A new ad from incumbent Congressman Juan Ciscomani against Democratic opponent Kirsten Engel features clips of her denying the ongoing border crisis and issuing support for police defunding.
The ad featured several flashbacks from Engel on her positions ranging from her time as a state lawmaker through her first run for Congress against Ciscomani in 2022.
The former state lawmaker and University of Arizona law professor denied that Arizona had an immigration crisis during that first run for Congress. Engel said that physical barriers like walls weren’t a solution for her, and that the greater focus should be on providing greater aid to those arriving at our border rather than detainment.
“We do not need help at our border. We do need to secure the border. We have issues of drug trafficking and human smuggling that need to be addressed, but certainly not walls,” said Engel. “What we need from Washington is having an orderly asylum process. That’s national law, that’s international law. We need comprehensive immigration reform. We have to help our Dreamers.”
As a remedy to the border, Engel has advocated for border policy approaches favoring those who arrive in the nation outside the legal avenues for entry: an end to Title 42, legal pathways to citizenship, and deprioritizing illegal migration outside legal ports of entry.
Thank you so much to Sheriff Dannels and his team for the tour and sharing the daily challenges at our southern border. Our local law enforcement risk their lives every day – Congress needs to stop playing politics, reject inaction, and come together to address this crisis. pic.twitter.com/jyUCYtPtgh
Engel maintains these positions as defining her vision for securing the southern border. She has also criticized Ciscomani for not supporting a proposed bill to provide $20 billion for the border out of $118 billion in expenditures. That bill was mainly designed to ensure an additional provision of aid to Ukraine, $60 billion, and the remainder of the $38 billion given in aid to other foreign countries.
While Engel has been outspoken in recent years about border policy, she has distanced herself from conversations on policing since the BLM fallout after George Floyd’s death in 2020 and the conviction of responding officer Derek Chauvin less than a year later.
I hope this verdict is the start of our justice system finally turning the corner and holding law enforcement accountable for unjustified acts of violence against members of the black community. #BlackLivesMatter
Engel advocated for police defunding during the 2020 Black Lives Matter riots, arguing that there needed to be less police available for responding to emergency calls and more alternatives.
“What we need to do is shift where the money [for police] is going,” said Engel. “Not every 911 call requires a police officer to show up at your door.”
In that same interview, Engel affirmed when she was asked whether she supported a reduction in police budgets.
“Yeah, the way you’ve asked that question, I agree with it,” said Engel.
Instead, Engel proposed that social workers should take over for police officers.
It was also during the peak point of BLM upheaval in the summer of 2020 that Engel publicly backed a claim by Tucson Councilwoman Lane Santa Cruz that Tucson police officers were to blame for the death of a man in their custody in April of that year.
Santa Cruz’s public accusations of wrongdoing prompted the officers to resign out of fear for their families’ safety.
The man, Carlos Ingram-Lopez, died from cardiac arrest due to acute levels of cocaine in his system and an enlarged heart.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
An Arizona appellate court has kicked a sales tax proposal for the city of Scottsdale off the November ballot.
The Arizona Court of Appeals sided with a challenge by three city residents (represented by the Goldwater Institute) that the city’s ballot descriptions inaccurately characterized the sales tax as a decrease rather than a pitch for a new tax.
“The City’s description of the measure fails to properly disclose the proposition’s principal provision — that it creates a new tax,” said the court.
The city of Scottsdale characterized the sales tax proposal as a decrease of the current sales tax expiring next June from .20 percent to .15 percent over 30 years.
“Shall Scottsdale’s current 0.20% transaction privilege and use tax rate, expiring June 30, 2025, be replaced and reduced to 0.15% for 30 years to fund improvements, maintenance, and increased police and fire protection of citywide parks, recreational facilities, and the preserve as determined by city ordinance?”
The Arizona Superior Court had previously disagreed the ballot proposal language was false or misleading, and had granted the city’s motion to dismiss the residents’ complaint. However, in their Monday ruling, the Arizona Court of Appeals took issue with the city’s promise that the new sales tax was a replacement and reduction to the current one.
“This new tax would neither reduce the current tax rate (because the tax will remain at .2 percent until it expires), nor reduce the current tax rate after its expiration (because it would create a new tax),” stated the court. “The proposition’s description that a ‘YES’ vote would reduce the “transaction privilege and use tax rate” — which in total is 1.75% and made up of multiple different taxes including the 0.20% at issue here — to 0.15% is misleading because a ‘YES’ vote, in fact, would implement a brand-new tax.”
The court went on to say that the city’s explanation of the implication of a “no” vote was misleading because it could prompt voters to believe that their voting had an effect on the inevitable end of the current tax.
“[T]he ‘NO’ language in both the full text and Tagline text fails to communicate the essential change that a ‘NO’ vote would effectuate,” said the court. “Namely, that the current tax would terminate as scheduled and no longer exist. A ‘NO’ vote does not, somehow, result in a reduction as the language states; a ‘NO’ vote results in the current tax terminating on June 30, 2025, as currently scheduled.”
In its order, the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed the superior court order and enjoined the city and Maricopa County from including the measure on the November ballot.
Although the court offered some explanation for its ruling, the appeals court promised a full opinion would come out as well.
The Goldwater Institute said in a press release announcing the court win that the ruling would ensure more honest representation for taxpayers in the future.
“Local leaders in Scottsdale and across Arizona should consider themselves warned: public officials should not be in the business of deceiving taxpayers so they’ll vote to raise taxes on themselves,” said the think tank.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
The Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) is proposing to put a strict limit on childcare enrollment, but a policy group says that’s illegal.
The Goldwater Institute advised ADHS in a letter that such a cap on childcare facilities (preschools, daycares, and day camps, for example) would violate statutory requirements on agency rulemaking.
Arizona law restricts agencies from making any rules that exceed authorized subject matter areas, that supplement a more specific grant of rulemaking authority, and that aren’t specifically authorized by statute.
The Goldwater Institute argued that the proposal to impose a maximum group size on childcare facilities constitutes an authority that ADHS doesn’t possess within their regulatory powers.
“[A]n across-the-board cap on ‘group size,’ independent of any relevant considerations such as child-adult ratio, is not a regulation of ‘staffing per number and age groups of children’ [per their regulatory authority] and it is not justified by any other provision in the statute,” said the Goldwater Institute.
The organization also predicted in its letter that such a proposal would result in a greater burden on childcare facilities and a greater cost for families, in addition to reducing overall childcare availability.
The proposal concerns amendments to two rules pertaining to staff-to-children ratios: 9-5-404 and 9-5-726. The amendment adds on limitations of group size per age group.
Group size limitations begin small with younger children and expand as the ages rise: infants are limited to 10 in a group; one-year-old children are limited to 12 in a group; two-year-old children are limited to 16 in a group; three-year-old children are limited to 26 in a group; four-year-old children are limited to 30 in a group; and both five-year-old children and school-age children are limited to 40 in a group.
The amendments also struck provisions allowing volunteers to be counted as staff in staff-to-children ratios and restricting student aides or qualified teacher caregiver aides from being counted as staff. Also replaced were any instances of staff as “caregivers,” instead renaming them as “child educators.”
In a press release, Goldwater Institute staff attorney John Thorpe said the group size restrictions would not only be an exercise of authority beyond ADHS’ scope, it would serve to restrict families’ critical access to childcare facilities. Thorpe marked the proposal as another example of “ill-informed, heavy-handed bureaucratic regulation” within the state and nationwide.
“Imposing an arbitrary cap on the number of children allowed in a space — regardless of the size of the space, nature of the activity, or number of adults supervising — makes no sense,” stated Thorpe. “It’s especially pernicious during a childcare shortage, as it will force good preschools and childcare facilities to turn away families they’re perfectly equipped to serve for no other reason than an irrational bureaucratic requirement.”
Last December, a report by the Council for Strong America estimated that Arizona lost close to $5 billion annually in earnings, productivity, and revenue due to lack of adequate childcare. Over half of responding parents said they were late for work, leaving work early, missing days of work, or low in their productivity at work due to their childcare struggles.
Nearly 20 percent reported having been let go or fired from their work related to those struggles.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Arizona Department of Education (ADE) Superintendent Tom Horne demanded an explanation from a prominent anti-school choice leader after her remarks defending males in female bathrooms and locker rooms.
Save Our Schools Arizona Director Beth Lewis criticized three of Horne’s guests for opposing males in female spaces. Lewis questioned why gender mattered in terms of intimate and traditionally gendered public spaces.
“Why do Tom Horne and these Grandmas care who my kids are sharing a bathroom with?” posted Lewis. “My kids and their peers accept each other — gay, straight, lesbian, trans, bi, they don’t care!”
Horne released a statement on Thursday challenging Lewis over her remarks. The superintendent said Lewis’ position was reckless and jeopardized the safety of children.
“These changes to Title IX regulations are outrageous since they allow biological boys to expose themselves to girls in bathrooms and locker rooms and invade the girls’ privacy,” stated Horne. “They will also cause unbelievable management challenges for campus administrators, teachers and coaches that will make their jobs much more difficult.”
Horne blasts "Save Our Schools" leader for supporting biological boys using girls' locker rooms and showers Social media post reveals stance For immediate release: August 15, 2024 pic.twitter.com/DnADNSDav9
— Arizona Department of Education (@azedschools) August 15, 2024
The Biden administration modified Title IX regulations to redefine the term “sex” to include “gender identity” back in April. The change impacts access to gendered programs, activities, or spaces, which extends not only to bathrooms and locker rooms but sports teams as well.
Louisiana has challenged this change by the Department of Education in court. Last month, the Fifth Circuit and Sixth Circuit Courts of Appeals rejected the Biden administration’s requests to undo separate injunctions against their Title IX changes, stemming from challenges by the states of Kentucky and Louisiana. On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the injunctions.
Horne reflected on findings within the courts, specifically in the Louisiana case which presented evidence of a pattern of males attacking females in public restrooms.
“The courts see the tragedies that have already occurred because of policies such as the new Title IX regulations,” said Horne. “Beth Lewis and SOS have no excuse for not understanding that as well.”
Lewis responded to the statement by characterizing opposition to males in female bathrooms as “hateful rhetoric,” and deriding Horne as “a weirdo who is publicly obsessing over kids’ genitals.”
Supt. Horne is again using his state agency handle to (weakly) attempt to troll me for standing up against his hateful rhetoric 😂 I’ll say it again — @RealTomHorne is a weirdo who is publicly obsessing over kids’ genitals 💁🏻♀️ https://t.co/bf0emvwpSBpic.twitter.com/GnHMvQlssX
Prior to directing Save Our Schools Arizona, Lewis taught elementary and middle school students for over a decade.
Save Our Schools Arizona is a public schools advocacy organization with much of its focus on opposing the state’s school choice program. As the fight over gender ideology ramped up in recent years, their organization also took on advocacy in favor of LGBTQ+-friendly legislation.
In this past session, the organization opposed a requirement for students and adults to restrict access to school bathrooms, changing facilities, and any sleeping quarters in accordance with biological gender, as opposed to gender identity (the mental belief behind transgenderism).
Save Our Schools Arizona also regularly backs Democratic candidates, most recently applauding the naming of Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as Kamala Harris’ vice presidential pick.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
A north central Phoenix legislative district may have a chance to replace its open-borders Democrat state senator in the upcoming November election.
State Senator Christine Marsh is running for reelection in Arizona Legislative District 4 this November. Based on her history of election finishes, Marsh may be in for another close contest in the swing district, and her continued opposition of legislative efforts to help secure the state’s border and support law enforcement may cost her votes in this contest.
Marsh has served in the Arizona Legislature since January 2021. In the November 2020 General Election, she defeated Republican State Senator Kate Brophy McGee by fewer than 500 votes in Legislative District 28 (under the last redistricting lines). The previous election, McGee had bested Marsh by 267 votes in the 2018 General Election.
In the first election under the new redistricting lines for the decade, Marsh won another narrow victory over Nancy Barto by less than 1,200 votes for the right to represent the citizens of Legislative District 4.
Throughout her time in the Arizona Legislature, the Democrat legislator has been a fierce opponent of her state’s meaningful efforts to help secure the border and support law enforcement attempting to protect local communities from many of the harms stemming from the escalating crisis. In 2021, Marsh voted against SCR 1011, which “declare[d] that the Legislature calls on the President and Congress to take immediate and decisive action to secure the southern border and complete the southern border wall.” She also voted against HCR 2029, which “commend[ed] the courage of the United States Border Patrol and recognize[d] the role they play[ed] in safeguarding Arizona and the U.S.”
The following year, Marsh voted no on a $700,000 appropriation from the state General Fund in FY 2023 to the Border Security Fund for the construction and maintenance of a physical border fence (SB 1032). Additionally, she opposed an authorization for the Department of Emergency and Military Affairs “to use up to $250,000 from the Border Security Fund to pay for additional full-time equivalent positions” (HB 2591).
In the first year of her most-recent term in office (2023), Marsh continued her streak of opposition to proposals that would secure the border. She voted no on HCM 2007, which “expressed the legislative desire that Congress enact the State Immigration Enforcement Act.” According to the history provided by the Arizona House of Representatives, this act “would allow states or political subdivisions of states, to enact, implement, and enforce criminal penalties that are prohibited in the criminal provisions of immigration laws.”
This year, Marsh voted no on HB 2157, which would have “prohibit[ed] a court from using a defendant’s deportation as the sole reason for early termination of probation or intensive probation.” She opposed SB 1231, which would have made “it unlawful for a person who is an alien to enter Arizona from a foreign nation at any location other than a lawful port of entry.”
When Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed SB 1231, she wrote, “This bill does not secure our border, will be harmful for communities and businesses in our state, and burdensome for law enforcement personnel and the state judicial system.”
However, Republicans felt differently about the failure of this bill to receive a green stamp of approval from the governor – especially the sponsor, Senator Janae Shamp. The first-term lawmaker said, “The Republican-controlled Legislature will continue to prioritize closing our border and providing law enforcement with the tools they need. This veto is a slap in the face to them, Arizona’s victims of border-related crimes, and other citizens who will inevitably feel the wrath of this border invasion in one way, shape, or form at the hands of Hobbs and Biden.”
Marsh also voted against SCR 1042, which “proclaim[ed] the Legislature’s support for the people and government of the state of Texas in its efforts to secure [the United States’] southern border.”
More recently, Marsh refused to support a legislative effort to refer a border security measure to the ballot in this November’s General Election – HCR 2060, voting against the bill when it was considered by her chamber. The proposal, if passed by voters in the fall, would empower local law enforcement to better secure their communities from the increasing calamities from the border crisis.
It’s not just her votes in the Arizona Legislature that have propelled Marsh into being one of her party’s leading open-border advocates; it’s also what she has said to others about her extreme left-wing positions about the issue. Earlier in her career, Marsh was interviewed by a group over Zoom and was asked if she would “work to end the collaboration of local law enforcement with ICE in an effort to stop state sanctioned violence against some of our most vulnerable community members and especially our undocumented LGBTQ community.”
The Democrat lawmaker responded, “Yeah, absolutely. Our treatment of the LGBTQ+ immigrants by every level of law enforcement needs to be made more humane, and I will definitely look for ways once in office to make sure that that happens.”
Marsh added, “I actually did quite a bit of research on this particular question and it’s fascinating, and I did not know that there was basically state-sanctioned violence, and I find it just totally offensive.”
According to a website reporting some of Marsh’s key positions and votes, Marsh supposedly “liked a tweet calling for abolishing ICE” back in 2018 from Alyssa Milano.
Marsh ran unopposed for the Democrat nomination for state senator in the July primary election. She will face off against Republican Carine Werner in the November General Election.
According to the Arizona Legislative District 4 Democrat Party, Republicans control 38% of the district’s voter registration, compared to 27% Democrats and 35% Other. In 2022, LD 4 had a higher voter turnout than both Maricopa County and the State of Arizona at 76%.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
