyed would vote for Hobbs, while only 9 percent would vote for Lopez. However, 40 percent reported that they were undecided.
Predictive polling on who would win the governor’s race consistently showed Hobbs with a lead.
According to a May poll from GQR Research which Hobbs sponsored, the secretary of state led Robson by one point and Lake by five points. GQR has a B rating from FiveThirtyEight.
Data Orbital polling from February, which has an A/B rating, reported slightly different leads: Hobbs would lead Robson by five points and Salmon by one point, but Lake would lead Hobbs by one point.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Congressman Tom O’Halleran (D-AZ-01) didn’t respond to questions about his support for President Joe Biden’s plans to run for re-election in 2024.
On Friday, Fox News asked O’Halleran and five other Democratic congressmen about their support for a Biden 2024 run. O’Halleran and four others didn’t respond. The network posed their question several weeks after O’Halleran failed to respond to a similar question from the Daily Caller.
According to data from FiveThirtyEight, O’Halleran has a perfect voting record on issues supported by the president, though he’s insinuated otherwise.
I’ll always do what’s right for #AZ01, regardless of party. While President Biden and I may not agree on everything, we agree that the State of our Union is stronger when we come together and put aside our differences to improve the lives of Americans. https://t.co/8AT5y7RG3B
O’Halleran was also behind the controversial proposal to suspend the federal gas tax, along with Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ). Democratic leaders received the initiative coolly, according to interviews presented in Politico. The legislators spurned the idea as one that would bleed revenue without justifiable savings for consumers.
Pleased to see President Biden advocate for my plan to suspend the federal gas tax. This would provide relief at the pump, putting money back into the pockets of hardworking #AZ01 families, lowering shipping costs, & helping to address inflation. https://t.co/kCuTMTxTnw
On Monday, Vice President Kamala Harris told CNN anchor Dana Bash that she and Biden would seek re-election in 2024. Harris issued those remarks less than an hour after the New York Times reported on Democratic Party leaders’ dissent over Biden’s desire to run again.
“Joe Biden is running for re-election and I will be his ticket mate,” stated Harris. “Full stop. That’s it.”
.@vp Harris insists that Joe Biden will be on the top of the ticket in 2024 and she’ll be his running mate. “Full stop. That’s it.” pic.twitter.com/2jGGlqAdrs
Biden’s promise to run is something that certain individuals within Biden-Harris immediate circle have echoed repeatedly, despite pushback from fellow Democratic leaders. Lack of unified support has Biden “irked,” according to insiders that spoke with multiple mainstream outlets close with the Biden administration: including the Washington Post, New York Times, CNN, The Atlantic, and Politico.
To be clear, as the President has said repeatedly, he plans to run in 2024.
Although O’Halleran’s voting record supports Biden’s policies wholeheartedly, his reluctance to back a second round of a Biden-Harris administration may have to do with public sentiment in addition to party dissent. Biden’s approval ratings have consistently dropped: the majority of voters have disapproved of the president since last October.
FiveThirtyEight estimated that close to 56 percent of voters disapprove of Biden at present, while nearly 40 percent approve.
Reuters offered worse numbers: they estimated that 58 percent of voters disapprove of Biden, while only 36 percent approve.
By comparison, former President Donald Trump’s approval ratings fluctuated, hitting lows of 35 at the end of 2018 and at the very end of his term in 2021, but maintaining averages at or above 40 and up to 49 throughout his four years.
O’Halleran is also potentially facing a tougher voter base, thanks to redistricting. Certain studies asserted that the congressman’s new district leans Republican — if active in 2020, the Phoenix-based survey research group Data Orbital projected that Trump would have won the district by over 8 points.
Arizona has two pathways for addressing abortion: an outright ban as old as the state itself, or the 15-week restriction codified in March.
On Friday, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruled that Roe v. Wade invented a nonexistent constitutional right to abortion, wrongly forcing the states to surrender their authority on the subject. Arizona’s elected officials must decide whether to honor the state’s original outright ban on abortion or, instead, enforce the 15-week ban passed earlier this year. The latter will likely go into effect in the second-to-last week of September; the SCOTUS ruling will be effective near the end of next month.
The Senate’s Republican caucus declared in a press release that the original outright ban is in effect. However, the attorney general’s office hasn’t issued a formal statement of which law it will enforce. It explained in a statement that it’s conducting a legal review.
“This law, that is already on the books, bans most abortions, unless the procedure is necessary to save the life of a mother,” wrote the Senate majority. “Last year, the legislature amended this law, so that the mother who chooses to have an abortion will not face any punishment.”
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Arizona's Abortion Law Now in Effect in the Wake of Today's SCOTUS Ruling ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/kH4iCWHTIJ
Long before the legislature revised the ban, the Arizona Court of Appeals enjoined the law as unconstitutional in its 1973 ruling in Nelson v. Planned Parenthood Center of Tucson. That decision was directed by the SCOTUS precedent in Roe.
Insecurity over current law prompted Arizona’s abortion providers to suspend abortions until further notice. Chris Love, the chairwoman of Planned Parenthood Arizona’s advocacy arm who bragged about her husband assaulting a black Trump supporter at a pro-abortion rally last month, explained that they didn’t want providers to lose their licenses or police engaging with their patients.
I've been asked why we just don't keep going until we're stopped. The answer is simple. We don't want our providers to lose their licenses and we don't want our pregnant patients to have encounters with police.
Cathi Herrod, the president of the Center for Arizona Policy, spoke with “Conservative Circus” host James T. Harris about the viability of restoring Arizona’s original abortion ban.
Herrod opined that Arizona’s original abortion ban would stand because it preceded Roe v. Wade and that was never repealed after. Arizona outlawed abortion from 1901, prior to achieving statehood, up until it was required by the Supreme Court to allow abortions in 1973. The original ban is A.R.S. 13:3603, which only punishes abortion providers and not the pregnant women.
“I believe that is still good law and that it should be enforceable,” said Herrod.
Herrod clarified that the 1973 Arizona Court of Appeals decision rested on the SCOTUS decision at the time, indicating that the law was no longer enjoined as a result of Friday’s ruling.
Cathi Herrod, President of Center for Arizona Policy, discusses whether it is legal in Arizona to get an abortion a https://t.co/DKN3oQb8KQ
Herrod also noted that even the most recent limitation on abortion — SB1164 banning abortions after 15 weeks, signed into law in March — stipulated that it didn’t repeal the state’s original abortion ban.
“This act does not: […] Repeal, by implication or otherwise, section 13-3602, Arizona Revised Statutes, or any other applicable state law regulating or restricting abortion,” reads the latest law.
In a Facebook post, Herrod added that the state’s original ban had greater enforceability than the 15-week restriction, unless a court enjoins that ban. In that case, Herrod stated that the 15-week restriction would be enforceable.
In response to claims that the legal system would punish expectant mothers for obtaining abortions, Herrod clarified that no state laws extended punishment to mothers. She noted that Governor Doug Ducey codified a repeal of a pre-Roe law punishing women who received abortions with jail.
Herrod predicted that there would be lawsuits on Arizona’s abortion bans. Pro-abortionists undertook legal action on Saturday, a day after the SCOTUS ruling. ACLU of Arizona, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Arizona Medical Association, and the National Council of Jewish Women Arizona filed an emergency motion in the Arizona District Court.
NEW: The ACLU + partners are urging the court to ensure that AZ's vague “personhood requirement” cannot be used to block access to abortion.
Until the court acts, the uncertainty in the law will cause providers to suspend abortion services & put lives of pregnant people at risk. pic.twitter.com/evpDW7DJ1g
According to the latest data from the Arizona Department of Health Services (AZDHS), there were nearly 13,300 abortions completed in 2020 — over 36 a day across the dozen facilities that provide abortions in the state. Over 85 percent of those who obtained abortions were unmarried. The greatest number of abortions occurred in women aged 20-24 years old: about 4,000. Over 1,200 of the abortions came from teenagers, from under 15 years old to 19 years old. Over 7,600 of the abortions came from women in the 20’s, and over 3,800 came from women in their 30’s.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
