Arizona’s Republican Primary for the open seat in the U.S. Senate between former Gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake and Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb quickly became a heated one.
While Lake faced criticism for referring to Lamb as a “total coward when it comes to election integrity” who “surrendered to the establishment” during the GOP Senate Forum, Lamb decried her as “a divider,” rather than a “uniter.” He stated, “It’s time she takes some personal responsibility for losing an election that she was supposed to win,” referring to her 2022 defeat by Gov. Katie Hobbs in a statement published to X.
Although the results are not finalized in many of the races, according to state and county officials, the unofficial results stand thusly as of noon on July 31 according to the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office.
The Arizona Republican U.S. Senate Nominee is Kari Lake — According to current results, Lake defeated Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb 55.3%-39.3% by a difference of 98,644 votes.
In a post to X, Lake shared her acceptance of the nomination and wrote, “I want to thank everyone who put in their blood, sweat, & tears, knocking on doors, volunteering, & working for our campaign I love every one of you I want to thank Arizonans for entrusting me to be their voice. And I want to thank my family, I couldn’t do any of this without them.”
I want to thank everyone who put in their blood, sweat, & tears, knocking on doors, volunteering, & working for our campaign
I love every one of you
I want to thank Arizonans for entrusting me to be their voice
As of this report it doesn’t appear that Mark Lamb has issued a concession or any statement regarding the race.
Lake will face Democrat Congressman Ruben Gallego who won the Democratic nomination unopposed, garnering 424,088 votes.
According to Cook Political, the race for the seat of outgoing Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ) leans Democrat. The RealClearPolling average as of this report shows Gallego leading by 3.4 points.
In a post to X, and during her nomination acceptance, Lake seemed to adopt a conciliatory tone toward Lamb writing, “[Sheriff Lamb] was never an opponent. He’s my friend. I truly appreciate everything he’s given to Arizona, and I know he’s not done fighting for it. He’s not done protecting it. He ran a great campaign, and I look forward to working together with him in the future.”
In her comments she thanked him and referred to him as her friend saying, “He ran a great campaign…that never hit below the belt, which is so rare in politics.” She complimented him saying, ”That is a great man. That is a man of great character.”
.@sherifflamb1 was never an opponent. He's my friend.
I truly appreciate everything he's given to Arizona, and I know he's not done fighting for it. He's not done protecting it.
He ran a great campaign, and I look forward to working together with him in the future. pic.twitter.com/qdf1oFuPFo
The 2024 Arizona Primary Election for Southern Arizona’s seats in the U.S. House of Representatives involved races that were mostly uncontested or lightly contested with the notable exception of District 6. That race, between incumbent Republican Congressman Juan Ciscomani and challenger Kathleen Winn, was more energetic, and will now be followed by what could be a staunch challenge from Democrat Kirsten Engel.
While the results are not finalized in many of the races, according to state and county officials, the unofficial results stand thusly as of noon on July 31 according to the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office.
Jeff Zink won the Arizona Congressional Primary for District 3, vacated by Democrat Rep. Ruben Gallego, against Jesus David Mendoza, 65.6%-34.4%, by a margin of 3,720 votes.
Zink is expected to face off against Yassamin Ansari who defeated Raquel Terán to win the Democratic nomination in a close 46.1%-42.7% race by a margin of 1,185.
According to Cook Political, District 3 leans heavily Democrat D+24
Republican Kelly Cooper defeated Dr. Zuhdi Jasser in a six-point race, 32.2%-26.8%, with a margin of 2,692 in Democrat-held District 4.
Cooper will challenge incumbent Congressman Greg Stanton who ran unopposed.
According to Cook Political, District 2 is solidly Democrat but only holds a D+2 rating, indicating a possible vulnerability for House Democrats. Cooper was previously defeated by Stanton in 2022 in a 12-point race by a margin of 32,420 votes, a massive decrease from Stanton’s 2020 23-point, six-figure margin prior to redistricting.
Dr. Jasser posted to X Thursday acknowledging his defeat in the race and issued a full statement. He wrote, “A humble thank you to all our supporters after a hard fought primary election battle for Arizona’s 4th Congressional District. I congratulate @KellyCooperAZ and wish him and his family the best in retiring the empty suited Biden rubber stamper @RepGregStanton from office.”
Cooper replied, “It was honor to run against you, I know we have the same goals, make Arizona better. I look forward to bringing unity to the Republican Party and winning in November!”
A humble thank you to all our supporters after a hard fought primary election battle for Arizona’s 4th Congressional District. I congratulate @KellyCooperAZ and wish him and his family the best in retiring the empty suited Biden rubber stamper @RepGregStanton from office.
Reps. Andy Biggs, a Republican, and Katrina Schaffner, a Democrat, won their respective nominations in unopposed District 5 primaries and will face off in the general election.
According to Cook Political, District 5 is solidly Republican R+11
Incumbent Congressman Juan Ciscomani defeated challenger Kathleen Winn in a 59.4%-40.6% race by a margin of 16,344.
Ciscomani will be challenged by Democrat Kirsten Engel in November who won the Democratic nomination unopposed.
Cook Political, considers District 6 to be a Republican Toss-up R+3
Forecasting from The Hill gives Ciscomani a 71% chance of retaining his seat.
Republican Daniel Butierez, Sr., and incumbent Democrat Congressman Raúl Grijalva, were unopposed in their District 7 primaries and will face each other in the general election.
Cook Political, has District 7 projected as solidly Democratic at D+15
Arizona’s Energy Competitiveness Index was released Friday by the Common Sense Institute of Arizona (CSIA) and despite skyrocketing electrical rates, Arizona’s energy reliability and competitiveness have reportedly fallen since 2022. With businesses and families buckling under the strain of higher rates passed by the Arizona Corporation Commission in March, the state and nation are pivoting further away from reliable natural gas and nuclear power toward more intermittent solar and wind solutions. And the outcome seems to be hurting Arizona families.
According to the report, “Arizona’s relative affordability has improved compared to other states. The state now ranks 21st in residential electric affordability, up from 28th in 2011.” But legislators and regulators shouldn’t celebrate much. This isn’t simply because Arizona has gotten better, but also because almost every other state has gotten much worse.
The CSIA report found in part, “The reliability of energy grids across the country is on the decline, although Arizona remains one of the more reliable grids in the country. On average, a user of electricity in Arizona faced 136.9 minutes of interruption in 2022 – up from 73.9 minutes in 2013, and nearly 59% less than the duration faced by the average customer across the U.S. (333 minutes). Despite falling slightly in the two reliability competitiveness indices, Arizona still ranks 5th in reliability.”
⚡ Despite a national decline, Arizona's energy grid remains one of the most reliable! In 2022, the average Arizonan faced only 136.9 minutes of interruption, compared to the national average of 333 minutes.
— Common Sense Institute Arizona (@CSInstituteAZ) July 29, 2024
However, the report added, “Both the electricity and natural gas prices faced by residential, commercial, and industrial customers in Arizona have increased in the last 13 years, but have also become more competitive as other states experienced larger increases. Arizona now ranks 21st in residential electric affordability, up from 28th in 2011.”
The report shows in detail that since peaking in 2022 at a score of 82.9, Arizona’s competitiveness index has dropped precipitously ending at 79 in 2023.
As noted by the Common Sense Institute: “Arizona’s Energy Competitiveness Index was 77 in 2011, peaked in 2022 at 83, and then declined to 79 in 2023. An increase in the Energy Competitiveness Index is a positive qualitative change – i.e., the state is more competitive as the index approaches one hundred. While the headline index extends through 2023, data for some of the individual component metrics are not available for the entirety of the period covered. For those metrics, we present the results through the latest year of data available.”
In regard to capacity, the report reveals that Arizona’s generating capacity, referred to as “nameplate capacity” increased from 2019 to 2022 but has barely kept pace with population increases and has declined considerably since peaking in 2012. The report noted, “Arizona has experienced a large increase in its population in recent years due to high levels of net migration. Because power plants typically take several years, if not a decade or more to complete, nameplate capacity has not increased as much, thus the decrease in nameplate capacity per 100,000 residents.”
From 2011 to 2023, Arizona's overall energy competitiveness ranking jumped to 21st, with improvements in six out of ten key indices.
— Common Sense Institute Arizona (@CSInstituteAZ) July 26, 2024
The Common Sense Institute offered a stark warning that, “While the goals of implementing a more environmentally friendly energy system have merit, policymakers should take caution not to recklessly transition their energy grids to renewable sources too quickly, and without appropriate supporting infrastructure. Renewable transition elsewhere, namely in states like California and Texas, has proven to be both costly and at a detriment to reliability and competitiveness.“
Should Washington and Phoenix continue to plunge headlong down this path, it seems unlikely that Arizona’s energy outlook will remain sunny.
In the election for the Scottsdale Unified School District Governing Board, it appears that one campaign is playing by the rules while the other is not. And the City of Scottsdale Code Enforcement Department has chosen to favor the side breaking the rules.
A concerned citizen contacted AZ Free News and provided photographic evidence that the campaign for candidates Donna Lewis, Matthew Pittinsky, and Michael Sharkey, installed large street signs over a month before the allowed period, which begins on August 26.
Social media posts from the North Scottsdale Democrats and campaigner Shea Najafi indicated that the organization participated in installing the signs prior to the permitted date.
City of Scottsdale Code Enforcement Officer Cathy Maldonado confirmed in correspondence provided to AZ Free News that the permitted date for school board campaign signage is Aug 26.
However, after multiple complaints, the city told the citizen that it is “unable to remove School Board election signs based off the time they are being placed,” unless “they are in a sign free zone, obstructing view / safety hazard, or if they do not have contact information.”
According to the City of Scottsdale’s Campaign Signs Guidelines and Regulations, “Campaign/Political Signs are allowed beginning 71 days before a primary election and ending 15 days after the general election.”
The document advises, “Candidates exceeding the permissible time limit will be subject to enforcement. Failure to comply with these guidelines and regulations may result in sign removal and other enforcement action.”
In a statement sent to AZ Free News, a supporter of conservative school board candidates Gretchen Jacobs, Jeanne Beasley and Drew Hassler laid out the chain of events:
“On 7/23, the supporter was informed that the City removed the Sharkey/Pittinsky/Lewis school board candidate sign.”
“On 7/24, I then filed a second complaint for another sign. Richie from the City of Scottsdale went to the sign location, we spoke, and he confirmed in text that the city would contact the candidates and give them 24 hours to remove the signs.”
“Throughout the day, additional complaints were filed as more Sharkey/Pittinsky/Lewis signs were discovered by the community … but now the City is responding to complaints to deny them, claiming that school board signs cannot be removed, even though they are admittedly out early. It appears that management is telling Code Enforcement Officers that they can only enforce some rules (safe zones, yes; but timing, no).”
“On 7/25, Code Enforcement Officer Richie confirmed in text to me that the signs are out early, but that he will not be allowed to remove the signs as he had stated that he would.”
In an email provided to AZ Free News from Melanie Schwandt, an Administrative Secretary with the City of Scottsdale, our source was given an answer from the City’s Legal Department which had determined “the School Board signs could not be removed even prior to the 71 day mark.”
Arizona Women of Action posted to X regarding the signage violations in Scottsdale, writing, “Some candidates are breaking city codes & getting away with it. This creates an unfair advantage for those candidates who do not mind taking the risk of getting their names out there before the legal date for signage.”
Some candidates are breaking city codes & getting away with it. This creates an unfair advantage for those candidates who do not mind taking the risk of getting their names out there before the legal date for signage.
— Arizona Women of Action (@azwomenofaction) July 27, 2024
Scottsdale Unites for Educational Integrity, reporting the same violations, wrote, “The @scottsdaleazgov confirmed that school board candidate signs may not be displayed until Aug 26th … but after democrat candidates installed signs more than 1 month early, the City has decided they will do …. exactly nothing.”
— Scottsdale Unites for Educational Integrity (@ScottsdaleUnite) July 26, 2024
AZ Free News has reached out to ‘Protect SUSD,’ the campaign for Sharkey/Pittinsky/Lewis, North Scottsdale Democrats (NorScoDems.org), as well as the Scottsdale Code Enforcement, Legal and Communications Departments for comment. We received no responses by time of publication.
On Friday, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AZFEC) filed a lawsuit against the State of Arizona, Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, and the ‘Make Elections Fair’ political committee. The group is challenging the initiative to place open primaries, ranked choice voting, and the elimination of public funding in partisan elections on the November ballot as a single item. The AZFEC, along with three co-plaintiffs, is contesting the constitutionality of The Make Elections Fair Arizona Act, on the basis that it violates the Arizona Constitution’s “Separate Amendment Rule,” which prohibits multiple constitutional amendments from being combined into a single ballot measure.
In a press release, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club explained, “If placed on the ballot and approved by voters, the Make Elections Fair Arizona Act would radically change how Arizonans select and approve candidates for public office, essentially copying the California voting system.”
Broken down under the premise of the “Separate Amendment Rule,” the Make Elections Fair Arizona Act constitutes twelve separate amendments according to the AZFEC. The act touches three disparate areas of Arizona election law, directly amends four different sections of the Arizona Constitution, and adds an entirely new section, whole cloth.
🚨 BREAKING: We just filed a lawsuit against the Make Elections Fair Arizona Act (which would essentially copy the California voting system) because it contains multiple separate constitutional amendments in violation of the Arizona Constitution. 🧵https://t.co/SZdu3h3aRV
— Arizona Free Enterprise Club (@azfec) July 26, 2024
Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club said in the release, “In their rush to undermine the will of Arizona voters for future elections, the special interests that drafted this measure ignored our laws and our Constitution. This egregious disregard for law and order exudes arrogance from these parties and should disqualify their measure from the November ballot.”
In the text of AZFEC’s complaint, attorneys for the organization cited, “Article XXI, Section 1 of the Arizona Constitution, which states that “[i]f more than one proposed amendment is submitted at any election, the proposed amendments shall be submitted in such a manner that the electors may vote for or against such proposed amendments separately.” They added that, in past precedence, the Arizona Supreme Court has upheld that “the purpose of the single-subject rule is to eliminate the ‘pernicious practice of “log-rolling,'” whereby voters are ‘forced, in order to secure the enactment of the proposition which [they] consider[] the most important, to vote for others of which [they] disapprove[],’” the process of packaging a proposition the voters might support with others they may not.
As detailed in the release, even the drafter’s website readily acknowledged that the initiative included multiple amendments in the no longer online section: “Initiative Language” by presenting the amendments in four distinct categories in a format showing each issue as a “Current Problem” and a solution labeled “MAKE IT FAIR.”
ARIZONA FREE ENTERPRISE CLUB V. STATE OF ARIZONA and ADRIAN FONTES §104 ( About Page, MAKE ELECTIONS FAIR ARIZONA, https://www.makeelectionsfairaz.com/about (last visited July 24, 2024).ARIZONA FREE ENTERPRISE CLUB V. STATE OF ARIZONA and ADRIAN FONTES §104 ( About Page, MAKE ELECTIONS FAIR ARIZONA, https://www.makeelectionsfairaz.com/about (last visited July 24, 2024).
In the complaint, the plaintiffs appeal for relief in the form of a declaration from the court that the initiative is in violation of the Arizona State Constitution, and a request for a mandamus order to compel Secretary of State Adrian Fontes to carry out his “nondiscretionary duty to comply with the Separate Amendment Rule set forth in Article XXI, Section 1 of the Arizona Constitution.”
As reported by the Arizona Mirror, the Make Elections Fair Arizona Act has already been the subject of a legal battle between the Make Elections Fair Arizona political action committee and Arizona Legislative leaders, House Speaker Ben Toma and Senate President Warren Petersen, regarding the descriptive language of the initiative on the November 2024 ballot.
The description in question reads, in part, that the proposition, “would amend the Arizona Constitution to: 1. Allow for the use of voter rankings at all elections held in this state to determine which candidate received the highest number of legal votes,” continuing to break down the revisions to the primary election and general election procedures.
Attorneys for the PAC complain in the lawsuit, “By beginning with the changes the Initiative permits regarding the use of voter rankings, the adopted analysis improperly amplifies those permitted changes and improperly understates the Initiative’s required changes to the primary-election procedures.” They suggest that this is misleading.
