For years, Arizona has been an emerging bastion of conservative leadership. Recently the AZ Republic called the Legislature the “most conservative” ever. Over the last decade it has passed landmark policies and defended critical laws around the country, setting an example for the rest of the nation to emulate.
This conservative advantage was threatened a few short years ago, when Katie Hobbs and Kris Mayes assumed their positions as Arizona governor and attorney general, respectively, after an extremely volatile election cycle. These two have stopped at nothing to insert their radical agenda as they seek to transform our state into a liberal utopia to please their friends in California and New York.
While Hobbs has sought to remake Arizona’s policies from her perch as the state’s chief executive, Mayes has been busy on the legal side. Throughout her tenure in office, Mayes has either done the bare minimum or nothing at all to defend key Arizona or national laws. Instead, she has spearheaded the left’s efforts to undermine President Trump’s work to make America great again.
Thankfully, however, the Arizona Legislature, under my leadership as Senate President, has stepped in the gap to uphold laws of great importance to our citizens. Despite our state’s top prosecutor missing in action as she seeks affirmation from her colleagues in New York and California, we have led or joined dozens of lawsuits and legal briefs to preserve conservative laws across our state and nation. These efforts have largely been unprecedented, as legislatures typically defer to their state attorneys general or other government prosecutors on the legal fronts. From early on, though, in Arizona’s divided government, I determined that our state could not afford to sit on the sidelines as Mayes hijacked our legal apparatus for her extremist ways. As a result, Arizona has again asserted itself as a national example, showing other states how to maintain the rule of law in the face of divided governments.
Here are some of the highlights of the cases:
Protecting Election Integrity
In the absence of the state’s attorney general taking action, the Arizona Legislature has been engaged in a prolonged legal battle to protect the integrity of our state’s elections, defending two laws that restrict voters who do not provide documentation that confirm their American citizenship. After I filed an emergency stay application at the U.S. Supreme Court, the Justices affirmed Arizona’s right to reject state form registrations that do not include proof of citizenship. This case is ongoing because of activist judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals who are attempting to circumvent the Supreme Court’s ruling. Arizona will continue to defend our own law, and we will come to the aid of any state working to require proof of citizenship.
Protecting the Integrity of Women’s Sports
Over half the states in America have enacted legislation to preserve fairness in sports, including Arizona, which passed the Save Women’s Sports Act, to ensure that girls’ athletic events at public schools are reserved for biological females. Arizona’s law, like most other states, remains tied up in federal litigation, with the Legislature itself stepping in to defend the statute after Mayes declined to do so. We defended Arizona’s law up to the U.S. Supreme Court, in addition to filing briefs of support for other states’ fights. We cannot allow activist judges and radical groups to erase protections that women and girls have fought for generations to secure.
Protecting Children
The Arizona Legislature defended the state’s lifetime registration and reporting requirements for convicted sex offenders, giving families and law enforcement greater abilities to track high-risk offenders. Despite the importance of the protections, Mayes failed to defend the law, abandoning the state’s responsibility to safeguard communities. However, we refused to allow the safety of our children to be jeopardized, and we recently won in federal court. The judge’s ruling in this case was a victory for every parent in Arizona.
Protecting the Second Amendment
The Arizona Legislature joined a national coalition to urge the U.S. Supreme Court to end Mexico’s frivolous lawsuit against U.S. firearm manufacturers for crimes committed by Mexican cartels in that country. Earlier this year, the Court agreed with our position, ruling that the lawsuit infringes on U.S. sovereignty by trying to impose restrictions on Second Amendment rights and to control how the American firearms industry is regulated. We were proud to work with other states to uphold our nation’s sovereignty, protect Americans’ right to bear arms, and safeguard lawful gun manufacturers from those attempting to destroy this industry. I will always engage in legal battles to protect our Second Amendment rights when Mayes refuses to do so.
Protecting Against Federal Land Grabs
Two years ago, the Biden-Harris administration confiscated nearly a million acres of land in northern Arizona, designating this space as a “national monument.” This unlawful designation will result in fewer jobs, diminished state trust land values, and billions in lost tax revenues. I sought to overturn this action in federal court to free our state from the grasp radical environmentalists had over the previous administration. As we argued throughout this case, Biden’s maneuver had nothing to do with protecting actual artifacts, but halting all mining, ranching, and other local uses of federal lands that are critical to our independence from adversary foreign nations, our food supply, and the strength of our economy.
Protecting America’s Energy
After the Arizona Legislature joined a national coalition to challenge a radical and costly rule imposed by California requiring trucking companies to retire their diesel-fueled models, the state agreed to repeal its ‘Advanced Clean Fleets’ mandate. This rule would have created dire impacts to the supply chain, raising costs for local trucking companies and their customers. For years, California has operated with near impunity as its leaders passed unconstitutional regulations that brought great harms to Arizona consumers. In the absence of our attorney general holding California accountable to the rule of law, the state Legislature gladly stepped up to protect our citizens from this egregious abuse of power and emerged victorious.
Warren Petersen is the President of the Arizona State Senate and represents Legislative District 14.
During the latest marathon cabinet meeting on Dec. 2, Energy Secretary Chris Wright made news when he told President Donald Trump that “The biggest determinant of the price of energy is politicians, political leaders, and polices — that’s what drives energy prices.”
He’s right about that, and it is why the back-and-forth struggle over federal energy and climate policy plays such a key role in America’s economy and society. Just 10 months into this second Trump presidency, the administration’s policies are already having a profound impact, both at home and abroad.
While the rapid expansion of AI datacenters over the past year is currently being blamed by many for driving up electric costs, power bills were skyrocketing long before that big tech boom began, driven in large part by the policies of the Obama and Biden administration designed to regulate and subsidize an energy transition into reality. As I’ve pointed out here in the past, driving up the costs of all forms of energy to encourage conservation is a central objective of the climate alarm-driven transition, and that part of the green agenda has been highly effective.
President Trump, Wright, and other key appointees like Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin have moved aggressively throughout 2025 to repeal much of that onerous regulatory agenda. The GOP congressional majorities succeeded in phasing out Biden’s costly green energy subsidies as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Trump signed into law on July 4. As the federal regulatory structure eases and subsidy costs diminish, it is reasonable to expect a gradual easing of electricity and other energy prices.
This year’s fading out of public fear over climate change and its attendant fright narrative spells bad news for the climate alarm movement. The resulting cracks in the green facade have manifested rapidly in recent weeks.
Climate-focused conflict groups that rely on public fears to drive donations have fallen on hard times. According to a report in the New York Times, the Sierra Club has lost 60 percent of the membership it reported in 2019 and the group’s management team has fallen into infighting over elements of the group’s agenda. Greenpeace is struggling just to stay afloat after losing a huge court judgment for defaming pipeline company Energy Transfer during its efforts to stop the building of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
350.org, an advocacy group founded by Bill McKibben, shut down its U.S. operations in November amid funding woes that had forced planned 25 percent budget cuts for 2025 and 2026. Employees at EDF voted to form their own union after the group went through several rounds of budget cuts and layoffs in recent months.
The fading of climate fears in turn caused the ESG management and investing fad to also fall out of favor, leading to a flood of companies backtracking on green investments and climate commitments. The Net Zero Banking Alliance disbanded after most of America’s big banks – Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and others – chose to drop out of its membership.
The EV industry is also struggling. As the Trump White House moves to repeal Biden-era auto mileage requirements, Ford Motor Company is preparing to shut down production of its vaunted F-150 Lightning electric pickup, and Stellantis cancelled plans to roll out a full-size EV truck of its own. Overall EV sales in the U.S. collapsed in October and November following the repeal of the $7,500 per car IRA subsidy effective Sept 30.
The administration’s policy actions have already ended any new leasing for costly and unneeded offshore wind projects in federal waters and have forced the suspension or abandonment of several projects that were already moving ahead. Capital has continued to flow into the solar industry, but even that industry’s ability to expand seems likely to fade once the federal subsidies are fully repealed at the end of 2027.
Truly, public policy matters where energy is concerned. It drives corporate strategies, capital investments, resource development and movement, and ultimately influences the cost of energy in all its forms and products. The speed at which Trump and his key appointees have driven this principle home since Jan. 20 has been truly stunning.
David Blackmon is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, an energy writer, and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
Two months ago, Arizona’s monopoly utilities and their political allies were patting themselves on the back about the expansion and development of a couple of new natural gas projects that they claim will help the Grand Canyon state keep up with growing energy demand.
On the surface, an announcement of new projects like the Transwestern Expansion should have been great news for Arizona ratepayers. Our state is in desperate need of more reliable, dispatchable power; especially after years of reckless green new deal investments that have raised costs and reduced reliability.
But sadly, it turns out that SRP’s enthusiasm for gas isn’t about expanding baseload power on the grid after all. The new gas capacity is instead being used to replace existing coal power generation that SRP has pledged to shut down in Arizona. All to meet ridiculous self-imposed carbon reduction goals and climate commitments that should have been junked a long time ago…
As Americans enjoy their freedom — as they have a God-given right to do — they drive where they want in privately owned cars (gas powered, hybrid, or electric), live comfortably in heated-and-air-conditioned homes, and spend their evenings cooking dinner on gas (or electric stoves), and watching whatever television program or sporting event they choose. All of it brought to them by virtue of abundant and affordable energy.
According to 2024 data published by the U.S. Department of Energy, 82.16 percent of the energy consumed in the United States came from fossil fuels, including coal, petroleum and natural gas. Another 8.67 percent came from nuclear power plants.
In other words, more than 90 percent of the energy used in this country last year came from these sources.
Only 1.64% came from windmills; and only 1.17 percent came from solar panels.
As this nation’s economy and population has grown, so too has its power needs. Since 1960, in fact, the consumption of energy produced by fossil fuels and nuclear power has more than doubled.
But the consumption of nuclear energy peaked in 2019 — and has stagnated since then — while facing a campaign of opposition from liberal environmental groups.
This is ironic, however, because as the use of fossil fuels and nuclear power increased in recent decades, greenhouse gas emissions declined. From 1990 to 2022, for example, fossil fuel consumption increased by 8.64 percent, according to the Department of Energy. But during that same period, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, greenhouse gas emissions declined by three percent.
Nonetheless, groups including the Sierra Club, 350.org, and the National Resources Defense Council have sought not merely to stop the growth of this type of energy production, but to roll it back. In theory, they would replace the production lost from nuclear power and fossil fuels with energy produced from “renewable sources,” including windmills and solar panels.
They are particularly opposed to the development of nuclear power — even though nuclear plants don’t emit greenhouse gases.
“The Sierra Club,” says its website, “continues to oppose construction of any new commercial nuclear fission power plants.”
350.org also opposes the construction of new nuclear plants. “New nuclear,” its website says, “is a dangerous distraction in the race to solve climate change.”
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) argues that “expanding nuclear power is not a sound strategy for diversifying America’s energy portfolio and reducing carbon pollution.”
However, some progress has been made recently in resisting this campaign to foist renewable energy development upon the United States. In 2021, some of this nation’s largest banks — including Wells Fargo, Citi, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley and Bank of America — joined the Net Zero Banking Alliance. This alliance, said the Sierra Club’s magazine, “signaled a commitment by member institutions to develop voluntary targets that support a climate goal of 1.5C above preindustrial levels.” Since then, however, each of these banks has dropped out of the alliance.
Unfortunately, the ”renewables only” advocates have also achieved some victories in recent years.
Since 2001, the Sierra Club’s “Beyond Coal” campaign has supported the closing of more than 300 coal-fired power plants in this country. In 2021, construction of a liquid natural gas export terminal in Oregon was also canceled. Then, in 2023, a proposed gas-fired power plant in Connecticut was canceled, too. These groups also pressured California into nearly shutting down the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, which provides 9% of the state’s electricity, before state energy commissioners voted to extend its operation to 2030.
The relentless campaign to force America away from fossil fuels and nuclear power and towards wind and solar is also driving America toward energy dependence on the People’s Republic of China.
The Heritage Foundation published a report last year by Diana Furchtgott-Roth and Miles Pollard that showed how this is happening. “China has succeeded in dominating the world’s supply chains in green energy products and components,” it said. “If America continues to require the use of these green energy products, it will cede economic power to China, giving China control of American energy security.”
Limiting how we produce energy in the United States will, as a matter of course, impose limitations on our freedom. Reliance on China for our energy supply chain will make our country susceptible to economic coercion. Limiting how we produce energy, means less of it and fewer choices about how to use it. This is of course baked into the climate activists’ view of world, one where experts tell us we must drive EVs, use electric stoves, and eat less meat, so that even the smallest of life’s details are predecided.
To preserve freedom, we must unfetter ourselves from ideologically driven restrictions on fossil fuels and overcome decades of naysaying about nuclear power. In so doing we can ensure a future where abundant affordable energy gives every American real choice, which is the heart of freedom.
Only weeks after refusing to comply with an Executive Order to reactivate the Cholla Power Plant in Northern Arizona, Arizona Public Service (APS) has filed documents with the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) requesting an increase in the state-regulated electrical utility’s revenue of $579.5 million. That equates to a jump in residential electrical rates of approximately 14.5%. The hike would represent a 30% increase in residential rates since 2023.
The utility is also seeking permission from the Commission to unilaterally adjust prices annually using “rate design schedules.” APS justified this request to the ACC in the 2,323-page application docket claiming, “The costs to ensure reliable service to customers have rapidly increased due to high rates of inflation, persistently high interest rates, and continued supply chain and trade policy volatility.”
The utility alleged that a “significant revenue deficiency … based on the 12-month period that ended on December 31, 2024 (Test Year), demonstrates that APS’s current rates do not recover sufficient revenue to ensure reliable service.”
“The tremendous growth across APS’s service territory shows no sign of letting up, with the Company’s infrastructure and reliable energy supply providing the backbone of this historic expansion,” APS said. “And yet, with high rates of inflation, persistently high interest rates, and continued supply chain volatility, the costs to serve current APS customers (let alone prepare for growth) are substantially higher than when the test year concluded in the Company’s last rate case.”
Just one year ago, the ACC approved a rate increase for residential customers of approximately 8 percent. That was followed by significant turnover in the commission with Republican newcomers Rachel Walden and Rene Lopez joining incumbent Lea Márquez Peterson to defeat the Democrat nominees and lock down all five seats for the GOP.
In the upcoming 2026 election, Arizona Reps. David Marshall and Ralph Heap are challenging incumbent commissioners Chairman Kevin Thompson and Vice Chairman Nick Myers. During a Tuesday presser, Marshall and Heap accused the commissioners of excessive price hikes and blocking President Donald Trump’s energy agenda.
“We have some families now who have to make a decision. Do I buy less groceries so I can pay my power bills? Or just deal with it or go without power,” Marshall told reporters.
“The Corporation Commission may not always make the headlines,” he added. “But the decisions made there affect every one of us every single day.”
In a statement responding to the primary challenge from Reps. Marshall and Heap, Commissioners Thompson and Myers defended their record saying, “We’ve taken steps to ensure our utilities are planning responsibly and not chasing costly, agenda-driven energy mandates. That’s why we required APS to prove in its 2023 Integrated Resource Plan that it has enough reliable and dispatchable generation to replace retiring plants. And it’s why we initiated the termination of Kris Mayes’ Renewable Energy Standard, which was an outdated mandate that artificially inflated utility costs by forcing ratepayers to subsidize unreliable, high-cost sources like wind and solar.”
