On Monday, House Republicans put forth what they called a balanced budget of $17.9 billion.
By Tuesday, Gov. Katie Hobbs said the proposal was all but dead.
The leaders of both chambers characterized their budget as uniquely reflective of total conformity with federal tax law — no other states adopted the entire slate of tax cuts — which Hobbs doubted could be accomplished. They estimated tax relief would amount to $1.5 billion over the next three years, and Republicans claim working families would feel the most benefit from the cuts.
“Politics are easy; governing is harder. We chose governing,” said Sen. President Warren Petersen (R-LD14). “We’re moving a budget that cuts taxes, funds core services, shrinks government, includes priorities both sides have raised, and gives Arizona a full path to finish the session.”
As budget talks have failed to progress in a meaningful way, the legislature stagnates under the weight of a bill moratorium.
In a statement issued Tuesday, Hobbs did acknowledge Republicans for working with her to adopt certain components of her preferred budget like middle class tax cuts and reductions to childcare cost. However, she disputed Republican leaders on their claims of fiscal responsibility.
She accused Republicans of siding with “billionaires, data centers, and special interests” as well as “kicking Arizonans off their healthcare and taking food off their tables.” The governor said she won’t engage in negotiations further unless they adopt her preferred budget.
Contentious aspects of the Republican-proposed budget included cuts to state agency budgets, and SNAP and Medicaid program funding.
“Until they also engage in good-faith negotiations rather than attempting to force through a partisan budget, I will be closely monitoring the situation in the coming days to determine whether the legislative majority is willing to negotiate in good-faith bipartisan negotiations and have the bill moratorium lifted,” said Hobbs.
NEW: @GovernorHobbs reacts to the newly released Republican budget: “Just like in Washington, they’re paying for tax breaks for billionaires, data centers and special interests by kicking Arizonans off their healthcare and taking food off their tables.” pic.twitter.com/8UlFIqa5S1
Hobbs also discussed the budget talks during a press conference for a separate topic on Tuesday, Reentry 2030. Hobbs tentatively praised Republicans for some concessions on their part, but generally was critical of them for balking at her $18.7 billion spending plan. A key part of that plan Hobbs hopes to win through in budget talks concerns draining the public land trust to boost K-12 education funding.
“I’m glad to see the Republicans have shown their budget proposal, there’s some things I’m encouraged about in their proposal, but across-the-board agency cuts is not one of them,” said Hobbs. “I’m hopeful that we can get back to the table and start having real conversations about a budget that works for Arizona.”
Legislative leaders have said Hobbs’ proposal is a nonstarter because the Public Land Trust was intended for long-term funding. Hobbs’ plan intends to renew funding through the yet-approved Proposition 123. Senate President Petersen said Hobbs’ plan wasn’t feasible and would push the state $1.5 million further into debt.
“We’re spending about $800 million less than what the governor has proposed, and the governor has proposed to raise taxes,” said House Speaker Montenegro (R-LD29) in an interview with Fox News.
“[H]er math doesn’t work,” said Petersen.
Hobbs has vetoed tax conformity efforts and walked away from budget negotiations multiple times since the start of the year.
The legislature began hearing budget bills on Tuesday during a joint hearing of the Senate and House Appropriations Committees.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ-05) introduced legislation this week to create stronger rules on court-ordered federal oversight of police.
The proposed bill is a direct response to the ongoing monitorship of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO), which began well over a decade ago following racial profiling allegations under the administration of former Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Biggs’ Monitor Accountability Act would further limit federal district courts’ discretion on monitor selection and duration.
The bill as written would limit monitors to five years of service, prohibit courts from reappointing the same monitors under the same court order, prohibit monitors from coming from the same law firm or employer, cap monitor compensation and encourage courts to require pro bono or reduced-cost work, require public comment on proposed monitors prior to court appointment, limit extensions of monitorship to those without substantial and sustained compliance, and require case reassignment to a different judge after six years.
Additionally, the Monitor Accountability Act would apply retroactively to monitorships older than six years. This would ensure Maricopa County — Biggs’ impetus for the bill — secures a new monitor and judge.
The costs associated with the monitorship have neared $350 million according to Biggs and the county, about a tenth of which has gone to the court-appointed monitor and his firm. Proponents of continued monitorship counter that the actual cost of the monitorship amounts closer to $60 million.
Biggs, who is running to unseat Gov. Katie Hobbs this November, released a statement claiming that the MCSO monitorship, among others, has become exploitative.
“The federal monitor’s continued existence in our county and propensity for moving the goalposts from his original charge only serves to exploit taxpayers and undermine the brave work of the men and women who serve our communities — and this is only one of dozens of similar arrangements across the country,” said Biggs. “It’s time for Congress to take back the reins from rogue judges and monitors who have exceeded appropriate bounds.”
Cochise County Sheriff Mark Dannels joined Biggs’ statement with support for the bill as a corrective measure to prevent further exploitation of the monitor system.
“We’ve seen this problem first-hand in Arizona: Maricopa County has been the victim of a rogue monitor for more than 13 years, costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars and shifting resources away from keeping the community safe,” said Dannels.
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors filed a motion to end the monitorship last December, and in February testified to a House Judiciary Committee hearing on their effort in court. Biggs led that subcommittee hearing.
The board has pleaded for relief from what it claims to be indefinite taxpayer spending to keep up with ever-moving goalposts.
The Goldwater Institute has also requested the court to publicize the invoices associated with MCSO’s monitorship.
“[T]he government should not be allowed to keep such information secret unless there’s good reason, and even then, they’re required to specify what those reasons are,” stated the organization’s vice president of legal affairs, Timothy Sandefur.
The Department of Justice, who initially filed the lawsuit under former President Barack Obama along with the ACLU, signaled support for an end to MCSO’s monitorship.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Attorney General Kris Mayes is suing to stop the construction of a new Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facility in Surprise.
Mayes announced the lawsuit on Friday. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plans to renovate a vacant warehouse it purchased in January for about $70 million into an immigration detention facility.
Mayes also hosted a press conference to announce the lawsuit. Present with her were Senate Assistant Minority Leader Catherine Miranda (D-LD11) and State Sen. Analise Ortiz (D-LD24).
Mayes claimed the federal government failed to hold public forums and conduct the proper environmental reviews.
The attorney general also argued the federal government needed permission prior to acting on this immigration enforcement initiative.
“The federal government did not ask the people of Surprise whether they wanted this,” said Mayes. “They did not ask the parents of the students that attend any of the schools near this site if they were okay with this. They did not ask the firefighters and paramedics, who would be the first to respond if something went wrong, if this was a good idea.”
Mayes accused the Trump administration of violating federal laws, to include the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA).
“The Trump administration has run roughshod over federal law in its rush to expand detention capacity across the country,” said Mayes. “The federal government did not ask the people of Surprise whether they wanted this facility in their backyards. They simply bought a warehouse, handed a $300 million contract to a private company and told the City to deal with it.”
The city of Surprise issued a public statement saying the DHS purchase of the facility was news to them. The city also emphasized that it didn’t have the power to assist or interfere with federal immigration enforcement.
“The City was not aware that there were efforts underway to purchase the building, was not notified of the transaction by any of the parties involved and has not been contacted by DHS or any federal agency about the intended use of the building. It’s important to note, Federal projects are not subject to local regulations, such as zoning,” said the city. “When it comes to immigration enforcement, local law enforcement does not enforce federal immigration laws; Surprise Police Department enforces local and state laws. While we do not participate in ICE operations, we also cannot interrupt or prevent their operations.”
The lawsuit filed in the Arizona District Court alleges the facility is unsuitable for mass detainment based on claims that the location lacks the appropriate water and wastewater infrastructure, and the location exists across the street from a chemical storage facility as well as two public schools.
Several hundred followed up the attorney general’s lawsuit with a protest over the weekend. An ICE spokesperson said in a statement that they had evaluated the use of existing facilities to minimize potential impacts on the environment, including protected species, natural resources, and cultural resources.
“Let’s be honest about what is happening. This isn’t about the environment,” said the spokesperson. “It’s about trying to stop President Trump from making America safe.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
A media mouthpiece for the Islamic regime is praising Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ-03) for her actions in support of Iran.
Ansari was featured on the front page of an Islamic Republic newspaper, Sazandegi, for her efforts to resist President Donald Trump’s approach to Iran.
🚨 The regime is now openly promoting a NIAC-aligned American congresswoman.
Yassamin Ansari is being praised by an Islamic Republic newspaper, Sazandegi, for opposing U.S. pressure on the regime – pushing no real pressure, no regime change, just “diplomacy” that keeps it in… pic.twitter.com/7ZrpV6cvcd
The congresswoman filed Articles of Impeachment against Secretary of War Pete Hegseth earlier this month. (This title is Hegseth’s preferred alternate, authorized in an executive order last September as an unofficial secondary title; along those lines, the “Department of War” is another option for “Department of Defense.”)
In a statement, Ansari accused Hegseth of high crimes and misdemeanors against Iranians. She also accused Hegseth of abuse of office and undignified conduct, unlawful military actions, and unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
Ansari’s parents came to the U.S. from Iran. As many did, Ansari’s father overstayed a student visa to escape the Islamic Revolution. That visa was initially awarded to him in the early 1970s to attend the University of Oregon for engineering.
Ansari’s mother came approximately a decade later; Ansari told The Guardian that her mother entered as a citizen since her grandfather had completed a medical residency in the U.S. several decades prior. One of Ansari’s grandfathers was imprisoned by the regime, Ansari told The New York Times.
Ansari also told The Times that she desires a secular democracy for Iran. She has condemned the present regime for its terrorism and treatment of women.
“I can say wholeheartedly: I want to see an actual democratic state, a secular state, a state where the people have decided who their leader is,” said Ansari. “Ultimately, I do think there needs to be an internationally monitored referendum, free and fair elections, because Iran is also a very diverse country. There’s 90 million people, and it’s not just Persians. There’s, you know, Armenians, Kurds. There’s different Jews, Baha’is, Muslims. Many people are secular. There’s got to be a coalition, and there’s got to be a model that is representative of everyone.”
Despite those remarks and her parents’ backgrounds, Ansari has proven through her resistance to Trump and stalwart defense of Iran to be a favorite of the Islamic regime.
The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) and Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian-Americans (PAAIA), both pro-Iran lobbyist groups, endorsed Ansari throughout her campaign for Congress.
Ansari has voiced continual opposition to U.S. involvement in the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.
In an interview with The Guardian several weeks ago, Ansari called Trump a mentally ill, evil man that deserved to be removed from office over dragging the U.S. into the war.
“There is no doubt in my mind he is mentally unstable and not all there but I also believe he is a deeply troubled, evil human being that only cares about himself and his family,” said Ansari. “He has shown that throughout his entire life. He has shown that throughout his presidency by ripping away healthcare and basic necessities from the average American, while he and his family have made billions of dollars.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
A Pima County supervisor wants the sheriff out of office after details of his past misconduct came to light.
Pima County Supervisor Matt Heinz is accusing Nanos of “perpetrat[ing] a fraud” on the Pima County community for decades. Heinz has been calling for Nanos’ ouster for over a month now.
Nanos, no stranger to controversy, came under fire again for his alleged mishandling of the investigation into the apparent kidnapping of Nancy Guthrie, 84. Guthrie disappeared from her Tucson home nearly three months ago. As of this report, no leads about her kidnapper(s) have been made public.
Doubts over his administration of the high-profile disappearance prompted further scrutiny into Nanos’ past. The Arizona Republic reported on records indicating that Nanos falsified his resume in order to be hired by the Pima County Sheriff’s Department (PCSD) over 40 years ago.
Nanos is accused of failing to disclose the alleged misconduct that led to his resignation while working for the El Paso Police Department in New Mexico back in the 1980s.
Nanos received 37 days of suspension or leave for eight misconduct incidents, ranging from poor behaviors to violence. One incident yielded a 15-day suspension for allegedly beating a handcuffed robbery suspect seated in the back of a cop car with a flashlight.
According to reports, it was that latter incident that caused the El Paso Police Department to be sued and forced Nanos to resign in 1982 in lieu of termination. However, Nanos claimed on his resume that he left the El Paso Police Department in 1984.
“He’s a bad cop. He made really bad decisions, and then lied about his past to convince then-Pima County officials to hire him back in 1984. He also lied about that gap in time. He used to say 1982,” said Heinz in an interview with NewsNation. “We shouldn’t even know his name. We should not know the name Nanos.”
Sheriff Chris Nanos, who is overseeing the investigation into Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance, faces renewed scrutiny from local officials who are reviewing his past suspensions while working as a cop in El Paso, Texas. “He’s a bad cop. He made really bad decisions and then lied… pic.twitter.com/4ZDIbEKlx6
PCSD said in a press release issued last month that the date discrepancies were “administrative in nature” and weren’t part of an intentional effort to mislead or misrepresent Nanos’ work history.
Heinz also accused Nanos of holding a grudge against the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) over a 2015-2016 investigation into his department over the possible misuse of around $500,000 in Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) funds. That investigation ended up costing Nanos his chief deputy, who was indicted, and ultimately the sheriff’s race.
“He has held a grudge against the FBI and refused to fully work with them going forward,” said Heinz.
Heinz said it was possible this potential personal grievance by Nanos had jeopardized Guthrie’s case.
Nanos’s attorney, James Cool, said in a statement that the sheriff’s past has no bearing on his present conduct.
“Whatever the Sheriff did or did not do before being elected is necessarily unrelated to his performance of the duties of his office,” stated Cool.
During their next meeting (May 12), the Pima County Board of Supervisors plan to review a report submitted by Nanos answering questions about his employment history and current administration. The board has entertained considerations of removal proceedings, but hasn’t made any final decisions.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
