by Ethan Faverino | Mar 1, 2026 | News
By Ethan Faverino |
In a decisive step to strengthen voter confidence and streamline Arizona’s election processes, the Arizona House of Representatives passed HCR 2016, a proposed constitutional amendment sponsored by Representative Rachel Keshel (R-LD17).
HCR 2016 seeks to require in-person voting to take place exclusively at designated precinct polling places, eliminating the use of countywide voting centers, emergency voting centers, and on-site early voting locations.
If approved by voters in the upcoming election, the resolution would cap election precincts at no more than 2,500 registered voters at the time precincts are designated. It would also remove statutory authority for voting centers and related provisions in election administration, electioneering, and unlawful acts statutes.
“Arizonans want elections they can understand, observe, and trust, and the precinct model delivers that,” stated Rep. Keshel. “HCR 2016 puts Election Day voting back where it belongs: at clearly designated polling places tied to precincts, with reasonable precinct sizes that are easier to staff and manage. Voting centers and last-minute location changes create confusion, weaken consistent procedures, and slow results. This helps restore faith in our elections for Republicans, Independents, and Democrats who expect clear rules and timely results.”
The resolution would end the option for in-person voting at on-site early voting locations through 7:00 p.m. on the Friday before an election and eliminate references allowing on-site tabulation of early ballots at voting centers.
House republicans advanced HCR 2016 as a key priority under the House Republican Majority Plan to secure elections by reinforcing the structure of in-person voting and empowering Arizona voters to decide the issue directly at the ballot box.
The measure aligns with broader efforts to ensure fast, accurate ballot counting for timely results, protect election integrity, and promote transparency.
Secure elections remain a top focus for Arizona Republicans, who emphasize that voters deserve free, fair, and transparent processes where ballots are counted quickly and results are known sooner. HCR 2016 supports these goals by addressing structural elements that contribute to delays and confusion in election administration.
The measure now advances to the Arizona Senate for further consideration.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Feb 26, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona House Concurrent Resolution 2048, sponsored by State Representative Michael Way (R-LD15), passed the Arizona House Government Committee last week in a party-line vote and now heads to the full Arizona House of Representatives.
HCR 2048 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would prohibit salary increases for elected state officers from taking effect during their current term. It would also require legislators, the Governor, and other statewide executive officers to forgo regular salaries and subsistence payments if the general appropriation bill is not signed into law by April 30.
The measure states that compensation withheld during a budget delay would not be paid retroactively. Salaries would resume with the first full pay period after the budget becomes law.
“If we do not pass a budget on time, we should not get paid. It is that simple,” Way said in a statement. “Arizonans are expected to meet deadlines in their jobs. Lawmakers should be held to that same standard. If we fail to finish the budget by April 30, there should be consequences.”
The resolution is described as complementing House Concurrent Resolution 2005, introduced by Rep. Justin Wilmeth (R-LD2), which would require the Legislature to adjourn its regular session by April 30.
“Deadlines matter,” Way said. “Families and businesses across Arizona operate on them every day. State government should do the same.”
If approved by the full Legislature, HCR 2048 would be referred to Arizona voters at the next general election.
Way represents Legislative District 15, which includes Mesa and Queen Creek in Maricopa County and San Tan Valley in Pinal County.
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 Matthew Holloway | Feb 11, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona lawmakers advanced a constitutional proposal last week that would set a firm deadline for ending the Legislature’s regular session, a major procedural change supporters say would provide a clearer structure for what is currently an open-ended calendar.
Under the state’s current system, the Arizona Constitution requires lawmakers to convene the regular session on the second Monday in January each year, but does not set a deadline for when that session must end. Regular sessions in recent years have stretched into late spring or early summer, with the 2025 session adjourned on June 27 after roughly 169 days in session.
The absence of a constitutional adjournment deadline means lawmakers can continue legislative work beyond traditional spring months, even though state law governs per diem reimbursements for extended sessions.
By contrast, other states employ more rigid schedules. Texas lawmakers meet in regular session once every two years for a constitutionally limited period, and adjourn by a set date unless a special session is called. In 2025, for example, the Texas Legislature concluded its most recent regular session in early June as the statutory timeline expired.
The House Government Committee on Wednesday passed House Concurrent Resolution 2005 (HCR 2005), sponsored by State Representative Justin Wilmeth (R-LD2) of North Phoenix. The resolution would amend the Arizona Constitution to mandate that the Legislature adjourn its regular session sine die no later than April 30 each year.
Under the proposal, lawmakers could still convene special sessions after April 30, but those would be subject to the subjects specified in the Governor’s call. If HCR 2005 clears both chambers of the Legislature, it would be placed on the ballot at the next general election for voter approval.
Wilmeth said the measure is aimed at restoring discipline and accountability to the legislative calendar. “I appreciate the committee moving this measure forward, allowing the discussion to continue,” he said in a statement.
“This proposal is about accountability and discipline. Arizonans expect the Legislature to do its job, pass a budget, and finish its work on time. President Ronald Reagan kept a sign on his desk in the Oval Office that said, ‘It CAN be done.’ I agree with that. Finishing our work by April 30 is achievable, and it should be the standard.”
Wilmeth, a Republican member of the Arizona House of Representatives and Chairman of the House Committee on Artificial Intelligence & Innovation, introduced the constitutional adjournment proposal earlier this year.
Supporters of the resolution have pointed to frequently extended sessions, which in recent years have stretched deep into spring and summer, as justification for a defined end date. In several recent cycles, lawmakers did not adjourn until June, well past traditional deadlines for bill passage and budget agreement.
In a post to X on January 23, Wilmeth wrote, “Decades ago, we told the people we’d have a part-time legislature conducted by citizen-legislators. Nowadays, the legislative session basically goes seven months! That’s unacceptable to me. It’s just responsible government to stick to our part-time commitment.”
If voters approve a constitutional amendment, Arizona would become one of the states with a fixed legislative deadline, rather than relying on internal legislative rules and per diem incentives to guide the calendar. That model differs from states like Texas, where sessions are inherently limited by statute or constitution and extend only through specified time windows.
HCR 2005 now moves to further consideration in the Arizona House as it continues through the legislative process.
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 Ethan Faverino | Feb 6, 2026 | News
By Ethan Faverino |
State Representative Michael Way (R-LD15) has introduced House Concurrent Resolution 2048 (HCR 2048), a proposed constitutional amendment that would hold Arizona’s elected officials financially accountable for failing to pass a state budget on time.
If approved by the Arizona Legislature and subsequently by voters in the next general election, HCR 2048 would amend Article V, Section 12 of the Arizona Constitution.
The measure would require that the Governor, all statewide executive officers—including the Secretary of State, Attorney General, State Treasurer, Superintendent of Public Instruction, and Lieutenant Governor—as well as all members of the Legislature, forgo their regular salaries and subsistence payments whenever the general appropriation bill for the upcoming fiscal year has not been signed into law by April 30.
Compensation withheld under this provision would not be paid retroactively once a budget is finally enacted; instead, salaries and payments would resume only on a forward basis, beginning with the first full pay period after the budget becomes law.
“Taxpayers do not get paid for work they do not finish, and lawmakers should not be treated any differently,” expressed Rep. Way. “We are elected to do one essential job each year, pass a state budget. If we fail to meet that deadline, we should not collect a paycheck.”
Rep. Way noted that Arizona has long experienced recurring delays in budget passage, with deadlines frequently treated more as flexible guidelines than firm requirements. “For too long, budget deadlines have been treated as suggestions instead of requirements,” Rep. Way added. “HCR 2048 changes the incentive structure and makes elected officials accountable for doing the job they were sent here to do.”
The resolution operates alongside HCR 2005, which would require the Legislature to adjourn its regular session by April 30 of each year. Together, the two measures aim to shorten the prolonged legislative sessions and bring greater discipline to the annual budget process.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Jan 24, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
A proposed constitutional amendment aimed at reshaping Arizona’s election system passed its first major legislative hurdle in a hearing on Wednesday, as the Arizona House Committee on Federalism, Military Affairs & Elections (FMAE) approved Rep. Alexander Kolodin’s (R-LD3) Arizona Secure Elections Act.
The Committee advanced House Concurrent Resolution 2001 with a 4-3 vote. It now heads to the House Rules Committee. If approved by both chambers of the Arizona Legislature, the measure would be referred to voters on the November 2026 general election ballot.
Kolodin announced the committee hearing on social media ahead of the meeting.
According to supporters, HCR 2001 is intended to address concerns about voter confidence following recent election cycles. If approved by voters, the constitutional amendment would establish several requirements for statewide election administration.
Those provisions include limiting voter registration and participation to U.S. citizens, prohibiting foreign contributions to candidates or ballot initiatives, and requiring government-issued identification in order to vote.
Additional requirements would mandate that early voting concludes no later than 7:00 p.m. on the Friday preceding a Tuesday general election, prohibit the acceptance of ballots after polls close on Election Day, preserve in-person voting options at accessible polling locations, and require mail-in voters to verify their address each election cycle.
Committee Debate
During the hearing before the committee, Kolodin described HCR 2001 as an effort to overhaul Arizona’s election system by drawing comparisons to reforms adopted in Florida after the 2000 presidential election.
“This year the Arizona State Legislature will give the voters of Arizona the opportunity to transform our system of elections from a national embarrassment to a national model,” Kolodin told committee members, arguing that Florida’s reforms improved election security, sped up results, and increased voter satisfaction.
Kolodin urged lawmakers to advance the measure, saying the proposal would allow voters to address longstanding concerns about election administration.
Democrats raised concerns about voter access and election logistics. Rep. Aaron Márquez (D-LD5) argued that the proposal would effectively end the active early voting list and push large numbers of voters back into in-person voting without funding for additional polling locations, potentially creating longer lines on Election Day.
Kolodin rejected that characterization, emphasizing that HCR 2001 is a constitutional ballot referral rather than a statutory change.
“You have mistaken assumptions right off the bat,” Kolodin said. “It’s not a piece of legislation. It’s not modifying statutory law. This is a constitutional ballot referral.”
Kolodin explained that constitutional amendments are intended to establish broad governing principles, while election administration details are left to statute.
“In a statute, you want to be prescriptivist,” he said. “With a constitutional amendment, you must refrain from being overly prescriptivist,” noting that constitutional provisions are designed to endure for generations.
Addressing concerns about early voting, Kolodin said the proposal would not eliminate early or mail-in voting but would require voters to confirm their address each election cycle before automatically receiving a ballot.
Kolodin also defended the proposal’s voter identification requirements, arguing that the current signature verification system is imprecise and can result in lawful ballots being rejected.
“Our current system of signature verification, which is incredibly imprecise, leads to a large number of valid votes sometimes be[ing] rejected. It’s a very imperfect system. A more precise system, where a definite match can be obtained, where you don’t have to squint at the loops and the squiggles to try to figure out the signatures match, or if a ballot should be sent to curing, and potentially rejected, but where there’s something where it’s binary: it’s either a yes or no. There’s no matter of opinion there [that] will actually lead to fewer votes cast by lawful voters being rejected in the system,” Kolodin said.
Advocacy Groups Weigh In
The Arizona branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, represented by Katelynn Contreras, opposed the Resolution during the public comment period, stating, “HCR 2001 does not improve election integrity. Instead, it will restrict access for eligible voters to create confusion and rigid, unworkable rules in the Arizona Constitution. This resolution significantly curtails early and non-voting options that most Arizonans rely on.“ The ACLU representative cited what she described as survey data, claiming that 70 percent of Arizona voters say elections are fair and that roughly 80 percent vote by mail or early, and suggested that the ballot measure would “ban a method of voting that is widely used in the state.”
The figures cited by the ACLU couldn’t be independently verified by AZ Free News.
Asked to clarify the claim, Contreras said the measure would create “new discretionary areas that could be used to restrict mail voting for future.” Kolodin responded, “Mr. chair, I just wish to point out that that is untrue. OK, I just want to put that very clearly.”
The Arizona Freedom Caucus has promoted the proposal on its social media channels since the resolution’s prefiling in November, identifying it as a legislative priority and encouraging public engagement ahead of committee consideration. Arizona House Republican accounts have also circulated prior statements from Kolodin outlining the proposal’s intent.
Arizona Freedom Caucus Chairman Jake Hoffman (R-LD15) urged legislative leaders to advance the proposal following committee review.
“The Arizona Freedom Caucus is grateful that AFC Member Representative Alexander Kolodin has once again provided much-needed leadership in the critical mission to secure Arizona’s elections today and into the future,” Hoffman said. “Once it is heard by the FMAE Committee this week, I urge House Leadership to move it quickly to a floor vote and then send it to the Senate.”
Kolodin criticized the objections raised during the hearing, saying opponents had failed to cite provisions supporting claims that the measure would end early voting.
“We have now reached the point where the opposition to this measure has become truly silly,” Kolodin said, arguing that the proposal would expand, not restrict, voting opportunities.
He added, “It is time for the people of Arizona to have the opportunity to get their kids and their grandkids, my kids and your kids, an election system that we can be proud of, an election system that actually works, instead of inconveniencing and disenfranchising voters, and an election system that provides more opportunities for community participation by casting one’s vote at the polls or to return you ballot to the polls as you prefer. And it’s time, in other words, to take this choice out of the hands of politicians and put it in the hands of the people who actually deserve to have it: you, the voters of Arizona, and that’s where we’re sending it, despite the opposition.”
AZ Free News previously reported on Kolodin’s election integrity proposals and related legislative efforts, including the prefiling of HCR 2001 and its Senate mirror measure, SCR 1001, in November 2025. The Senate resolution, introduced by Sen. Shawnna Bolick (R-LD20), passed a hearing with the Senate Judiciary Committee 4-3 on Wednesday and will be heard next by the Senate Rules Committee.
The resolution must be approved by both the Arizona House and Senate before it can be referred to voters for consideration in 2026.
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.
