Are you registered to vote, and is your voter registration correct? If not, then it’s time to make a plan.
The deadline to register to vote in Arizona is Monday, October 7 by close of business day in person at your local election office, by 11:59 pm MST online, or postmarked by that day for mail-in registration.
Arizonans with a valid driver’s license or state ID may register to vote online, in person, or by mail.
In order to be eligible to vote a full ballot (not federal elections only), you must provide proof of citizenship by mail with your voter registration form by 5 pm MST on the Thursday before Election Day, which falls on Halloween (October 31) this year. Proof of citizenship includes your driver’s license or state ID, birth certificate, photo ID page of U.S. passport or passport card, U.S. certificate of naturalization or alien registration number, or Bureau of Indian Affairs or Tribal ID card.
If you need to register to vote through mail, you may print off the voter registration form online or request the registration form be mailed to you by your county recorder.
Voter registration cards may take 4-6 weeks to appear in the mail.
Absentee ballot deadlines are October 25 by 5 pm MST for requesting ballots, November 5 by 7 pm MST for returning your ballot by mail or in person. The last day to mail your ballot in is October 29.
Early voting begins October 9 — which is also the day ballots will be mailed and drop boxes for mail-in ballots will be made available — and ends November 1.
All in-person voting requires voters to show proof of identity before receiving a ballot. Voters must provide their name and place of residence to the election official and either:
Provide one form of the following ID options: valid Arizona driver’s license, valid Arizona non-operating ID card, tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal ID, valid U.S. federal, state, or local government-issued ID;
Provide two different forms of the following ID options: utility bill of the elector that is dated within 90 days of the date of the election (a utility bill may be for electric, gas, water, solid waste, sewer, telephone, cellular phone, or cable television); bank or credit union statement that is dated within 90 days of the date of the election; valid arizona vehicle registration; indian census card; property tax statement of the elector’s residence; tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification; arizona vehicle insurance card; recorder’s certificate; valid united states federal, state, or local government-issued identification, including a voter registration card issued by the county recorder; any mailing to the elector marked “official election material”;
Provide a mix of the following ID options: Any valid photo identification from the first list in which the address does not reasonably match the precinct register accompanied by a non-photo identification from the second list in which the address does reasonably match the precinct register; U.S. Passport without address and one valid item from the second list; U.S. Military identification without address and one valid item from the second list.
Members of federally recognized tribes aren’t required to have an address or photo on their tribal ID in order to cast a provisional ballot.
Election Day is Tuesday, November 5.
Military and overseas voters’ ballots were mailed on September 21. These uniformed and overseas voters may use their own designated portal through the secretary of state’s office to request to register to vote and/or request a mail-in ballot, as well as upload their voted ballot. These voters may also fax their completed ballots to 602-364-2087 before the Election Day deadline of 7 pm MST.
Check the status of your mail-in ballot or early ballot;
Check the status of your provisional ballot;
Submit a public records request;
Submit a petition request;
Or, respond to notice.
Ballot tracking for 13 of Arizona’s 15 counties is offered through the Ballot Trax. Maricopa and Pima counties offer their own ballot tracking and notification services through their own recorder’s website.
Others to utilize the tracking tool are California, Nevada, Colorado, Utah, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Washington, D.C. Select counties in other states (Oregon, Alaska, Illinois, Ohio, Tennessee, Florida, Virginia, New Jersey, and Maryland) also use this ballot tracking service.
Should your mail-in ballot be lost or damaged, you may request a replacement ballot by mail or in person. If through the former, you must contact your county recorder’s office no later than 11 days prior to Election Day, which would be Friday, October 25 this year. If through the latter, you may visit a voting location on or before Election Day to cast your vote in person.
Congressman Ruben Gallego, the Democratic candidate vying for Krysten Sinema’s seat, denounced Iran’s largest missile attack against Israel on Tuesday. Iran fired nearly 200 missiles in a two-wave attack, which U.S. and Israeli defenses largely repelled.
During his time in Congress, Gallego repeatedly voted against funding Israel’s defense against Iran, sanctioning Hamas, and disengaging from or condemning Israel boycotts—rather than punishing Hamas, the terrorist entity controlling the Gaza Strip.
“Today, Iran carried out a second significant attack on our key democratic ally in the Middle East, Israel, endangering the lives of innocent civilians,” said Gallego. “The U.S. remains steadfast in its support of Israel in the face of Iran, the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.”
Iran’s attack comes nearly a year to the day after their last major terrorist attack that escalated fighting between the two nations.
Today, Iran carried out a second significant attack on our key democratic ally in the Middle East, Israel, endangering the lives of innocent civilians. The U.S. remains steadfast in its support of Israel in the face of Iran, the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.
Even though Israel suffered mass casualties of its civilians under that attack, Gallego voted against a bill providing funding to Israel the next month.
The congressman did the same two years prior in 2021, rejecting emergency funds to cover Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system. Earlier that same year, Gallego voted against sanctions on Hamas.
And that year, Gallego enjoyed an $84,000 trip to Qatar paid for by a special interest nonprofit seeking to strengthen trade relations. The Qatari government supports terrorism against Israel, including entities opposed to the Jewish faith responsible for terroristic attacks against the country: the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.
When the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel picked up in 2019, Gallego voted against efforts to condemn or prevent participation. That same year, Gallego voted to give funding to the Palestinian Authority, a primary financier of terrorism against Israel.
The year after Hamas broke a short-lived peace with Israel a decade ago — it fired off rockets at Israel for a revenge killing on a Palestinian after its members kidnapped and killed three Israeli teenagers in the West Bank — Gallego voted to delay presidential authority to waive, suspend, or reduce sanctions on Iran for two years pursuant to an agreement on the nuclear program of Iran.
For years, Gallego supported the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an entity of the Muslim Brotherhood linked to Hamas activity. That all changed within the last year. Gallego pivoted on his sentiments about CAIR last December in response to remarks made by the organization’s executive director and co-founder about the Hamas attack on Israel, Nihad Awad. The CAIR leader said the terrorist attack was a cause for celebration he was “happy to see” occur.
“Statements made by CAIR’s Executive Director regarding the Hamas attack on Israel are despicable and downright antisemitic, and I strongly condemn them,” said Gallego. “The October 7th attack was utterly evil, and any effort to describe it any other way is disgusting. He must resign.”
Statements made by CAIR’s Executive Director regarding the Hamas attack on Israel are despicable and downright antisemitic, and I strongly condemn them. The October 7th attack was utterly evil, and any effort to describe it any other way is disgusting. He must resign. https://t.co/JR6qC0t5Sv
In June, Gallego voted for an amendment to the 2025 budget prohibiting the State Department’s reliance on death toll statistics given by the Gaza Health Ministry. CAIR condemned this vote.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Reports have emerged that voters may have had their registration addresses moved by Arizona’s Motor Vehicles Division (MVD) without their consent, potentially jeopardizing their ability to vote.
Such unintended disenfranchisement occurred for thousands of voters in the 2022 midterm election.
The renewed concern for the eligibility of an untold number of legal voters emerged after GOP congressional candidate Abraham Hamadeh’s counsel, Jen Wright, brought up their discovery from earlier this year that the MVD moved the voter registration address for thousands of voters without their consent.
🚨ATTN: ARIZONA VOTERS🚨
In @AbrahamHamadeh’s case we found THOUSANDS of voters’ registration address was moved based on ANY interaction with MVD.
CHECK YOUR REGISTRATION NOW TO CONFIRM YOU ARE REGISTERED AT YOUR CURRENT, PRIMARY RESIDENCE.https://t.co/So7VKN545E
Wright was referencing the Hamadeh v. Mayes case, which the Arizona Court of Appeals decided in April.
In that case, Hamadeh’s counsel explained that they discovered voters who owned other properties in addition to their primary residence and found themselves disenfranchised.
“[A]fter interviewing hundreds of those voters, we found that many are voters who have connections to properties outside of their home county; and due to no fault of their own, but instead changes to the statewide computer system, their registration was moved from their county of residence to the county where they had some connection without the voter’s express knowledge, consent or intent in a way that lacks a requisite procedural due process requirement necessitated before depriving someone of their sacred right to vote,” stated counsel. “[I]t appears that more than 1,100 election day provisional voters were, we believe, wrongly disenfranchised. Turns out, with many of these declarations we have their voting record and history, and we can see when and how it was changed, and it was not by their own intent; and we know their intent because they did not show up to vote in the secondary county that was assigned to them.”
The MVD process that impacted those 1,100 voters went into place in April 2020. The court of appeals said that those Arizonans’ votes still couldn’t count since their registrations reflected an address outside the precinct they attempted to vote in, regardless of the change being made by MVD without the knowledge or consent of the voters.
“[E]ven if voters cast provisional ballots in the wrong precinct because of the alleged faulty but unchallenged election procedure, the voters still were not registered to vote in the precincts where they cast those provisional ballots,” stated the court. “Arizona law simply does not authorize opening the envelopes and counting those ballots.”
This hasn’t been the only case recently in which MVD interactions jeopardized Arizonans’ right to vote.
Last month, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that nearly 100,000 longtime Arizona voters caught up in an MVD coding error were allowed to vote, despite a challenge from Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, who put the blame on voters and asked that they be limited to voting a federal ballot only.
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled that those voters were eligible to vote. Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer ruled that the fault was with the state, not the voters, for their registration changing.
“[A] state administrative failure permitted the Affected Voters to be registered without confirming that they provided DPOC when they received their driver’s licenses and where there is so little time remaining before the beginning of the 2024 General Election,” said Timmer.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer and State Senator Ken Bennett filed amicus briefs in defense of a Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) ballot initiative with the Arizona Supreme Court last week.
Bennett served as the secretary of state from 2009 to 2015. He filed his brief jointly with Helen Purcell, the former Maricopa County recorder who served nearly 30 years.
Richer said in his filing for Smith v. Fontes that the votes should be counted for RCV, or Prop 140, the “Make Elections Fair Act” — regardless of the existence of a disqualifying number of duplicate signatures gathered — because the “election has already begun” and, he says, state law prohibits the prevention of counting votes cast.
“Hiding the results or attempting to prevent the vote from being tabulated is an inequitable result,” said Richer. “And it is at odds with Arizona public policy that demands government transparency. Not counting the vote does not mean it did not happen.”
Richer said all arguments concerning the initiative’s qualifications to be on the ballot were rendered moot after the deadline passed to certify and print the ballots.
“To be resolved with a high degree of certainty may not be currently possible given the election time constraints,” said Richer. “The issue has now, at least partially, gone to the people. The Recorder believes there is benefit to allowing the vote to occur, and assuming it is otherwise constitutional, to count.”
Richer stated that his office had already printed over 21,500 different ballot styles and mailed many of them out to in-state residents as well as military and overseas voters, some of which have been returned: over 1,100 out of about 8,500.
“Recorder submits that once the ballots are printed, the time for signature challenges must end,” said Richer.
Richer also said that state law prohibits the destruction of any public record of a vote, and that Maricopa County’s tabulation machines would tabulate the votes returned.
The recorder noted that state law does allow for courts to enjoin the certification and printing of ballots, but not the power to enjoin the counting of votes.
“[I]f the voting tally is a public record, the Recorder does not see how Maricopa County can either destroy it or fail to release it,” said Richer.
Similarly, Bennett and Purcell argued that their combined expertise on elections made it clear that timeliness in elections takes precedence over validity.
Bennett and Purcell cited court precedent in their argument of mootness regarding the challenge to Prop 140’s validity. Secretary of State Adrian Fontes instructed county election officials to include Prop 140 on their ballots printed in late August.
“Courts have consistently upheld the principle that pre-election challenges must be resolved before the ballot printing deadline,” said the pair. “[And] as a practical matter, invalidating Prop 140 after voting has already begun would result in electoral chaos and damage voter confidence in the efficacy of their votes.”
That ballot printing deadline occurred a day after the Arizona Supreme Court remanded the case to the Maricopa County Superior Court for review, citing the exclusion of evidence pertaining to 40,000 duplicate signatures. The exclusion of those contested signatures reduce petition signatures to what is below the total required to qualify for the ballot.
Though the Maricopa County Superior Court did find that nearly all of the 40,000 signatures were duplicates, the court ruled that the state constitution didn’t allow for those votes cast on Prop 140 to be ignored. That ruling led to the appeal which the Arizona Supreme Court now considers, and with which Richer and Bennett disagree.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne issued a statement of support for a lawsuit challenging Attorney General Kris Mayes’ restrictions on the state’s school choice program.
Horne said that he maintains concerns that Mayes will demand the return of Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) funds from families based on her interpretation of the laws governing allowable expenses.
In July, Mayes advised the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) that, per her interpretation of the law, parents should no longer be reimbursed for supplementary educational materials not expressly outlined in curriculum.
Though Mayes acknowledged that the statute on which she based her interpretation didn’t offer a definition of “supplemental materials,” she argued in her letter to Associate Superintendent John Ward that the State Board of Education’s definition of the term should apply: “relevant materials directly related to the course of study for which they are being used that introduce content and instructional strategies or that enhance, complement, enrich, extend or support the curriculum.”
Mayes’ application of this definition requires explicit mention of all supplies required within a curriculum: even things like pencils and erasers. The ADE handbook doesn’t require documentation of items “generally known to be educational” in their purpose, such as pencils and erasers.
The attorney general directed Ward to provide documentation of total supplementary material expenditure from 2019 to present, as well as funds spent on curriculum materials without curriculum documentation and approved textbooks lacking proof of requirement by a qualified school or eligible postsecondary institution.
In response to Mayes’ directive, the Goldwater Institute sued on behalf of ESA mothers Velia Aguirre and Rosemary McAtee. The two mothers homeschool their children: Aguirre homeschools all three of her children, while McAtee homeschools seven of her nine children.
In their argument, the Goldwater Institute argued that Mayes’ directive was not only in violation of the law, it was a jeopardy to the existing backlog of tens of thousands of purchase orders — an issue that would inherently impact the education of many children relying on those ESA funds.
The Goldwater Institute also pointed out in a press release that not even public and private school curriculums necessarily list supplementary items such as pencils and erasers.
In a statement, Horne expressed hope that the Goldwater Institute would prevail in its lawsuit.
“The Department of Education concedes the argument of the Goldwater Institute. When this issue first arose in July, my concern was that the Attorney General could force Empowerment Scholarship Account holders to return funds if they did not comply with her office’s interpretation of the law. This lawsuit will settle the issue in court and my sincere hope is that the arguments made by Goldwater will prevail.”
Horne had issued an anticipatory show of support for a hypothetical lawsuit from the Goldwater Institute in a response on the ADE page for ESAs immediately following Mayes’ letter. Horne clarified that a prior court decision bound ADE from having the standing to file lawsuits.
The superintendent said that he doesn’t agree with Mayes’ interpretation that supplementary materials are required to be tied to curriculum. However, Horne said that Mayes’ directive was one his department advised him that he couldn’t challenge and win.
As of Monday, over 78,600 students were enrolled in the ESA Program.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
