by Daniel Stefanski | Sep 20, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Arizonans are pessimistic about the future of their state.
Last month, Noble Predictive Insights (NPI) conducted a poll of over 1,000 registered voters in Arizona, showing “a picture of a state grappling with general pessimism and shifting priorities for voters.”
The survey from NPI indicated that 60% of respondents believed that Arizona is going in the wrong direction, compared to 40% who believe that the state is on the right track. The negative responses were up from the start of Governor Katie Hobbs’ administration in January 2023, when 55% believed the state was headed in the wrong direction, and 45% believed Arizona was headed in the right direction.
According to NPI, “In August, Republicans were overwhelmingly pessimistic, with 77% believing the state is on the wrong track. Within the party, the discontentment is slightly more pronounced among Trump-First Republicans (81%) compared to Party-First Republicans (77%). Democrats, on the other hand, are broadly optimistic – two-thirds say Arizona is on the right track, with Party-First Democrats (68%) and Harris-First Democrats (67%) in general agreement. Independents’ views on Arizona’s direction line up closest to the toplines with 64% unhappy with the trajectory of the state.”
“It’s not hard to see why pessimism increased in this period. In early 2022, a COVID-19 survey hit the state. And since then, Arizonans have told us that inflation has become more and more of a pain point,” said David Byler, NPI Chief of Research. “Partisanship plays a role too. Longtime Republican Arizonans are watching the state turn purple – and they blame newcomers from Oregon, Washington, California, and other blue states. Democrats – whether longtime residents or new arrivals – are greeting this political change with more warmth. So, partisanship plays a role – but so do real-life conditions.”
Additionally, the release from NPI highlighted that “the poll also found that the length of residency in Arizona correlates with outlook on the state’s trajectory. The longer a respondent has lived in Arizona, the less satisfied they are with the direction of the state. Recent transplants – those who have moved to Arizona within the last five years – were more likely to believe the state is headed in the right direction (56%).”
In an exclusive comment to AZ Free News, Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen said, “Republicans in Arizona have been passing good policies for more than a decade, prompting hundreds of people to move to our state every day. We used to be able to keep up with the demand for affordable housing. Unfortunately, since the Governor entered office, she has implemented policies restricting our housing supply, which have forced prices to rise. The pessimistic attitudes are a direct result of the partisan games being played by the Governor, and our citizens are paying the price.”
House Speaker Ben Toma added, “Arizonans are bearing the brunt of an economy weakened by the Biden-Harris administration’s inflationary policies. Hardworking families are desperate for relief, but the failure of Democratic leadership in Washington and locally continues to erode the successful conservative policies that once drove record economic growth, reduced costs, and fueled confidence in our future.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Sep 6, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A border security ballot measure might be headed for victory this coming November if numbers from a recent poll hold up.
This week, Noble Predictive Insights (NPI) released a poll, showing that Proposition 314 (the Secure the Border Act) was receiving 63% support for passage. Only 16% of respondents indicated that they were opposing the measure at the ballot box.
According to a press release issued by NPI, “Not all components of the expansive Prop 314 are equally popular. According to the poll, supporters of the measure most strongly back two of its planks: holding drug dealers responsible for the death of a person who consumes a drug containing fentanyl (77% support), and requiring employers to verify the immigration status of workers (75% support). Their feelings are more mixed (56% support) about reforms surrounding how migrants obtain public benefits. Among those who oppose Prop 314, 31% oppose the punishments for fentanyl dealers, 47% are against immigration status verification in the workplace, and 64% oppose the portion determining how migrants obtain public benefits.”
“Opponents will have trouble pushing the argument ‘people are only supporting this because of the fentanyl stuff, they don’t care about the immigration’ – that’s what voters like most about Prop 314,” said Mike Noble, NPI Founder & CEO. “Prop 314 is popular across party lines, and that is a difficult trend to disrupt with only a couple of months until Election Day.”
Proposition 314 was referred to the ballot by Republicans in the Arizona Legislature after Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs and left-wing legislators rebuffed most efforts from conservative lawmakers to pass legislation over the past two years to help secure the border and give law enforcement more tools to protect their communities. After the measure was transmitted to the Arizona Secretary of State, progressive interest groups opposed to the efforts challenged the legislation in court in an attempt to keep it from the ballot. However, multiple state courts rejected those lawsuits and gave the greenlight for voter consideration of Prop 314 in the November General Election.
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen, who was instrumental in making sure Prop 314 made the ballot, reacted to the news of the NPI polling, telling AZ Free News, “The polling goes hand in hand from what I am hearing from my constituents. They are worried about border security. I think it shows how out of touch our democratic legislators are at the Capitol. Every single Democrat voted ‘no’ on this measure. I’m glad the voters will get to decide this.”
House Speaker Ben Toma, who was the sponsor of the legislative vehicle for the measure, added, “The polling is consistent with what we’ve been hearing from Arizonans all along—they are frustrated with the open border policies of the Biden-Harris administration and are demanding change. They want a secure border and safer communities. Proposition 314 offers meaningful, commonsense reforms to protect our communities, and I am confident it will pass in November.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Jul 29, 2024 | Education, News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A powerful Arizona organization is attempting to coax the state’s once-invincible champion for school choice into fighting back against one of its most fierce opponents.
Last week, John Thorpe, a Staff Attorney with the Goldwater Institute, sent a letter to Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne, over his office’s continued capitulation to Attorney General Kris Mayes over the interpretation of certain laws pertaining to the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program.
The letter from the Goldwater Institute sought “to bring some clarity to the issues of (1) whether the use of ESA funds for ‘supplementary expenses’ requires an explicitly documented ‘nexus’ to a curriculum approved by the Department of Education, and (2) whether ESA funds are subject to the AG’s authority under [state statutes].”
This communication addressed an earlier email from Arizona Department of Education ESA Executive Director, John Ward, to parents within the program, informing them about a letter he had received from Mayes’ Solicitor General. According to Ward, that letter “stated that some ESA program practices are inconsistent with State law and result in payment of ESA funds without authorization of law, [and that] the Solicitor General’s Office has directed the ESA program to address the issues it identified.”
The Attorney General’s Office cited two Arizona statutes to bolster its argument that “the Arizona Department of Education has approved certain supplemental items and textbooks without requiring curricula, which may result in ‘illegal payment of public monies.’” Ward told parents that “ADE has no choice but to comply with the Solicitor General’s determination,” forcing families to “submit a curriculum with all supplemental materials requested or purchased” – something that he even noted was a practice “in place since before the current ADE administration.”
Horne’s acceptance of Mayes’ interpretation of the law was surprising to many members of the public, being that his office has been at odds with the Attorney General’s Office on almost every issue related to this program. Previously, Horne issued several statements expressing his unabashed opposition to the Democrat Attorney General’s persistent attacks on the ESA program and vowing to match her office step for step in defense of parents.
In Thorpe’s letter, he argues that “the law does not condition families’ rights to buy supplemental materials on an explicitly documented ‘curriculum nexus,’” and that “Arizona families’ ESA dollars are not ‘public monies.’”
Thorpe concluded his letter to the state’s schools chief, writing, “The AG’s power to investigate misuse of public monies does not give her the authority to prevent your office from allowing Arizona families to use their ESA funds for statutorily permitted uses. Nor does the law require you, or those families, to justify every textbook or ‘supplementary expenditure’ with a Department-approved curriculum nexus or documentation from a private school.”
On the same day of the Goldwater letter, Ward sent another email to ESA families in response to questions of his department “to provide additional guidance on what is required to use Empowerment Scholarships to purchase supplemental materials” – perhaps signaling that Horne and the Arizona Department of Education would not be backing down from its surrender to Mayes. Ward stated that “ADE would like to provide you with an updated template of Parent-Prepared Curriculum that you can use to submit with your requests for supplemental materials.”
One of the state’s most ardent and effective advocates of the ESA program, Christine Accurso, linked to the Goldwater letter on her social media platform, adding her own commentary about how parents should react to the decision from the Arizona Department of Education on these supplemental materials for their ESA accounts. She said, “ESA parents should have absolutely no fear with submitting orders (for direct purchase or for reimbursement) that includes items that are obvious supplemental educational materials. If an order gets rejected, then email asking them to approve it. If you get an email or communication about your order that says it is the ‘department’s final administrative decision’ then you can go to the State Board of Education and file an appeal. However, you must have proof that the department has given its ‘final administrative decision’ before submitting an appeal to the SBE.”
The Goldwater Institute’s public foray into this controversial action from the Republican Superintendent’s Office follows a letter that was previously sent to Horne from Arizona House Speaker Ben Toma, a fellow Republican. In his letter, Toma wrote, “I understand that you may have no choice but to cooperate with the Attorney General’s politically-motivated investigation. However, ADE is best situated to determine how to implement its policies in a way that fulfills legislative intent but does not burden parents with unnecessary bureaucratic requirements.”
Toma added, “As you implement your Department’s policies, I urge you to scrutinize Attorney General Mayes’ unsolicited legal advice expressed in her July 1, 2024, letter, consider how her interpretation of Arizona statutes would impact parents throughout the state, and reject her interpretation of the law that would lead to absurd results.”
In a blog post for the Goldwater Institute, Matt Beienburg referenced Toma’s letter, stating, “As noted by Arizona Speaker of the House Ben Toma, the unprecedented intrusion and second-guessing by the AG’s office into ADE’s administration of the ESA program is just the office’s latest attempt to advance a novel legal theory in order to hijack the legislative deliberations and decisions of state lawmakers. Indeed, just days before firing off its attack against ADE for its application of state statute, the AG’s office was forced to concede and drop its efforts to override the provisions of the recent bipartisan state budget agreement. The AG’s demands against the ESA program should similarly be rejected by the state department of education, the state board of education, and the judicial system of Arizona.”
A few days removed from the Goldwater Institute letter, the Arizona Department of Education sent another email to ESA parents, informing them of a virtual meeting with Horne, Ward, and others from the department to “provide account holders with an opportunity to have their questions answered regarding the new curricula requirements for supplemental materials.” However, families will not be able to ask their questions live and unfiltered. Instead, as per the electronic notice, “the format for the virtual meeting will be the Department of Education reading and answering questions that have been submitted to it by ESA Holders.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Jul 15, 2024 | Education, News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Another political battle may be brewing over Arizona’s historic school choice program.
Earlier this week, Arizona House Speaker Ben Toma sent a letter to Tom Horne, the state’s Superintendent of Public Instruction (ADE), over his department’s controversial decision to acquiesce to Attorney General Kris Mayes’ demands to increase regulation of the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program.
In his letter, Toma wrote, “I understand that you may have no choice but to cooperate with the Attorney General’s politically-motivated investigation. However, ADE is best situated to determine how to implement its policies in a way that fulfills legislative intent but does not burden parents with unnecessary bureaucratic requirements.”
Toma added, “As you implement your Department’s policies, I urge you to scrutinize Attorney General Mayes’ unsolicited legal advice expressed in her July 1, 2024, letter, consider how her interpretation of Arizona statutes would impact parents throughout the state, and reject her interpretation of the law that would lead to absurd results.”
The Republican Speaker’s communication addressed an email from ADE ESA Executive Director, John Ward, to parents within the program, informing them about a letter he had received from Mayes’ Solicitor General. According to Ward, that letter “stated that some ESA program practices are inconsistent with State law and result in payment of ESA funds without authorization of law, [and that] the Solicitor General’s Office has directed the ESA program to address the issues it identified.”
The Attorney General’s Office cited two Arizona statutes to bolster its argument that “the Arizona Department of Education has approved certain supplemental items and textbooks without requiring curricula, which may result in ‘illegal payment of public monies.’” Ward told parents that “ADE has no choice but to comply with the Solicitor General’s determination,” forcing families to “submit a curriculum with all supplemental materials requested or purchased” – something that he even noted was a practice “in place since before the current ADE administration.”
Horne’s acceptance of Mayes’ interpretation of the law was surprising to many onlookers, being that his office has been at odds with the Attorney General’s Office on almost every issue related to this program. Previously, Horne issued a number of statements that expressed his ardent opposition to the Democrat Attorney General’s persistent attacks on the ESA program and vowing to match her office step for step in defense of parents.
One of the foremost experts and defenders of the ESA program, Christine Accurso, addressed this action by Horne’s office, writing, “I joined the ESA program as a parent in 2014 and in all of the years we participated, I never had to submit curriculum that listed pencils and paper (for example) as something I can use ESA funds for. This new regulation is not what the legislature intended. If you go back and listen to the many years of committee hearings you will clearly hear the lawmakers desired to give parents access to tax dollars to provide an excellent education for their child, putting them on equal footing financially (while providing a 10% savings) to what the state funds in the public schools. I don’t know of a school district in Arizona, let alone America, who has curriculum for such obvious supplemental educational materials, as noted above.”
Accurso’s sentiments were reciprocated by Speaker Toma, who in his letter to Horne, stated, “it appears that the Attorney General’s Office is advancing an argument that documentation is required for most ESA-related expenses. The legislative record does not support such an overtly restrictive view or burdensome administration of the ESA program.”
Speaker Toma concluded his letter by expressing his appreciation for Horne’s “willingness to discuss these implementation issues with legislators who – like parents – are understandably concerned about the Attorney General’s letter.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Jul 1, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Arizona Republicans won a significant victory over the state’s Democrat attorney general in state court over a funding dispute for the recently approved budget.
Earlier this week, a Maricopa County Superior Court Judge ruled in favor of Republicans’ arguments after Attorney General Kris Mayes sued over a funding mechanism set in motion by the new budget that was negotiated by the state legislature and Governor Katie Hobbs.
Attorney General Mayes had filed suit after officials transferred $115 million in opioid settlement dollars to close funding shortfalls in the state’s appropriations.
“This was a frivolous case brought by the Attorney General,” said Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen. “Facts matter. Laws matter. And our taxpayers are best served when our elected officials uphold the rule of law. Once again, I’m grateful we have checks and balances in place to ensure this principle is followed.”
House Speaker Ben Toma said, “I’m pleased with the judge’s decision to dissolve the temporary restraining order, which AG Mayes wrongly sought. Now the funds will be lawfully spent by the Department of Corrections, as intended in the budget and to help individuals impacted by opioids.”
Previously, Petersen and Toma submitted a brief to the court, where they wrote, “Plaintiff Kris Mayes has no constitutional or statutory authority to unilaterally deploy attorneys to disrupt Arizona’s constitutionally mandated budgetary and legislative process – pursuant to which the Legislature and Governor develop public policy and institute a fiscal scheme to ensure those policies are carried out. Yet here, the Attorney General improperly seeks to use the judiciary as a tool to effectuate her unilateral dissatisfaction with the public policy decision made by the Legislature and Governor in the most recent general appropriations act, HB 2897 and the carrying out of other statutorily authorized duties.”
The Republicans explained that the opioid funds under dispute “are only to be transferred from one governmental account to another,” and that “the bill expressly limits the appropriated funds to Approved Purposes.”
The ruling from Judge Hannah overturned a temporary victory for Mayes last week, when a court commissioner had granted her office a temporary restraining order over the actions from the legislature and governor. In reacting to the previous decision, Mayes said, “The decision by the Governor and the Legislature to sweep opioid settlement funds to backfill budget deficits is illegal, and today I asked the court for an injunction to stop the transfer of these funds. In their rush to end the session, GOP leaders and the Governor ignored other viable options to balance the budget, such as utilizing the rainy-day fund, which has now reached approximately $1.4 billion. This is outrageous.”
Mayes added, “Every Arizonan should ask why the opioid funds were not protected and used to support our communities and prevent opioid use as intended. This decision violates the settlement agreements, and I am determined to stop it. That’s why I made the difficult decision to sue over this issue. This is too important, with too many lives at risk, to get wrong.”
This is the second year in a row that Mayes has been on the losing end of the state’s budget process. Last year, the second-year attorney general sent a letter to Governor Hobbs and the Arizona Legislature, expressing her alarm for the “Legislature sweeping the authority of the Attorney General to direct funds received through consent judgments against several pharmaceutical companies for their roles in the opioid crisis.”
She warned, “Sweeping this authority from the Attorney General would be a breach of the consent judgments, and as Attorney General I will not stand by and allow this to happen. I fully intend to consult with the Legislature as the judgments dictate. Any proposal that contradicts this provision by having the Legislature instead direct how the state funds will be used is not acceptable, and I am prepared to go to court to ensure that the State is able to obtain and properly direct those funds for opioid treatment, prevention and education if warranted.”
Republican State Representative David Livingston sent Mayes a letter in response to her 2023 threat, pointing out that the Legislature does, in fact, have a say in how the funds are used. He wrote, “Attorney General Mayes should learn the facts first, and accurately convey those facts in committee hearings, before making demands and threats to sue the Legislature and the Governor over the budget.”
Both the governor and Republicans in the Arizona Legislature have additional history with Mayes than at the point of last year’s episode, that may lend more toxicity to actions by all the parties involved in this political battle. Earlier this spring, Mayes secured indictments of two Republican State Senators over certain efforts undertaken in the aftermath of the 2020 General Election. Also, Mayes has been extremely vocal in attempting to lead an investigation of the Governor’s Office over allegations of impropriety and / or unlawful behavior from one of her state agencies.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
