AZFEC: Kris Mayes Is Undermining Defense Of Arizona’s Proof Of Citizenship Law 

AZFEC: Kris Mayes Is Undermining Defense Of Arizona’s Proof Of Citizenship Law 

By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |

In 2022, the Arizona legislature passed—and then-Governor Ducey signed into law—a landmark election integrity bill: HB 2492. Authored by the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, the law bolsters safeguards to our election process by requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote, ensuring that only U.S. citizens are voting in our elections.  

It’s commonsense legislation that is popular with the public and a blueprint for other states looking to adopt nearly identical bills. And why wouldn’t it be? U.S. citizens cannot go into France, Australia, or any other country throughout the world and vote in their elections, so why should citizens from other countries be allowed to vote in our elections? 

Yet immediately after HB 2492 was passed, a consortium of liberal organizations and the Biden Justice department sued to stop the law from going into effect. Now, after multiple trips to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, one of which included a bizarre ruling that required an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to let Arizona enforce our proof of citizenship requirements for the 2024 election (which we won), the entire law will now be going to the nation’s highest court.   

We are confident that the Supreme Court will uphold the law in its entirety, but one issue about the litigation has been simmering beneath the surface: Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes…

>>> CONTINUE READING >>>  

Arizona Free Enterprise Club Granted Intervention In APS Rate Case, Challenges 14% Proposed Rate Hike

Arizona Free Enterprise Club Granted Intervention In APS Rate Case, Challenges 14% Proposed Rate Hike

By Jonathan Eberle |

Arizona Public Service (APS) is seeking to raise electricity rates by 14% starting in 2026 — a move the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AZFEC) argues would unfairly burden Arizona families while subsidizing costly “green energy” initiatives and the early closure of a key coal plant.

According to filings with the Arizona Corporation Commission, APS attributes the proposed rate increase largely to battery storage projects and the early retirement of the Cholla Power Plant. The Arizona Free Enterprise Club filed an official response criticizing APS for attempting to block the organization’s intervention in the case, while allowing environmental groups such as the Sierra Club to participate. “APS has no issue letting radical groups like the Sierra Club into their hearings, but they’re trying to block the one organization fighting for Arizona families,” said AZFEC President Scot Mussi.

Mussi contends APS’s “carbon free” and “carbon neutral” commitments over the past five years have shaped their energy plans — including their Integrated Resource Plans and large-scale renewable energy projects — resulting in higher costs for consumers. “For years, their voluntary commitments have very likely increased costs for Arizona ratepayers,” the organization said in its filing.

Two days after filing its response, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club announced it had been officially granted intervention in the APS case. This designation allows AZFEC to participate directly in proceedings, making it the only organization representing ratepayers who oppose the rate hike.

In the ruling, the Administrative Law Judge overseeing the case described the Club as “the lone proponent” of an energy approach emphasizing reliability, affordability, and independence — priorities the group says align with President Trump’s “American Energy Dominance” agenda.

“While others are lobbying to shut down Arizona’s coal plants and pour billions into unreliable Green New Scam projects, we’re standing up for the ratepayers who will be left to foot the bill,” Mussi said. “We’re proud to be the only organization in this case fighting to keep Arizona’s energy secure, affordable, and free from political interference.”

The Club’s participation ensures that Arizona ratepayers have a voice during the proceedings, according to Mussi and AZFEC Deputy Policy Director Greg Blackie. “This isn’t about politics — it’s about protecting Arizona families and ensuring that our state doesn’t fall victim to the same radical energy policies destroying affordability across the country,” said Blackie. “We intend to shine a light on the real costs, the real numbers, and the real consequences of this so-called green transition.”

The case before the Arizona Corporation Commission will determine whether APS can move forward with its proposed rate hike. The Arizona Free Enterprise Club says it plans to continue pressing for “transparency, accountability, and energy freedom,” ensuring that “ratepayers are not forced to fund reckless green energy policies.”

Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.

AZFEC: MAG’s Transportation Plan Is Already Failing To Meet Promises—Lawmakers Need To Act Accordingly

AZFEC: MAG’s Transportation Plan Is Already Failing To Meet Promises—Lawmakers Need To Act Accordingly

By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |

How long must taxpayers be forced to throw money at a failed plan before something is done about it? For the Maricopa Association of Governments’ (MAG) regional transportation plan—which for two decades spent billions on light-rail and other wasteful “active transportation” projects and has primed the pump for another twenty years of boondoggle spending—The Club hopes the answer is not much longer. 

Since 2004, local governments through MAG have siphoned more and more funding from a transportation tax to build white elephant transit projects throughout Maricopa County. Yet MAG won’t budge from its broken plan despite collapsed ridership, worsened congestion, and ballooning costs – for projects that don’t match how people actually travel. 

The good news is that with the next statutory transportation audit coming due July 2026, lawmakers on the Joint Legislative Audit Committee (JLAC) will have an opportunity to weigh in on the MAG plan and provide recommendations for change.  

State law requires that these five-year audits evaluate several elements of the MAG plan, including transit service, costs, ridership, congestion, and mobility. While previous audits flagged some deficiencies, they lacked any concrete performance metrics, and on a few occasions were prepared by a firm tied to MAG (a conflict of interest). So, to further bolster the JLAC process, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club brought in a nationally recognized transportation expert to conduct an audit of the plan. The result: MAG’s plan is failing and needs a major overhaul. 

>>> CONTINUE READING >>>  

Conservative Group Asks 3 County Attorneys To Investigate ASU’s Alleged Election Meddling

Conservative Group Asks 3 County Attorneys To Investigate ASU’s Alleged Election Meddling

By Ethan Faverino |

The Arizona Free Enterprise Club escalated its call for accountability, urging the County Attorneys of Mohave, Pinal, and Yuma Counties to launch investigations into Arizona State University (ASU) leadership for allegedly manipulating 2022 gubernatorial debate rules to favor Democratic Katie Hobbs over Republican Kari Lake.

The action follows a complaint filed by the Club in August 2025, with the Arizona Attorney General and Maricopa County Attorney, which was dismissed without a thorough review, prompting a broader push for enforcement under state law.  

In a sharply worded letter addressed to the Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith, Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller, and Yuma County Attorney Karolyn Kaczorowski, Club President Scot Mussi detailed evidence of ASU’s deviation from established debate protocols, accusing university officials of using public resources to influence the election in violation of A.R.S. § 15-1633.

The statute states: “A person acting on behalf of a university or a person who aids another person acting on behalf of a university shall not spend or use university resources for the purpose of influencing the outcomes of elections or to advocate support for or opposition to pending or proposed legislation.”

This call-to-action stems from a September 2022 debate co-sponsored by ASU, Arizona PBS, and the Citizens Clean Elections Commission (CCEC).

Under longstanding CCEC regulations (Ariz. Admin. Code § R2-20-107(K)), a candidate declining an invitation to debate their political opponent forfeits airtime, granting the attending opponent a 30-minute solo interview.

When Hobbs announced she would skip the debate, ASU and PBS bypassed set regulations, granting her an exclusive 30-minute interview, a first in years to do so.

Internal communications, obtained and reported by the Arizona Republic, exposed the intent behind the decision. ASU President Michael Crow, Chief of Staff James O’Brien, and ASU Media Enterprise Managing Director Mi-Ai Parrish allegedly prioritized Hobbs’ comfort over neutrality.

Parrish’s emails to O’Brien highlighted concerns that “Katie is getting roasted hard” for dodging the debate and pressed CCEC staff to limit Lake’s discussion of election integrity, arguing that airing “a person with those views was wrong.” CCEC Executive Director Tom Collins confirmed to the Republic that Parrish sought to suppress Lake’s platform.

Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly listed the names of the County Attorneys. They have now been corrected.

Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.

Arizona Supreme Court Hears Arguments Against Donor-Doxxing Law

Arizona Supreme Court Hears Arguments Against Donor-Doxxing Law

By Matthew Holloway |

Attorneys from the Goldwater Institute, representing the Center for Arizona Policy and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, joined former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould on Thursday to challenge Proposition 211. The measure, called the “Voters’ Right to Know Act,” is being contested on the grounds that it violates the state Constitution’s protections for free speech and privacy.

In the wake of Turning Point USA co-founder Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and a decade marked by attacks on political figures—the security risks of effectively doxxing political donors loom large in the case.

If upheld, the law would force nonprofit groups that weigh in on ballot measures or reference incumbents near an election to publicly disclose their donors—not just names and amounts, but also home addresses and employers—in a searchable database.

In today’s climate of escalating political violence—from death threats and swatting to vandalism, arson, and even assassinations—a database like this could essentially become a “hit list.”

In a press release the Goldwater Institute explained its position stating, “While proponents of the Voters’ Right to Know Act say they’re simply combatting so-called ‘dark money’ in politics, it is clear to Goldwater and its clients — the Center for Arizona Policy, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, and individual donors — that their real intent is to intimidate their political opponents into silence.”

“Arizona’s Proposition 211 is as un-American as it is dangerous. No one should be exposed to retaliation or violence simply for supporting causes they believe in,” said Jon Riches, Goldwater’s Vice President of Litigation. “The law also violates Arizona’s Constitution, which provides stronger protections for freedom of speech and privacy than even the U.S. Constitution. That’s why we at the Goldwater Institute believe the Arizona Supreme Court will ultimately strike down Proposition 211.”

Arizona Free Enterprise Club President Scot Mussi added, “They’re afraid of the activist organizations out there. They’re afraid of politicians and others that want to exact retaliation because they simply support a position or belief that they disagree.”

Mussi characterized the law as “a dangerous threat to our right to free speech and association.”

“As drafted, the law can be used to unconstitutionally target and harass private citizens, including our organization and our supporters,” Mussi stated. “We are confident that the Supreme Court will recognize the danger this law poses and will rule in our favor.”

In a statement to AZ Free News in May, Mussi elaborated on the potential for political intimidation: “Both the U.S. Constitution and the Arizona Constitution guarantee citizens the right to speak freely, which includes the right to not be forced to speak. Prop 211 not only violates this right for donors by silencing them from supporting causes they believe in but impairs the speech of nonprofits like ours as well.”

Peter Gentala, President of the Center for Arizona Policy, stated in a press release that Proposition 211 “creates an atmosphere of fear among those who support nonprofits that engage in the most pressing issues in Arizona today.”

Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.