by Staff Reporter | Apr 10, 2025 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Arizona legislature passed a bill recognizing the existence of only two genders and defining sex-based terms.
The Senate passed HB 2062 on Tuesday along party lines.
The bill from State Rep. Lisa Fink established definitions for the two genders and all related gendered terms: “boy” defined as “a human male who has not yet reached adulthood”; “father” defined as “a male parent of a child or children as defined by law”; “female” defined as “an individual who has, naturally had, will have, or would have, but for a developmental anomaly or accident, the reproductive system that at some point produces ova”; “girl” defined as “a human female who has not yet reached adulthood”; “male” defined as “an individual who has, naturally had, will have, or would have, but for a developmental anomaly or accident, the reproductive system that at some point produces sperm for fertilization of female ova”; “man” defined as “an adult human of the male sex”; and “mother” defined as “a female parent of a child or children as defined by law.”
HB 2062 also defined “sex” to mean “a person’s biological sex, either male or female, at birth.”
Governor Katie Hobbs is unlikely to approve this bill. She vetoed similar legislation last year (SB 1628), writing in a brief explanation letter that she would not harm residents of the state.
“As I have said time and again, I will not sign legislation that attacks Arizonans,” wrote Hobbs.
Hobbs has declared that individuals become the gender they believe they are, as opposed to their biological sex.
The Independent Women’s Network (IWN) — a grassroots activist group heavily involved in preserving sports participation based on biological sex — launched a campaign to urge Hobbs to go back on her past stances on transgenderism and sign HB2062 into law. One of IWN’s most prominent ambassadors is Riley Barker (nee Gaines), the collegiate swimmer turned political activist after losing to Lia Thomas, a male swimmer who identifies as a female.
“Call upon Governor Hobbs to sign this common sense, pro-woman measure into law to prevent sex discrimination in Arizona,” stated IWN. “We cannot fight sex discrimination if we cannot define ‘sex.’”
Senate Democrats argued for the reality of transgenderism. State Sen. Analise Ortiz said that males who believe they are females should be viewed as such.
“This should terrify us because trans women and girls are already a vulnerable population and this would only make them more vulnerable,” said Ortiz. “The explicit goal is to erase trans people from public life, including causing them to lose their jobs. It is wrong. We just need to respect people for who they are.”
The bill passed out of the House in February, where it also passed along party lines.
State Rep. Stephanie Simacek called the reality of gender “narrow and outdated.”
State Rep. Lorena Austin cited “her lived experience” as a “nonbinary” and “gender nonconforming” to argue against the bill. Austin claimed Christians had no right to determine what constituted gender in the law.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Christy Narsi | Oct 28, 2024 | Opinion
By Christy Narsi |
This November, Proposition 140, the Make Elections Fair Arizona Act, will be on the ballot. Prop. 140, if passed, would create a Rank-Choice Voting (RCV) system, where voters rank candidates in order of preference. Supporters of the proposition claim it will incentivize candidates to reach out to as many voters as possible, regardless of party affiliation and “liberate us from the grip of partisan primary elections.”
But will it really make Arizona elections more fair?
RCV may seem logical on the surface, but in reality, it introduces a complex vote tabulation system that lacks transparency and often leads to weird election outcomes.
In most elections, a voter casts a single ballot for the candidate he or she likes most. With RCV’s ranking system, if one candidate receives more than 50 percent of first place votes, the election is over and the candidate with the most votes wins. If, however, no candidate receives more than 50 percent of the votes, election officials conduct a series of closed-door instant runoffs by eliminating the candidate with the fewest first place votes and redistributing those votes to the second choices on those ballots. This process continues (eliminating the last place finisher and redistributing his or her votes) until a faux majority is created for a single candidate.
Today, there is bipartisan support for ensuring every vote counts. Yet RCV guarantees the opposite, and instead will create confusion, dropped votes, and a convoluted system of ballot counting that does not represent the will of the people.
“Ranked Choice Voting can lead to bizarre outcomes where a person who was the first choice of very few voters can still win,” explained Independent Women’s Law Center’s Jennifer C. Braceras. Democratic principles are actually sidelined as RCV encourages candidates and interest groups to play games and try to manipulate outcomes by introducing additional candidates to divert attention from stronger opponents, rather than try to simply bolster their own support.
A study of ballot data from New York City’s 2013 and 2017 general election, and of New York City’s 2021 Democrat mayoral primaries, showed “ballot errors in RCV elections are particularly high in areas with lower levels of education, lower levels of income, higher minority populations, and a higher share of limited English proficient voters.”
Policymakers should be working to make voting easier and more accessible for all Arizonans. Therefore, we should reject schemes such as RCV that make voting more complicated, less accessible, and less transparent.
Voting should be simple: one person, one legal vote; may the best person win. RCV violates this principle by allowing some voters to effectively cast more than one ballot while excluding other voters whose ballots were exhausted prior to the ultimate run-off. RCV is a dangerously complex process that confuses voters and disincentivizes participation. This is a real threat to our democratic process.
Christy Narsi lives in Surprise, AZ. She is the National Chapter Director at Independent Women’s Network (IWN). Christy is passionate about developing and empowering women who make an impact in their communities.
by Paul Parisi | Sep 3, 2024 | Opinion
By Paul Parisi |
On August 26, 2024, Our America Hometown Heroes made their voices heard at the Phoenix City Council meeting, standing up for local control and the autonomy of the Phoenix Police Department (PPD). Wearing their signature yellow T-shirts, several Hometown Heroes rallied and spoke during the public comment period, advocating for the city’s ability to manage its own police force without federal intervention.
In stark contrast, a smaller group of Black Lives Matter (BLM) activists attended the same meeting, calling for a DOJ Consent Decree that would place the PPD under court-ordered oversight. Their demands stemmed from a controversial June report issued by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), which criticized the PPD and pushed for federal oversight despite the department’s voluntary efforts to implement sweeping reforms.
Our America’s presence at the meeting was bolstered by leaders of organizations representing minority communities, such as BLEXIT Arizona, the Hispanic Liberty Alliance, and the Independent Women’s Network. This coalition underscores the broad support for local control.
During the meeting, four speakers from Our America took to the podium, urging the Phoenix mayor and council to continue the reforms that have already significantly reduced crime while safeguarding all citizens’ civil rights.
Reflecting on her long history of positive engagement with law enforcement, Bella Ceballos-Viner shared, “For over 25 years, I have had nothing but great experiences, and I speak on behalf of my Hispanic community and many African-Americans who support the police.” Her words resonated with the room, highlighting the importance of community trust and collaboration with local law enforcement.
Christy Narsi, another Hometown Hero and part of Independent’s Women’s Network spoke passionately about the failures of DOJ Consent Decrees in other cities, warning the council against relinquishing local control.
Christy emphasized, “I urge you not to surrender local autonomy by allowing federal overreach to steal control of our local law enforcement and the city they serve.” Her argument underscored the belief that decisions about local policing should be made by those who know the community best.
The debate over the future of the PPD is a microcosm of a larger national conversation about the balance between federal oversight and local autonomy in law enforcement. Our America firmly believes that the best way to achieve safer streets and a brighter future is through a combination of police and criminal justice reforms tailored to the unique needs of each community. The reforms that the PPD has already implemented are a testament to the power of local action and the effectiveness of community-driven solutions.
As the City of Phoenix faces pressure from the DOJ to enter into a Consent Decree, the voices of local residents and activists like those from Our America will play a crucial role in determining the path forward.
By continuing to advocate for local control, Our America Hometown Heroes are not only standing up for the autonomy of the Phoenix Police Department but also for the principle that communities are best served when they have a direct say in how they are governed.
Paul Parisi is the Arizona Grassroots Director for Our America.
Page 1 of 11
