Legislation to separate election officials from political action committees is working its way through the Arizona Legislature, though receiving mixed signals from Democrats on their support for the proposal.
HB 2378, sponsored by Representative Leo Biasiucci, “prohibits the Secretary of State, a member of a county board of supervisors, a county recorder or any other officer in charge of elections, or their employee, from being a chairperson, treasurer or other member of a political action committee (PAC),” according to the purpose provided by the Arizona Senate.
The bill passed the House Committee on Municipal Oversight & Elections (MOE) back in January, receiving a unanimous and bipartisan vote of 10-0. It later cleared the House Rules Committee with a 5-3 vote. On the House floor, Biasiucci’s legislation gained 49 votes in support, and only 11 votes in opposition.
After HB 2378 made it past the House MOE Committee in January, bill sponsor, Representative Biasiucci, tweeted: “My bill, HB 2378, just passed the House Municipal Oversight and Elections Committee 10-0. Republicans and Democrats agree, you shouldn’t be involved in a PAC if you also oversee any significant aspect of election operations.”
My bill, HB2378, just passed the House Municple Oversight and Elections Committee 10-0. Republicans and Democrats in Arizona agree, you shouldn't be involved in a PAC(political action committee) if you also oversee any significant aspect of election operations. 🇺🇲
Representative Austin Smith also celebrated the bill’s approval by the House MOE Committee, writing, “An individual who is an elections officer or employee who oversees any significant aspect of election’s operations may not serve on a PAC board.”
The House Committee on Municipal Oversight & Elections just passed @Leo4AzHouse’s HB2378.
An individual who is an elections officer or employee who oversees any significant aspect of election’s operations may not serve on a PAC board.
Earlier this month, HB 2378 was heard in the Senate Elections Committee and received more opposition from Democrats there than in the House – perhaps predicting a frostier reception to the policy if and when it arrives on the Senate floor for a vote. Democrat Senator Anna Hernandez explained that she believed “this bill is overly broad” when casting her vote against the legislation in committee. Fellow Democrat Senator Juan Mendez complained that HB 2378 was “only a symbolic measure,” and Democrat Senator Priya Sundareshan said that “this seems to be a particular measure to punish a particular someone in an intraparty dispute.”
Senator Sundareshan’s comments were a veiled reference to Republican Maricopa County Recorder, Stephen Richer, who, in late 2021, formed a political action committee named Pro-Democracy Republicans of Arizona. The PAC posts its mission on its website: “The Arizona election wasn’t stolen. We Republicans simply had a presidential candidate who lost, while we had many other candidates who won. It’s time we Republicans accept and acknowledge that fact. Candidates come and go. But our democratic institutions are long-lasting, and peaceful transitions of power are a hallmark of the United States. We should not abandon this history in favor of conspiracy theorists and demagoguery. To that end, we are launching this PAC to support pro-democracy Arizona Republicans. We hope you will join us. We will win some races. We will lose some races. But either way, we will be strengthening the processes that have long undergirded Arizona and the United States.”
Richer’s creation of this PAC, while serving as Maricopa County’s top election official, angered many Republicans during the 2022 election cycle.
Senate Elections Chair, Senator Wendy Rogers, cast her vote in support of the bill, arguing, “If someone is in a position to influence the outcome of an election, thank you Rep Biasiucci for calling out the need to separate that kind of person from a PAC which is brought together to assert influence as well.”
HB 2378 awaits a vote in the Arizona Senate.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
On Tuesday, lawmakers asked Secretary of State Adrian Fontes to reject the Election Procedure Manuals (EPM) drafted by Governor Katie Hobbs when she was the secretary of state, per recent court decisions.
The dubious EPMs were the 2019 and 2021 versions drafted by Governor Katie Hobbs during her service as secretary of state. Court decisions in Brnovich v. Hobbs, McKenna v. Soto, Leach v. Hobbs, and Leibsohn v. Hobbs declared that these EPMs weren’t in line with state law.
In a joint statement issued Tuesday, State Reps. Jacqueline Parker (R-LD15) and Alex Kolodin (R-LD03) insisted to Fontes that the court decisions merited review of the EPMs. Parker chairs the House Committee on Municipal Oversight & Elections, and Kolodin serves as the vice chair.
“Recent Arizona court decisions give us serious concerns about the lawfulness of former Secretary Hobbs’ 2019 EPM and 2021 draft EPM,” said Parker and Kolodin. “Arizona law purports to authorize the EPM to achieve and maintain the maximum degree of correctness, impartiality, uniformity and efficiency in voting procedures throughout the state. But we question whether these mandates have been followed. We hope Secretary Fontes more fully evaluates where the prior Secretary overstepped her bounds and look forward to hearing how those errors will be corrected.”
State Reps. @electjacqparker & @Alex4Arizona seek answers from new Arizona Secretary of State on Elections Procedures Manual & express serious concerns over errors and mishandling by former Secretary Hobbs.
Parker and Kolodin asked Fontes to include them in the stakeholder input process. They asked Fontes whether he would disregard Hobbs’ 2021 draft EPM; if he believed the 2019 EPM followed and carried the enforcement of state statute; and for his supplementation of any guidance, statements, emails, or directives that Hobbs or her agents gave to county election officials concerning the 2022 General Election not written in the 2019 EPM.
The duo also asked Fontes for copies of any and all drafts of the 2023 EPM, as well as communications regarding third-party input or proposals. They set next Tuesday, Jan. 24, as their deadline.
Brnovich v. Hobbs ruled that the 2021 draft EPM failed to meet statute deadline. McKenna v. Soto and Leach v. Hobbs determined that the 2019 EPM language added onto statute language and was therefore impermissible. Finally, Leibsohn v. Hobbs ruled that Hobbs’ electronic registration process for signature gathering was deficient and non-compliant with state statute.
When former attorney general Mark Brnovich rejected the 2021 draft EPM over concerns later confirmed by court decisions, Hobbs insisted that his grievances had no merit.
AG Brnovich now claims that his prior unethical behavior prohibits him from performing his current statutory duties.
The Elections Procedures Manual is an important part of election integrity in Arizona. It’s unfortunate for all voters that AG Brnovich refuses to do his job. pic.twitter.com/KJQnerd9Ve
The Elections Procedures Manual ensures that elections throughout AZ are run uniformly.
Unfortunately, it appears AG Brnovich prefers political posturing over performing his duty to review and approve the Manual. It’s time for him to work in good faith on behalf of all voters. pic.twitter.com/7ImW91mS6V
It appears that Fontes wouldn’t disregard Hobbs’ EPMs, regardless of court decisions. Fontes supported the Arizona Supreme Court decision upholding the 2019 EPM in McKenna v. Soto.
“This effectively shifts the burden from the petitioner (voter) to the government, maximizing all voters’ voices in the process,” stated Fontes. “This is a MASSIVE WIN for voters!”
Also, at Par20 of the opinion, the Court affirms that only the enumerated parts of ARS16-542 appearing in the AZ Election Procedures Manual have the force and effect of law. This is a MASSIVE WIN for voters!#ProtectDemocracy 3/
Fontes’ office didn’t issue an immediate public response to the request letter. However, he did advertise an upcoming panel with Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer.
I'm really looking forward to this friendly exchange of ideas with my colleague @stephen_richer. We don't agree on everything but having smart, civil, and informative conversations about improving our systems is what makes our democracy stronger. pic.twitter.com/6tLky19d8N
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake must start her election challenge appeal at the Arizona Court of Appeals – Division 1, rejecting Lake’s argument for a transfer of the case in hopes of expedited handling.
The order declining Lake’s request to bypass a three-judge panel at the court of appeals in Phoenix noted “no good cause appears to transfer the matter to this court.” It also noted there had already been a scheduling order issued in case with possible oral argument slated for Jan.24.
It is a decision Lake appears to have accepted.
My court case will be going before the Appeals Court prior to the Arizona Supreme Court because it's already been scheduled for review.
This decision was done without prejudice & I am confident the case will end up in their hands eventually.
The defendants in Lake’s election challenge include the five members of the Maricopa County board of supervisors, the county’s two elections directors, and Recorder Stephen Richer. Katie Hobbs was also a defendant in her official capacity as Arizona Secretary of State at the time of the election.
The courts have now substituted Adrian Fontes as the defendant in his role as the new secretary of state, although Hobbs remains a defendant in her personal capacity as a contestee for governor.
Lake filed on Dec. 30 to have the Arizona Court of Appeals overturn the findings made by Judge Peter Thompson of the Maricopa County Superior Court, who denied Lake’s election challenge on Dec. 24 after a two-day trial.
Then, as reported by AZ Free News, Lake’s attorneys filed a petition the next day to transfer the appeal directly to the Arizona Supreme Court.
The three judges assigned to the panel that will hear Lake’s appeal are Maria Elena Cruz, Angela K. Paton, and Peter B. Swann.
Terri Jo Neff is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or send her news tips here.
On Wednesday, GOP gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake filed an appeal of her election lawsuit’s dismissal and the order to pay $33,000 to opponent Katie Hobbs for legal fees.
Lake’s lawsuit named Hobbs both personally and as secretary of state; Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer; the entire Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (BOS); and Maricopa County Elections Director Scott Jarrett.
We have filed our appeal.
And we would VERY much like to talk about the issue of signature verification (or the complete and total lack thereof in Maricopa County) before the court.
In an interview with “War Room” founder and host Steve Bannon this past week, Lake claimed that the election was stolen from her by shadow figures bent on keeping cartels active, the border open, and inflation high. Lake said that Hobbs will merely be a “puppet” for these forces.
“The voters went to the ballot box in November because they’re fed up. The only way to stop me from stopping the cartels was to steal an election,” said Lake. “This state is going to go to hell in a handbasket if Katie Hobbs is allowed to take control.”
Lake further claimed that Hobbs was in on this alleged collusion
“Hobbs has absolutely no respect for the law. I can’t even believe she didn’t recuse herself from this botched election.” said Lake. “She didn’t even campaign, she didn’t debate, she hid from people, hid in her basement, had no policy, because she knew that she could rig the election and walk into office.”
Lake appealed to the Division 1 Court of Appeals. Lake has promised previously that she would take her case up to the Supreme Court if necessary.
The Maricopa County Superior Court dismissed Lake’s lawsuit on Christmas Eve. Maricopa County defendants and Hobbs filed for $696,000 collectively in sanctions on Monday. However, the court denied most of the sanctions on Tuesday, only awarding Hobbs’ team $33,000 in fees. Judge Peter Thompson clarified that Lake’s claims of election misconduct or fraud weren’t groundless or presented in bad faith, contrary to what Maricopa County argued in its sanctions request.
In response to the superior court’s dismissal, both Hobbs and BOS Chair Bill Gates issued press releases celebrating the win.
Hobbs campaign manager, Nicole Demont, issued a statement on her behalf. DeMont said that the judge affirmed what Arizona voters chose last month, not “the conspiracy-riddled, dark corners of the Internet” that voted for Lake. Hobbs earned over 1.28 million votes to Lake’s 1.27 million votes: a difference of 17,100 votes.
A statement from our campaign manager Nicole DeMont on today's lawsuit dismissal.
Governor-Elect Hobbs is ready to get to work improving Arizonans' everyday lives and moving our state forward. pic.twitter.com/rYLoaE6z5z
Lake doesn’t appear to have the backing of some of the GOP’s national leadership. Embattled RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel told Newsmax that Lake lost because she ran a poor campaign, and that Arizona GOP Chair Kelli Ward also facilitated the loss.
“You had one candidate saying, ‘If you’re a McCain voter, get the hell out of my rallies.’ And then the McCain voters said, ‘Yeah, I’m not going to vote for you,” said McDaniel.
Oh snap. RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel goes off on Kari Lake & Kelli Ward for losing this election. Kari Lake not a good candidate. Wow. https://t.co/SgJxFkcvoy
The Maricopa County Superior Court denied most of the $696,000 sanctions requested against Kari Lake. Judge Peter Thompson clarified that Lake’s claims of election misconduct or fraud weren’t groundless or brought in bad faith.
“There is no doubt that each side believes firmly in its position with great conviction. The fact that Plaintiff failed to meet the burden of clear and convincing evidence required for each element of A.R.S. § 16-672 does not equate to a finding that her claims were, or were not, groundless and presented in bad faith,” wrote Thompson.
However, Thompson didn’t deny all of the sanctions. He did award Katie Hobbs $5,900 in her capacity as secretary of state for an expert witness, $22,400 in her capacity as governor-elect for another expert witness, and another $4,700 in her capacity as governor-elect for 8 hours’ worth of ballot inspections. The total of over $33,000 comes with an annual interest rate of 7.5 percent.
Lake’s “War Room” team declared Thompson’s dismissal a win. They reaffirmed that they would appeal his ruling on the case.
We are quite confident in both the legal and evidentiary merits of our case.
Particularly when all ten of our counts are given proper consideration.
We appreciate Judge Thompson's evaluation & are eager for a second (& more comprehensive) review of our case. https://t.co/JcAmHIZhks
Lake’s lawyers petitioned late Monday to have Maricopa County and Secretary of State Katie Hobbs’ collective $696,000 sanctions request dismissed entirely.
In their court filing, Lake’s attorneys said that the county’s sanctions request was a punishment for litigating the election. The attorneys stated that they presented over two hundred witnesses that testified to facts and alleged violations of law, which included specific numbers of allegedly illegal votes exceeding the 17,100 margin between Lake and Hobbs.
“[T]he issues raised before this Court were of significant concern to millions of Arizona voters as to the causes of chaos that arose on Election Day — and the administration of elections in Maricopa County generally — and Plaintiff’s claims deserved to be brought and heard,” stated Lake’s attorneys. “Trust in the election process is not furthered by punishing those who bring legitimate claims as Plaintiff did here.”
Lake’s attorneys further disputed Maricopa County’s claim that there wasn’t any evidence of intentional misconduct to change the election outcome. They cited the court’s acknowledgement in its ruling that evidence did exist — though Thompson determined that the evidence didn’t appear to affect the election outcome.
The attorneys also rehashed testimonies from Election Day Director Scott Jarrett and County Recorder Stephen Richer. They claimed that Jarrett walked back his initial denial of knowledge of 19-inch ballots being printed onto 20-inch paper, something that would render them unreadable by tabulators. They also claimed that Richer offered conflicting testimony concerning chain of custody: he at first stated that ballots were processed at the Maricopa County Tabulation and Election Center (MCTEC) before being counted at Runbeck, then later stated that ballots were counted at MCTEC and documented on chain of custody forms before being transferred to Runbeck for counting again.
The bulk of the sanctions fees came from the law firms tied to Democrat’s go-to litigator and principal Russiagate player, Marc Elias, who served Hobbs in her capacity as governor-elect. Hobbs requested over $457,000 for Elias’ law firm, Elias Law Group, and over $93,000 for Elias’ former firm, Perkins Coie. The two firms also requested nearly $56,700 for 16 hours of work. The firms noted that these definite fees for less than a day’s work don’t require a detailed review of invoices nor would they be subject to revision. In his denial of these sanctions, Thompson noted that itemization of costs were required pursuant to state law.
The firms also requested over $22,400 in definite fees for their expert witness, Kenneth Mayer, and nearly $4,700 for 8 hours of ballot inspections.
Lake claimed in a since-deleted tweet that Elias helped ghostwrite Judge Thompson’s ruling.
A few days ago I asked what conspiracy theory Kari Lake would offer for why she lost her election contest lawsuit. It is more insane than even I predicted. pic.twitter.com/8K6OIfSVcc
Maricopa County cited this claim as a justification for their sanctions request. In their counter to the sanctions request, Lake’s attorneys declared that her speech was constitutionally protected.
Perkins Coie helped to create & disseminate the collusion hoax in a coup against the President of the United States
Hobbs hired them to help her undermine Arizona election law & procedure
And our ostensibly conservative Maricopa Attorney's office has agreed to help them do it?
In her capacity as secretary of state, Hobbs requested nearly $37,000 for the services of Coppersmith Brockelman, a go-to law firm for Democrats whose partner, Roopali Desai, was appointed earlier this year to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Maricopa County requested an incomplete portion to cover attorney’s fees: just over $25,000. Over $18,700 would go to the county attorney’s office, and just over $6,300 would go to outside counsel with the Burgess Law Group. The remainder of the fees are pending. The county noted that only their clerical workers could export time from their time-keeping systems into a spreadsheet, and that they weren’t willing to require their support staff to work on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day.
The Maricopa County Superior Court dismissed Lake’s lawsuit on Christmas Eve. Judge Thompson asserted that Lake’s team didn’t provide clear and convincing evidence of election misconduct or fraud. Lake promptly announced that she would appeal the ruling.
In their sanctions request, Maricopa County declared that Lake engaged in “unfounded attacks on elections” and brought forth “unwarranted accusations against elections officials.”
Just like in Arizona, we are told that the certification process is purely ceremonial but also irreversible.
We are given results & told to accept them or be punished.
