by Matthew Holloway | Dec 7, 2024 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club released a statement on Wednesday severely criticizing the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC). The statement came after the ACC, which is charged with protecting Arizonans from a non-competitive energy industry, voted to abdicate its duty by allowing formulaic rates that increase automatically year over year, as opposed to every increase being subject to public scrutiny and requiring approval.
The vote on Tuesday was carried 3-2 with commissioners Anna Tovar and Lea Márquez Peterson dissenting. According to the ACC, its policy statement “allows regulated utilities to propose formula rates in future rate cases. Under this approach, the ACC reviews and accepts as the rate a formula for calculating the utility’s cost of service, including clear definitions of inputs to that formula and a process for updating rates every year as the utility’s costs change.”
The commission claimed, “Formula rates will still be monitored closely to ensure that the utility does not over-earn relative to the cost of service for providing service (plus a reasonable return on invested capital), while continuing to provide service safely and reliably.”
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club responded in a statement saying:
“Following contentious double digit rate hikes being approved and ESG Resource Plans committed to going ‘Net Zero’ by 2050 being rubber stamped, the Commission has rushed through approving new rules masquerading as a mere ‘policy statement’ that could insulate utilities and the Commission from having to face ratepayers in future rate cases. The ‘policy statement’ would depart from traditional rate making and pursue ‘formula based rates’ offloading risk from investors to ratepayers and baking in automatic rate increases with little transparency or opportunity for ratepayer engagement.
“The only support for this ‘policy statement’ came from the utilities themselves. The Commission is charged to protect ratepayers by regulating the utilities, not the other way around. The Commission should pump the brakes, not rush through major rulemaking decisions in a lame duck session.
“The Arizona Free Enterprise Club is committed to protecting ratepayers, ensuring affordable and reliable energy in Arizona. We will continue to work to ensure utilities will not be able to force their captive ratepayers to foot the bill, especially through automatic rate hikes, for their costly goal to go ‘Net Zero’ by 2050 by shuttering reliable sources of energy generation to build out expensive and unreliable wind, solar, and battery storage projects.”
Attorney Dan Pozesfsky of Arizona’s Residential Utility Consumer Office (RUCO), expressed a similar view according to 12News saying, “Trying to implement formula rates through a policy statement rather than through rules is inappropriate, illegal and in this case denies due process.”
The outlet reported that the ACC, ignoring its own plans for the vote, rushed to schedule it noting that in a previous meeting Commission Chairman Jim O’Connor had told stakeholders, “Give us feedback. Bring us guardrails.” He added, “I eagerly look forward to that kind of input at our next workshop.” However, no workshop occurred and no published legal opinions were issued.
Diane Brown of the nonprofit Arizona PIRG Education Fund stressed that the vote was conducted with critical questions about the scheme remaining unanswered. She said, “This is precisely to me why it was so important to have the legal memo that this Commission said they would get. While there are statements that there will be increased transparency, I’m not seeing evidence of that. It is troubling to me that we haven’t heard from the ALJ (administrative law judge). We have not heard from Staff.”
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.
by Daniel Stefanski | Nov 7, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
An attempt to transform Arizona’s elections systems on Tuesday night fell well short after voters went to the polls.
Proposition 140, which would have imposed a mixed system of Ranked Choice Voting and jungle primaries for future elections in Arizona, was defeated with almost 60% of the vote share, as of Wednesday evening.
“We are so grateful for the Arizonans who stood up to oppose this radical transformation of our elections systems,” said Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb and former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould, co-chairs of the No on Prop 140 Committee. “Voters of all political persuasions wisely concluded that Prop 140 would do irreparable harm to our state if enacted. Arizona elections must be free, fair, and transparent, and that is what our system remains after this just result.”
One of the measure’s fiercest opponents, Scot Mussi, the President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, praised the outcome. He said, “Prop 140 was one of the worst ideas to ever be proposed in our great state, and it is fitting that it met its demise from a vast majority of Arizonans. Radical leftists, out-of-state billionaires, and scheming consultants tried to hoodwink voters into adopting this failed system, spending millions of dollars and duplicating signatures to qualify for the ballot. We are so pleased that millions of Arizonans did their homework and said ‘hell no’ to, what would have been, a disastrous transformation of our elections system. California can keep their destructive policies and systems on their side of the state line.”
The organization behind Prop 140, Make Elections Fair Arizona, did not appear to issue a statement as of Wednesday on its website or social media platforms. Immediately following the close of polls on Tuesday night, its account promised to be “back online soon with an Election Day campaign update,” but that does not seem to have materialized yet.
In a Wednesday press release, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club highlighted the defeat of Ranked Choice Voting questions in several states in Tuesday’s General Election. Those results were as follows:
- Colorado: Proposition 131 was defeated with almost 55% of the vote
- Idaho: Proposition 1 was defeated with almost 70% of the vote
- Montana: Both CI-126 & 127 were defeated
- Oregon: Measure 117 was defeated with almost 60% of the vote
- South Dakota: Amendment H was defeated with more than 65% of the vote
- Nevada: Question 3 was defeated with almost 54% of the vote
- Alaska: Measure 2, which repeals the state’s ranked choice voting system, appears headed toward passage
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Oct 30, 2024 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The outcome of a new poll is indicating the defeat of Proposition 140, the “Make Elections Fair Act,” which proposes to overhaul Arizona elections with ranked-choice voting and open primaries.
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC) released the poll on Tuesday, conducted by Data Orbital. The pollster surveyed over 500 voters over the past weekend to gauge their support for Prop 140; only 42 percent of respondents expressed support for the measure, with those who have already voted at 38 percent in support.
AFEC President Scot Mussi stated in a press release that the poll results indicated an opposition to election reforms similar to those adopted by California.
“This latest poll demonstrates that Arizonans do not appreciate these special interests attempting to commandeer our elections for their radical agenda,” said Mussi. “Arizona voters are diligently doing their research on Prop 140, and they are being turned off by its dangerous effects on our state’s elections and future.”
Mussi remarked that the defeat of Prop 140 would be “sending a message to these out-of-state billionaires and California liberals” that Arizonans won’t adopt “a system run by a partisan election official and his band of unelected bureaucrats.”
By “partisan election official,” Mussi was referring to the Secretary of State — under Prop 140 reforms, the secretary decides the number of candidates who may qualify for the general election ballot in every race, even their own. Theoretically, that could mean a general election ballot consisting of only one party.
AFEC also criticized Prop 140 for its speculated potential to increase tabulation errors, lengthen voting lines, and delay election results.
41 percent of respondents said they were not supportive of the measure. Eight percent said they were undecided, and five percent said they could not recall on how they had already voted on the measure.
The poll surveyed 261 males and 289 females, and respondents were nearly evenly split on whether they were “extremely likely” to vote (291) or had already voted (231). A select few were only somewhat likely (15) or “50/50 likely” (13).
A majority of respondents were 65-and-over, white, Republican, in possession of some college education but no degree, and had voted in the last four elections.
Respondents were heavily weighted in the 65-and-over crowd at 33 percent (182 respondents), with decreasing numbers of participation as the age brackets went younger: 17 percent at ages 55 to 64, 14 percent at ages 45 to 54, 14 percent at ages 35 to 44, 13 percent at ages 25 to 34, and eight percent at ages 18 to 24.
A majority of respondents self-identified as white (71 percent), followed by Hispanic (20 percent), African American (four percent), Asian (two percent), and other (two percent).
Also, more respondents were Republicans: 39 percent. 32 percent of respondents were Democrats, 25 percent of respondents were independents or unaffiliated, and about four percent were “other” voters.
42 percent of respondents received some college education but no degree. 25 percent had a bachelor’s degree, 15 percent had a high school degree or an equivalent, over 14 percent had a graduate degree or higher, two percent didn’t have their high school diploma, and one percent refused to answer.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Oct 11, 2024 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
After a stunning decision by the Arizona Supreme Court that will allow votes to be tabulated for Proposition 140, which would usher in ranked-choice voting, a coalition has formed to defeat the measure.
The NO on Prop 140 Committee, co-chaired by Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb and former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould, has launched a concerted effort to defeat the measure alongside organizations on both sides of the aisle including:
In a statement, Lamb and Gould said, “Special interest groups should not decide how our elections system operates. Arizonans on all sides of the aisle agree: this scheme to transform our elections into a system found in California is a bad idea. We oppose re-writing our Constitution and imposing such a radical, convoluted scheme on Arizonans.”
According to the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, one of the groups involved in the bipartisan coaltion, Prop 140 would do the following if enacted:
- “Allows one politician, the Arizona Secretary of State, to decide how many candidates qualify for the general election ballot for every single contest, including his or her own race
- Would result in some races where candidates from only one political party appear on the general election ballot
- Would force voters to navigate two completely different voting systems on the same ballot, with some races requiring voters to rank candidates and others that do not
- Will increase tabulation errors, create longer lines at the polls, and significantly delay election results.”
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.
by Daniel Stefanski | Oct 9, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
After a lengthy court battle, a ballot measure involving a major change to Arizona’s elections system will be considered by voters in the upcoming November General Election.
Late last week, the Arizona Supreme Court finally dismissed the challenge to Proposition 140, the Make Elections Fair Arizona Act. The court simply released its decision order, promising an explanation later. All the justices on the court supported the ruling.
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club, which spearheaded the challenge to the legal validity of the proposition, was disappointed in the result from the court. Scot Mussi, the President of the conservative organization, said, “We are disappointed in the ruling of the court on this matter. Our organization proved that the special interest groups attempting to hijack Arizona’s elections systems lacked the minimum number to qualify for the ballot to even be considered by voters in November. The special master in this case also ruled that 99% of the signatures in question should be disqualified. The committee behind the measure was aware of the duplicates, yet they obstructed and delayed the review of the duplicate signatures for over a month.”
Sarah Smallhouse, Chairperson of the Make Elections Fair Committee, said, “The Make Elections Fair Committee is thrilled with our latest victory for Prop. 140 before the Supreme Court. 32 days from now we will celebrate again when all Arizonans are liberated from the grip of partisan primary elections. It’s time to move forward. It’s time for open primaries in Arizona.”
“Our opponents engaged in blatant attempts to manipulate the system, undermining the democratic process with misleading tactics. This deliberate misconduct was rightfully rejected by the courts, ensuring that Arizona voters were not disenfranchised. The court’s decision upheld the integrity of our elections and protected the right of every voter to have a fair and transparent choice,” said Chuck Coughlin the campaign treasurer.
According to the Make Elections Fair PAC, Prop 140 would do the following if it is approved by Arizona voters: “Eliminates taxpayer funding for partisan elections; All candidates can run and will appear on the same ballot; Same signature requirements for all candidates; No funding for Partisan Presidential Primary unless unaffiliated voters are included; Every voter can participate in every election.”
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club has a different perspective on the ballot measure. In a press release, the Club stated that Prop 140 would do the following if enacted:
- “Allows one politician, the Arizona Secretary of State, to decide how many candidates qualify for the general election ballot for every single contest, including his or her own race
- Would result in some races where candidates from only one political party appear on the general election ballot
- Would force voters to navigate two completely different voting systems on the same ballot, with some races requiring voters to rank candidates and others that do not
- Will increase tabulation errors, create longer lines at the polls, and significantly delay election results.”
A couple of Arizona political parties weighed in on the official inclusion of Proposition 140 for voter consideration. The Republican Party of Arizona posted, “ACTION ALERT The awful California style Ranked Choice Voting measure DISGUISED as an ‘open primary’ will appear on AZ ballots. We need EVERYONE to join us on the NO ON PROP 140 campaign to Save Arizona.”
The Arizona Libertarian Party agreed, writing, “The AZLP approves this message. Prop 140 could effectively kill third-party and independent candidates. Vote no!”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
