Arizona Has The Blueprint To Stop Illegals From Voting, Other States Should Follow

Arizona Has The Blueprint To Stop Illegals From Voting, Other States Should Follow

By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |

The surge of border crossings continues. There is an election in just over 3 months. Many voters want to know—can illegals vote?

Obviously, it’s illegal for non-citizens to vote. The real question is whether voters must prove their citizenship prior to voting. This discussion has culminated in the U.S. House passing the SAVE Act earlier this month. But with near unanimous Democrat opposition, a federal proof of citizenship requirement has stalled in Congress.

As both a border and swing state, Arizona is center stage in this national discussion. Even Elon Musk chimed in by sharing an image of our voter registration form that clearly states “proof of citizenship” is not required to vote.

However, Arizona has done far more than any other state to tackle the issue of illegals voting.

In Arizona, if someone registers without proof of citizenship, they are registered as a “Federal Only Voter” and they receive a different ballot with only federal races. This means that: 1) we know exactly who and how many have registered without proof; and 2) they don’t get to influence any of our state or local elections.

In all 49 other states, proof of citizenship is not only not required, but they are all blended onto one list, and they get to vote in every election. So those states have no idea who or how many there even are! Their problem could be far bigger, and they would never know it.

Now with the decision from the U.S. 9th Circuit last week, Arizona will stop even more illegals from voting, thanks to a bill the Arizona Free Enterprise Club authored in 2022…

>>> CONTINUE READING >>> 

The Reason Maricopa County Schools Are Failing: New Leadership Is Needed This November

The Reason Maricopa County Schools Are Failing: New Leadership Is Needed This November

By Tiffany Benson |

I’ve consulted with several Maricopa County constituents and learned very few of us understand the role and responsibilities of the Superintendent of Schools. One thing’s for sure, we cannot allow a simpleton to remain in office. For those unaware, Maricopa County Superintendent Steve Watson—who was elected in 2016 and re-elected in 2020—is currently under heavy scrutiny for fraud.

The “May 2024 Maricopa County Regional School District Performance Audit” cites multiple findings of budget mismanagement and suspicious financial activities. MCRSD, which includes the Juvenile Detention Education Program and the Maricopa Accommodation Schools, are directly under Watson’s governance. Below are a few highlighted results from the performance audit:

  • “District administration and plant operations costs for the last two full fiscal years exceed the state average for school districts…Recommendations: Establish an expenditure budget for the Schools that include budget balance carry forward for which cash reserves are on deposit…Obtain training on school district budget and finance.”
  • “Budgeting practices are ineffective and do not prevent overspending and cash deficits. Lack of understanding and communication regarding the District’s budget have led to excessive expenditures and cash deficits…Recommendations: Ensure the correct budget is uploaded to [the Arizona Department of Education]…Monitor cash levels to prevent interest charges assessed on line of credit usage.”
  • “The District did not comply with State procurement guidelines when executing purchases in excess of required thresholds…Recommendations: Comply with [Arizona Administrative Codes] and [Uniform System of Financial Records] prior to executing purchases…Ensure curriculum is approved by the District Governing Board.”

In 2022, the Accommodation School District spent $2 million over its budget. Also, on July 17, 2024, ABC 15 Arizona politely reported, “Maricopa County school districts are needing to shell out about $150 million after a judge says a group of property owners were improperly taxed…that money needs to be returned as part of a lawsuit.”

What good is a county superintendent who refuses to comply with state laws and regulations? Not only is Watson fiscally incompetent, he’s also a Republican hack who cannot be trusted to appoint conservative candidates to school boards.

Many constituents have mentioned to me that Watson’s strategy as a follower of Mormon religion is to deliberately select Mormons to serve in office. I will say this appears to be the case with Courtney Davis in Mesa Public Schools (MPS) and Rebecca Proudfit in Peoria Unified School District (PUSD). And, like Watson, they identify as conservatives while governing as liberals.

When the time came for Watson to fill an MPS Governing Board vacancy, he intentionally bypassed candidate Ed Steele—a strong conservative, community leader and runner up during the 2022 midterm elections. Before administering the oath of office to Davis, Watson told constituents:

“This is really hard because when I say good and nice things about somebody who I hold in high esteem, other people think that’s umm — they might feel like I’m putting other people down. And that’s not the case. Here in [MPS], we had 49 people initially apply for this vacancy…and so, Courtney is great. She’s going to do a terrific job. And that’s not to say that the other people were terrible…In choosing Courtney, I had to pick somebody, right? Somebody has to get this position…Just understand this isn’t putting anybody else down.”

Seriously!? What public official talks like this!?

Watson gave a social-emotional speech instead of telling the people exactly who Courtney Davis is. What qualifications put her above the other 48 applicants? Did she attend and speak at any MPS board meetings before the appointment? Are her kids even enrolled in Mesa’s public schools? What are her core values? What leadership experience does she possess? Surely, religious affiliation wasn’t Watson’s only prerequisite for appointing her…right?

Well, it’s been a year and Mesa constituents now know where Davis’ values truly lie. From seconding the reelection of corrupt Marcie Hutchinson for MPS board president, to campaigning alongside Democrats, Davis—who coincidentally registered as “nonpartisan”—is decidedly left. Make no mistake, Ed Steele and Sharon Benson are the trustworthy conservatives running for Mesa Board of Education.

In PUSD, Watson intentionally bypassed several qualified, conservative candidates (namely Jeff Tobey) to appoint Proudfit. Over the past nine months, she has wittingly veered left.

Proudfit—who historically supported the Black Lives Matter movement—relocated public comments to the end of every board meeting simply because the leftist Peoria Education Association president recommended it. Proudfit led the vote to reapply for a grant that’s used to establish mental health clinics on school grounds, and she has no problem violating constituents’ First Amendment rights. She also allegedly accused a colleague of being jealous when PUSD board clerk David Sandoval—who openly discriminates against Christians— nominated Proudfit for board president.

Despite all this and more, some LD leaders in the West Valley have forfeited wisdom and discernment. There are talks of tainting the so-called “golden ticket” by promoting Proudfit as a conservative PUSD candidate. And for no other reason than she’s a nice person and she’s well-liked by affluent Establishment Republican types (a.k.a. RINOs). This is asinine. We only need to fill two seats for a conservative majority. Make no mistake, Jeff Tobey and Janelle Bowles are the only trustworthy conservatives running for Peoria school board.

For the record, I don’t vote for people because they’re nice or popular. I’m highly suspicious of representatives who claim to align with one party but are constantly praised by the opposition. I also refuse to cast a vote for anyone who doesn’t have time to run a campaign. Furthermore, if I were a respected public servant, I would not waste my endorsements on Democrats (a topic for another day). This foolishness is not a strategy. Just because you like someone and they have an “R” behind their name doesn’t mean throw away the Constitution and common sense.

This November, I’m calling on Arizonans to vote policies over personalities; vote for deep-rooted values over shallow virtues. Don’t just check a box because the person’s name is familiar. Do your research, increase your voter IQ, and vet the candidates, regardless of your relationship with them.

Steve Watson’s corrupt governing practices have driven us further into debt and moral confusion. It’s time to send him home.

Join the conversation with two conservative candidates for Maricopa County Superintendent on Sunday, July 28 @ 3pm.

superintendent debate info

Tiffany is the Founder of Restore Parental Rights in Education, a grassroots advocate for families, educators, and school board members. For nearly two decades, Tiffany’s creative writing pursuits have surpassed most interests as she continues to contribute to her blog Bigviewsmallwindow.com. She encourages everyday citizens to take an active role in defending and preserving American values for future generations.

Arizona Has The Blueprint To Stop Illegals From Voting, Other States Should Follow

There’s A Way To Stop Noncitizens From Voting And Dems Are Fighting It

By Jason Snead |

American elections should be decided by American voters. That is why the U.S. House of Representatives recently passed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, legislation that defends that basic principle by requiring proof of citizenship to vote.

In a sane world — especially with an election on the horizon — the SAVE Act would quickly get a vote in the Senate and pass overwhelmingly. Unfortunately, that will not be the case due to Democratic objections to citizenship verification.

On the bright side, as Democrats attempt to normalize the practice of noncitizen voting in local-government elections, many states are not waiting around for Congress to fix the problem. Missouri, North Carolina, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Iowa, Wisconsin and Kentucky have advanced constitutional amendments to the ballot to let voters decide for themselves whether or not proof of citizenship should be required to vote.

Ohio and Louisiana voters advanced noncitizen voting bans by wide margins this year, bringing the total number of states to implement such a ban up to seven.

Most Americans believe it is common sense to verify that voters are citizens before they get a ballot, according to polling from Honest Elections Project. In fact, only 9% of respondents believe noncitizens should be able to vote in American elections.

However, contrary to popular opinion, progressive attorneys like Marc Elias have convinced like-minded judges to interpret federal law to prevent states from checking an individual’s citizenship during the voter-registration process. As a result, we are forced to rely on nothing more than an unaccountable honor system to police one of the most important aspects of the franchise.

Sometimes illegal registrations are innocent mistakes or the result of noncitizens being misled into believing they can vote. Other times, it happens deliberately. Thanks to our lax laws, it is clearly possible for noncitizens to cast ballots in American elections.

Democrats want to keep it that way.

Washington, D.C., recently enacted a policy to allow noncitizens to vote in 2022. Even the Washington Post editorial board condemned the law, noting that “[s]ome progressives hope that reshaping the electorate will allow them to reshape local politics, prodding the city further to the left on issues such as rent control and spending on social programs.”

The New York City Council passed a similar resolution to allow noncitizen voting in 2022. Thankfully, it was ruled unconstitutional by a state appeals court. Had that not been the case, it would have allowed hundreds of thousands of noncitizens to vote in local elections.

For decades, Rep. Jamie Raskin, the highest ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, has openly advocated for noncitizen voting.

The fact is noncitizen voting has gone mainstream on the left. Progressives are actively looking for ways to change the composition of the electorate to push American politics to the left, from lowering the voting age to enfranchising felons — and, yes, noncitizens.

It is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal races, they retort. That is true, but merely making something illegal does not stop it, because noncitizens do register and vote.

Democrats are exceedingly out of touch with the median voter on this issue. Perhaps that is why today’s left rejects the idea of the people choosing their government in favor of the government choosing a new people.

The House Democrats’ near unanimous opposition to the SAVE Act and the Democrat-controlled Senate’s likely refusal to consider the bill shows that liberals are not committed to safeguarding American elections from the influence of noncitizens.

The American people deserve to know why liberal politicians in Washington are so keen to put the interests of foreign nationals over the voting rights of American citizens. More state lawmakers must join the effort to secure our elections by nipping this trend in the bud.

Daily Caller News Foundation logo

Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Jason Snead is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation and the Executive Director of Honest Elections Project Action.

Poverty Is Caused By The Dad Gap

Poverty Is Caused By The Dad Gap

By Dr. Thomas Patterson |

Well after 50 years from the end of the Civil War, black Americans in much of the country were not allowed to enter the homes of whites by the front door. Black men could be lynched for looking a white woman in the face. Schools, restaurants, even drinking fountains were all segregated.

Today, no such legal discrepancies exist. Yes, fringe actors still show that vestiges of racism remain and maybe always will. Yet even though Americans of all races mingle peaceably, the income gap between white and black Americans stubbornly persists. Racism itself can no longer provide a satisfactory answer.

Educational disparities account for some of the gap. Too many black children are still trapped in inner-city schools, where unionized teachers often can’t manage to educate even one student per school who acquires basic academic skills.

Unfortunately for the students, individuals who graduate from high school with ninth grade academic skills have the lifetime earning potential of a dropout. You can’t fool the real world with a meaningless diploma. It would be astonishing if there weren’t a sizable income gap when such educational inequities exist.

The overwhelming evidence points to fatherless homes as the main driver of black economic stagnation. In 1960, 24 percent of black children were born to single mothers. By 2018 the figure was 70 percent. Overall, 37 percent of black kids live with married parents, compared with 84 percent of Asians and 77 percent of whites.

Families headed by single mothers are five times as likely to live in poverty than those of married couple-headed families. We all know the depressing statistics for fatherless children—the increased incidence of incarceration and drug dependence, the lower probability of educational achievement, and the high likelihood they will create single parent-headed families themselves.

It’s neither fair nor accurate to blame black fathers exclusively for this social calamity. In fact, black men are often more attentive fathers than their white counterparts. Black fathers were more likely than others to have “bathed, dressed, changed or helped their child every day” according to a National Statistics report.

The problem is not the quality of black fathers but the quantity. Too many black fathers don’t stay to model fatherhood and provide the guidance and structure that children, especially boys, need.

Some critics ascribe this tendency to “black culture” as if something inherent in blacks is the cause. Others claim that poverty causes weak family structures, not the reverse. But history debunks both contentions.

The institution of the black family emerged from centuries of slavery, poverty, and bigotry virtually intact with strong and loyal family structures. By the time of the mid-20th century civil rights movement, family incomes and social standing were also improving. Ironically, it was the Great Society modern welfare state, offering an omnipresent financial incentive for family break-up, that marked the beginning of the decline of the black family, with all its devastating consequences.

Progressives, especially influential academics, and activists like Black Lives Matter argue that the nuclear family should be dismantled because it is…racist!

For example, a 2021 academic webinar promotion stated, “Family privilege is an unacknowledged and unearned benefit” that “serves to advantage certain family forms over others and is typically bestowed upon white, traditional nuclear families.”

So, the fact that more single parent families are black, according to this traditional Marxist interpretation, means that racism is the culprit? Hogwash alert: the number of parents in the family is a far better predictor of economic outcomes than race. You can look it up.

Although intellectual sophisticates preach tolerance of all family relationships, they are more traditional in their personal behaviors. The college educated mostly delay childbearing until after marriage and raise their children in a two-parent household. It’s called “talk left, walk right” or, in other words, hypocrisy.

Rather than stigmatizing families and their fathers, we should support, in meaningful ways, their importance to human well-being. Judging from the results, families without government “help” do a better job overall of rearing and feeding children, of caring for the dependent elderly, and of creating responsible, competent human beings than does government.

We will never close the economic and social gaps until we close the Dad gap.

Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.

World’s Most Populous Nation Has Put Solar Out To Pasture. Other Countries Should Follow Suit

World’s Most Populous Nation Has Put Solar Out To Pasture. Other Countries Should Follow Suit

By Vijay Jayaraj |

During his debate with former President Donald Trump, President Joe Biden claimed: “The only existential threat to humanity is climate change.” What if I told you that it is not climate change but climate policies that are the real existential threat to billions across our planet?

The allure of a green utopia masks the harsh realities of providing affordable and reliable electricity. Americans could soon wake up to a dystopian future if the proposed Net Zero and Build Back Better initiatives — both aimed at an illogical proliferation of unreliable renewables and a clamp down on dependable fossil fuels — are implemented.

Nowhere is this better reflected than in remote regions of India where solar panels — believed to provide clean and green energy — ultimately resulted in being used to construct cattle sheds.

The transformation of Dharnai in the state of Bihar into a “solar village” was marked by great enthusiasm and high expectations. Villagers were told the solar micro-grid would provide reliable electricity for agriculture, social activities and daily living. The promise engendered a naïve trust in a technology that has failed repeatedly around the world.

The news of this Greenpeace initiative quickly spread as international news media showcased it as a success story for “renewable” energy in a third world country. CNN International’s “Connect the World” said Dharnai’s micro-grid provided a continuous supply of electricity. For an unaware viewer sitting in, say, rural Kentucky, solar energy would have appeared to be making great strides as a dependable energy source.

But the Dharnai system would end up on the long list of grand solar failures.

“As soon as we got solar power connections, there were also warnings to not use high power electrical appliances like television, refrigerator, motor and others,” said a villager. “These conditions are not there if you use thermal power. Then what is the use of such a power? The solar energy tariff was also higher compared to thermal power.”

village shopkeeper said: “But after three years, the batteries were exhausted and it was never repaired. … No one uses solar power anymore here.” Hopefully, the solar panels will last longer as shelter for cows.

Eventually, the village was connected to the main grid, which provided fully reliable coal-powered electricity at a third of the price of the solar power.

Dharnai is not an isolated case. Several other large-scale solar projects in rural India have had a similar fate. Writing for the publication Mongabay, Mainsh Kumar said: “Once (grid) electricity reaches unelectrified villages, the infrastructure and funds used in installation of such off-grid plants could prove futile.”

While green nonprofits and liberal mainstream media have the embarrassment of a ballyhooed solar project being converted to cattle shed, conventional energy sources like coal continue to power India’s over 1.3 billion people and the industries their economies depend on.

India saw a record jump in electricity demand this year, partly due to increased use of air conditioning units and other electrical appliances as more of the population achieved the financial wherewithal to afford them. During power shortages, coal often has come to the rescue. India allows its coal plants to increase coal stockpiles and import additional fuel without restrictions.

India will add more than 15 gigawatts in the year ending March 2025 (the most in nine years) and aims to add a total of 90 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity by 2032.

Energy reality is inescapable in a growing economy like India’s, and only sources such as coal, oil and natural gas can meet the demand. Fossil fuels can be counted on to supply the energy necessary for modern life, and “green” sources cannot.

India’s stance is to put economic growth ahead of any climate-based agenda to reduce the use of fossil fuels. This was reaffirmed when the country refused to set an earlier target for its net zero commitment, delaying it until 2070.

The story of Dharnai serves as a cautionary tale for the implementation of renewable energy projects in rural India, where pragmatism is the official choice over pie in the sky.

Daily Caller News Foundation logo

Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Vijay Jayaraj is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds a master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, UK.

Copying California’s Election System In Arizona Is An Insane Idea

Copying California’s Election System In Arizona Is An Insane Idea

By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |

This fall, the people of Arizona will have a number of critical decisions to make about the future of our state. But one initiative may be the most important issue facing voters in November.

Earlier this month, the special interests behind a plan to bring California-style jungle primaries and ranked choice voting to Arizona submitted signatures with the Arizona Secretary of State to qualify the so-called “Make Elections Fair Act” for the November General Election. If approved, this proposed constitutional amendment would not only make our elections unfair, but it would radically change how Arizonans select and approve candidates for public office in several alarming ways.

The Measure Grants One Politician Too Much Power

It’s never a good idea to give one politician total power over anything—especially an election—but that’s exactly what the Make Elections (Un)Fair Act would do. The measure grants one politician, in this case the Secretary of State, the power to determine how many candidates will appear on the general election ballot for each race. On top of that, the Secretary of State could even decide how many candidates advance in his or her own race…

>>> CONTINUE READING >>>