A bill that was widely supported by Arizona law enforcement and passed out of committee with broad bipartisan approval met a partisan crowd when it arrived for a vote in the full State House of Representatives.
HB 2485, sponsored by Representative Kevin Payne, would enhance sentencing for convicted criminals who ambush police officers in the line of duty. According to the overview of the legislation provided by the Arizona House, this bill “increases the penalties for aggravated assault on a peace officer if the defendant is found to have lain in wait for or ambushed the peace officer while committing the assault.” The bill requires that “a person who is convicted of aggravated assault on a peace officer, and found to have lain in wait for or ambushed the peace officer in committing the assault, be sentenced to two years more than what would otherwise be imposed for the assault.”
This piece of legislation seemed like a slam dunk for passage out of the Arizona Legislature, but the final clearance from the House of Representatives was anything but. All but one Democrat voted against HB 2485, with Representative Amish Shah not voting. All Republicans voted to send the bill to the Senate.
Freshman lawmaker Cory McGarr noted the shocking vote against a bill designed to protect members of Arizona’s law enforcement community, writing, “All of the Dems voted against protecting police from AMBUSH. Might want to call your Democrat representative and ask why only Republicans voted to protect police.”
All of the Dems voted against protecting police from AMBUSH.
Might want to call your Democrat representative and ask why only Republicans voted to protect police. pic.twitter.com/uhlNWnin87
The result of the vote on the House floor was unlike the actions out of House committees earlier in the legislative process. When the bill was heard before the Committee on Military Affairs and Public Safety (MAPS) – chaired by the sponsor, Representative Kevin Payne, it passed with an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote; 13 members voted yes, one Democrat voted no, and another Democrat was recorded as present. Representative Sun, who voted no on the bill in committee explained that she had pause on supporting the bill because the “definition of ambush is very vague,” and she was concerned about “further criminalizing our constituents and adding to our privatized prison system.” HB 2485 cleared the House Rules Committee with a unanimous 8-0 vote.
Several representatives of the Arizona law enforcement community testified in support of the bill before the MAPS Committee. Don Isaacson, on behalf of the Arizona Fraternal Order of Police (Arizona State Lodge), relayed the endorsement of HB 2485 from the 10,000 police officers who comprise his organization. The key for Mr. Isaacson and his police officers was the change from “optional” enhancement for convictions of ambushing a police officer to “mandatory.” Rebecca Baker, the Legislative Liaison for the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office also testified in favor of the bill; as did Joe Clure, the Director of the Arizona Police Association, who made clear that it’s important to send a clear message to those who ambush police officers will be dealt with “harshly and firmly.”
But the most convincing testimony in front of the House MAPS Committee came from the President of the Arizona Fraternal Order of Police, Paul Sheldon, who has served for more than 23 years as a police officer. He expressed regret that this legislation was even necessary – especially since there was a time in his career, where these types of crimes against police officers were extremely rare. However, he noted that last year was the deadliest year for law enforcement in more than twenty years. He told the committee that 21 Arizona police officers were shot in the line of duty in 2022, and 16 of those were ambush attacks. Two of those ambushed officers died in the line of duty.
HB 2485 now heads to the Arizona Senate for its consideration.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
For over a decade, Arizona Legislative Republicans have not had to worry about a governor who may be inclined to use executive actions to unnecessarily regulate businesses around the state. They’re now advancing a bill to protect businesses in their districts from any new regulatory overreach that could be coming from the new Democrat Chief Executive on the Ninth Floor of Arizona’s Executive Tower.
This week, the Arizona House passed HB 2254, sponsored by Representative Justin Wilmeth. The bill “requires a proposed rule that will increase regulatory costs in excess of $500,000 within two years after implementation to be ratified by the Legislature,” according to the overview provided by the State House. 31 Republicans voted for the legislation, opposed by 27 Democrats. Two Democrats did not vote (Representatives Stacey Travers and Amish Shah).
Representative Wilmeth issued the following statement after his bill’s party-line passage in the House: “Burdensome regulations can lead to higher prices, fewer small businesses, and fewer jobs. HB 2254 says legislative approval would be required before high-cost rules could be implemented by the state. Executive agencies would have to get buy-in from the Legislature before they could move forward with major regulations. It will increase government accountability by strengthening oversight on unelected bureaucrats and help keep government regulations in check.”
✅House Approves Legislation by State Representative @JustinWilmethAZ to Restrict Regulatory Government Overreach.
Earlier last month, HB 2254 passed the House Government Committee with a partisan 5-4 vote and the House Rules Committee with a unanimous 8-0 vote.
Republican Legislators did not have to take precautions when it came to protecting Arizona businesses from the heavy and onerous hand of state government during the previous administration. Former Governor Doug Ducey led the way for the Grand Canyon State and the nation by “eliminat(ing) or improv(ing) over 3,365 regulations since 2015 – the equivalent of a $183 million tax cut.”
Representatives from the Sierra Club – Grand Canyon Chapter, AZ Solar Energy Industries, and WM E Morris Institute for Justice opposed the bill’s passage through the House process. Stephen Shadegg from Americans for Prosperity Arizona supported this legislation.
HB 2254 now heads to the Arizona Senate. If it clears that chamber, it will await its fate at the hands of a governor who will have to decide whether to voluntarily allow a Republican-led legislature to hold her regulatory actions accountable to their oversight.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
A powerful Senate Committee Chairman is encouraging Arizona’s Democrat Governor to show some urgency when it comes to re-nominating an individual to lead the Department of Child Safety (DCS), and he may have a solution as her office considers its next move in the matter.
On Thursday, Senator Jake Hoffman, Chairman of the Committee on Director Nominations, sent a letter to Governor Katie Hobbs, transmitting a letter his panel had received “from a coalition of frontline child welfare advocates and providers ‘respectfully requesting consideration for the reinstatement of former DCS Director Mike Faust.’” Senator Hoffman echoed “the pleadings of these dedicated child welfare professionals” in his own letter to the governor.
"The Department of Child Safety and our state's most vulnerable children deserve nothing less than proven experience to be expeditiously returned to that agency." pic.twitter.com/6pyeRx2il0
The letter that the Committee on Director Nominations had received was from a group of 21 individuals, representing licensed Group Home providers, bringing “well over 200 years of child welfare experience in Arizona.” The coalition wrote that “we share a mutual and tremendous respect for the past performance of former Director Faust and appreciate his rigor in holding all our agencies accountable when needed.” They praised Faust’s character, stating, “He is a man of his word and his transparency allowed for effective planning. Although his decisions were not always universally embraced, he could be trusted and he is a man of high moral character and integrity.”
It appears the Governor’s Office received the letter as well.
The coalition requested that the governor consider reinstating Faust to his past position of DCS Director.
Hoffman wrote in his accompanying letter to the governor that he believed “the coalition’s request to be a wise and prudent course of action” for Arizona. He also revealed that he had recently touched base with Faust “about his willingness to serve in this important role once again,” and that the former DCS Director “would be willing to discuss with (Hobbs) the possibility of his returning to lead the agency.”
The Director Nominations Chairman promised a “swift confirmation process should Mr. Faust be nominated to return in his role as the agency’s Director.”
All sides have admitted the importance of this agency and installing a competent individual who will do the work required on behalf of Arizona’s most vulnerable children. After Hobbs’ initial appointee, Matthew Stewart, was forced out of the nomination process by her office, she stated that DCS “has a critical mission protecting Arizona’s most vulnerable population, our children.” Chairman Hoffman wrote in his letter that “there are few executive agencies in Arizona as important as the Department of Child Safety.” And the coalition writing to Governor Hobbs asserted that “leading an agency of nearly 3,000 employees charged to protect and serve over 10,000 children is a daunting task that requires a unique and dedicated leader.”
The ball is now in the Governor’s Office when it comes to taking action on a vacant nomination for DCS Director as vulnerable Arizona children await direction and leadership from the state agency tasked with protecting their interests.
Hoffman’s committee, which was commissioned by Senate President Warren Petersen, has so far held two meetings to consider four of Governor Hobbs’ nominees for key positions in state agencies. The Committee on Director Nominations voted to recommend two of the individuals it has vetted, voted against recommending another, and held the fourth for future considerations. Governor Hobbs has been slow to transmit her nominations to the Arizona Senate for consent as is her constitutional obligation. The failed nomination last month of Matthew Stewart for DCS Director occurred independently of the committee process.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Republicans at the Arizona Legislature are looking out for taxpayers’ interests, and one beleaguered group is in their sights.
On Wednesday, House Speaker Ben Toma and Senate President Warren Petersen sent a surprising and blunt letter to the Executive Director of the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG), warning that litigation is “reasonably likely” over concerns that NAAG may not be “complying with Arizona public money laws.”
Toma and Petersen outlined some of the justifications for their concerns, including the recent reporting “that NAAG lost at least $37 million last year on a panoply of investments in things like private equity and foreign stocks. The legislative leaders also highlighted the reports “that NAAG utilized assets from public settlements to secretly support ESG-linked investments and to fly Attorneys General and their families on European holidays.”
— Arizona House Republicans (@AZHouseGOP) March 2, 2023
According to the letter (which pulled from several press reports), “NAAG has amassed over $250 million in assets from public enforcement settlements, which include Arizona public monies.” Toma and Petersen assert that “NAAG is subject to the duties and liabilities set forth under Arizona law for custodians of public moneys, that public monies cannot be appropriated without legislative authorization, and that investments must comply with Arizona law.” Their letter states “it appears that NAAG has been operating outside the lines, and the result is millions in public money lost on ESG investments, foreign stocks, and trips to Europe, while millions still sit in the hands of an unaccountable bureaucracy in Washington, D.C.”
Toma and Petersen write, “The situation is unacceptable and not consistent with Arizona law. It is time that Arizona’s laws and regulations start applying to NAAG and that this unaccountable slush fund activity stop now.”
The letter from Toma and Petersen follows a series of actions taken against NAAG in the past two years – mostly by Republican Attorneys General. A handful of Attorneys General took steps to sever their state’s relationships with NAAG, while several other states highlighted their significant concerns with NAAG in attempts to force necessary change. Former Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich was one of the top cops running for the exit doors with NAAG, following Alabama, Texas, Missouri, and Missouri. Three former attorneys in the Arizona Attorneys General Office under Brnovich just recently became employed by the State Senate and House in the past few months.
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall was the first officeholder to break away from NAAG back in 2021. He said at the time, “I can’t justify spending taxpayer dollars to fund an organization that seems to be going further and further left. With the money we will save, I can add a young lawyer to my consumer protection division and yield a far better return on the taxpayer’s investment.”
The Alliance for Consumers organization cheered Arizona’s latest move this week, tweeting, “Kudos to Arizona! The @NatlAssnAttysGn should be held accountable for recklessly spending taxpayer dollars on their woke agenda.”
— Alliance For Consumers (@for_consumers) March 2, 2023
After receiving the letter, NAAG had a short comment in response: “NAAG has received the letter from the Arizona Legislature. We are working with our Executive Committee of attorneys general on the matter and will present it to our membership.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Republicans in the Arizona Legislature continue to advance bills that would increase parental choice, transparency, and involvement in their children’s education; and some of those proposals are being met with incredible opposition from Democrats and interest groups.
Last month, SB 1700, sponsored by Senator Justine Wadsack, was considered by the Senate Education Committee. According to the fact sheet provided by the Arizona Senate, SB 1700 “requires the Arizona Department of Education to maintain a list of books that public educational institutions may not use or make available to students, including books that are lewd or sexual, promote gender fluidity or gender pronouns or groom children into normalizing pedophilia.” The bill also “grants parents the right to request removal of school district or charter school library or classroom materials, extends public review periods for library materials and district textbooks and removes exceptions from district curriculum approval and school library access requirements.”
Debate on this bill in committee was fierce, and opponents railed against its eventual passage. One teacher, in particular, made national headlines when she compared the “advanced degrees” of Arizona teachers with the education and background parents may or may not have to “choose the curriculum and the books that our children are going to read.”
These comments caught the attention of Arizona Republican lawmakers, who used the rhetoric in the committee hearing to continue to make their case for parental choice legislation. Wadsack, the bill’s sponsor, tweeted, “And THIS is why I fight for Parental Rights! THIS right here. This was a Leftist Teacher speaking in my committee last week – You just can’t write this stuff.”
And THIS is why I fight for Parental Rights! THIS right here!
The Arizona Department of Education also weighed in on the teacher’s outburst in the Senate Education Committee: “Superintendent Horne will always empower parents because they should be in charge of their children’s education. #EducationForAll”
Despite the backlash against the bill, Republican Senators held their ground and successfully cleared SB 1700 from the Education Committee. Senators Steve Kaiser, Anthony Kerr, and Chairman Ken Bennett joined Senator Wadsack in fending off three Democrat Senators.
Representatives from the Arizona Association of County School Superintendents, the Arizona Education Association, the National Association of Social Workers – Arizona Chapter, Save Our Schools Arizona, the Arizona Charter Schools Association, Arizona National Organization for Women (NOW), Arizona Library Association, and Equality Arizona all opposed the bill.
Representatives Rachel Jones and Cory McGarr were co-sponsors of this bill.
SB 1700 has not been considered by the Rules Committee, nor by the entire Senate chamber.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
