On Monday, the Arizona Senate passed HB2617 to require county recorders to cancel voter registrations for individuals who are proven to not be qualified electors, such as those who aren’t U.S. citizens and those who have a driver’s license or other non-operating license in another state. The bill passed along party lines, 16-13. Since HB2617 was amended in the Senate, it will be reviewed by the House before it’s passed on to Governor Doug Ducey.
In further detail, HB2617 will require the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) every month to submit information regarding who’s been issued a driver’s license or non-operating license in another state to the secretary of state. Then within 10 days, the secretary of state will also be required to furnish county recorders with a list of registered voters for their county that were issued a driver’s license or a non-operating ID license in another state.
Additionally, HB2617 requires the county recorder to compare their voter registration database to the Social Security Administration database on a monthly basis. In the event an individual doesn’t provide satisfactory proof of citizenship, county recorders must compare their file to the Electronic Verification of Vital Events System.
Furthermore, the secretary of state will be required to report the number of deaths and number of voter registration cancellation notices issued to county recorders to the state legislature on a quarterly basis. Jury commissioners and managers must also forward information about individuals who indicate they’re not a U.S. citizen or reside outside of the county to the secretary of state and county recorder.
Prior to canceling the voter registration of the person in question, county recorders must submit notice to the individual and give them 90 days to provide evidence that they’re qualified to vote in Arizona. If the person doesn’t respond with satisfactory evidence within 90 days, each individual case may be referred to the county attorney or attorney general for further investigation.
Progress Arizona, a progressive activist nonprofit, argued that the legislation would “harm vulnerable communities,” calling it an “unnecessary barrier to vote.”
The GOP-led #AZLEG will not stop attacking our right to vote until they implement their bills that would harm vulnerable communities in Arizona. Call your state Senator and ask them to VOTE NO on #HB2238 and #HB2617! https://t.co/BK67Crv13p
House Republicans insisted that the legislation, sponsored by State Representative Joseph Chaplik (R-Scottsdale) would ensure that those who didn’t belong on the voter rolls would be purged.
A new state law resolves one of the most controversial aspects of the pandemic – who gets to decide whether a child must wear a mask or face covering.
On Monday, Gov. Doug Ducey signed House Bill 2616 which puts the mask or no mask decision squarely in the hands of parents instead of school officials or any other bureaucrat.
“Parents should make decisions for their children, not the government,” said Rep. Joseph Chaplik, who sponsored HB2616 to require the express consent of the parent or guardian of anyone under age 18 before a government official can require a child to wear a mask.
“Arizona law already requires parents to be consulted before instituting medical requirements for children,” noted Chaplik (R-LD23). “This commonsense bill extends the law to include masks, joining other freedom states in protecting the right of parents to make decisions for their child.”
The prohibition on mask mandates of children applies to the State of Arizona, its political subdivisions, any governmental entity, school districts, and charter schools. The entire Republican caucus of the House and the Senate voted in support of HB2616, which was sent to the governor’s desk last week.
The Senate Government Committee is scheduled on Monday to consider HB2616, a bill requiring governments to receive parental consent in order to require a minor to wear a mask. That applies to political subdivisions and entities like public and charter school districts as well.
.@JosephChaplik’s HB2616 prohibits any government entity from requiring anyone under 18 to wear a mask without parental consent. Parents, not government bureaucrats, should decide when/if their child wears a mask. Great bill to protect individual liberty. We support HB2616. pic.twitter.com/HsCXehcl2e
The masking choice bill passed the House last month along party lines, 31-28.
House Democrats insisted that the bill worked against science. State Representative Marcelino Quiñonez (D-Phoenix) cast Republicans as those inviting discrimination by not normalizing mask-wearing.
“There seems to be a hesitancy to accept the science and go with the science. Instead of doing that, we continue to create barriers to ensure that people feel othered by wearing a mask, instead of following the science,” said Quiñonez. “The legislation to create another barrier, another bureaucracy, is overdue. And so with that, I encourage my colleagues to follow the science and vote ‘no.’”
Parents win! #HB2616 gives the rights back to parents on making medical decisions about their children wearing masks.
31 Republicans vote Yes, every Democrat votes against parental rights. (including the ones not wearing masks while voting) #azlegpic.twitter.com/nJUf2EIxtc
On Wednesday, the House Government and Elections Committee narrowly approved a bill from State Representative Joseph Chaplik (R-Scottsdale) prohibiting government entities or schools from requiring minors to wear a mask without the express parental consent. All Democrats voted against HB2616, ensuring Republicans edged out a narrow 7-6 victory.
“I believe parents should make decisions for their children, not the government,” asserted Chaplik. “The states of Florida and Virginia, with bipartisan support, have passed this similar policy. I will continue to stand for freedom in Arizona for our constituents.”
HB2616 would’ve had greater reach than government and K-12 education: the original bill also prohibited mask mandates in private businesses for both adults and for minors, unless the business had express parental consent for the child to wear one. An approved amendment to HB2616 from State Representative John Kavanagh (R-Fountain Hills) struck those additional provisions.
During the committee hearing, Chaplik explained that obtaining consent was up to the schools. When State Representative Sarah Liguori (D-Phoenix) expressed confusion as to whether schools would be required to obtain written consent for a child that showed up to school wearing a mask, Chaplik clarified that the child arriving to school in a mask was sufficient parental consent.
Liguori lambasted her colleagues for “buying into a political narrative.” She claimed that school districts with mask mandates have opt-out options for parents. That is incorrect. Tucson Unified School District (TUSD), for one, doesn’t mention the option to not wear a mask on school property.
“I hate to get caught up in the politics of the masks, which I believe was intentionally designed as an illusion but its even more of a fantasy to think we as legislators know more than the experts who have trained their entire lives in these fields and have studied the science and data on this day in and day out for the past two years,” said Liguori.
State Representative Jake Hoffman (R-Queen Creek) challenged Liguori’s assertion that the experts were infallible and that the masks were a political issue. Hoffman reminded the committee of the CDC’s track record of changing their guidelines and goalposts constantly.
“In reality, the science is on the side that kids should not be forced to wear masks,” said Hoffman. “This is not a political argument, it’s an actual medical science argument. There’s countless medical studies to support this, and there are countless health professionals at the highest levels — especially medical doctors, not just public health professionals because there’s a very big difference between an actual medical doctor and a public health professional — they support this.”
On Tuesday, the American Federation for Teachers (AFT) President Randi Weingarten pushed back in an interview with MSNBC against the beginning trend to drop mask mandates in schools. Weingarten admitted that masks are not only intolerable but an impediment to learning.
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky has also pushed back, arguing in an interview with Reuters this week that “now is not the moment” to drop mask mandates.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Scottsdale hotel that made headlines last year for sheltering hundreds of illegal immigrants has been repurposed this year for sheltering Afghan refugees. In an email obtained by State Representative Joseph Chaplik (R-Scottsdale), Scottsdale Police Department (SPD) Chief of Police Jeff Walther briefed the mayor and council on a situation that it appears not even local law enforcement was aware of until after the fact.
According to Walther’s relayed intelligence from the organization contracted by the State Department and the Department of Defense (DOD) to run the shelter, the International Rescue Committee (IRC), refugees were relocated from military bases beginning January 12. The refugees won’t be confined to the hotel and may roam the community at their leisure because the law prohibits their detainment. They will reside at the hotel until they are matched with sponsor families throughout the Valley. At most, Walther said there would be 300 refugees housed at the hotel.
Walther reassured the council and mayor that the refugees were vaccinated, vetted by the State Department, and educated on American culture. The chief of police then admitted that there’s no security on site at the moment, but said IRC promised there would be at some point in the future.
If anyone attempts to contact the hotel, they will be met by individuals purporting to operate a regular hotel. Walther explained that the IRC hired a hotel management company to disguise the site was a functioning hotel serving “a closed clientele” — i.e., the refugees. At no point will the State Department or DOD manage the hotel or install any personnel there.
Just like last year, this reporter called the hotel. A woman answered, identifying the establishment as Homewood Suites; there was a substantial amount of background chatter. The woman informed this reporter that they were accepting reservations, but that there weren’t any available rooms until June, but didn’t disclose why.
AZ Free News inquired with Scottsdale’s mayor and city council about the hotel, and its reported lack of security for the refugees. A spokesperson for the mayor and council submitted this response, essentially repeating portions of information relayed by Walther and stating that city officials couldn’t do anything about something happening within their jurisdiction because the federal government was involved:
“The city was recently informed that a nonprofit organization working on behalf of the federal government has rented part of a vacant hotel in Scottsdale to house Afghan refugees evacuated by the U.S. in August 2021. This site is being used as a temporary housing facility while each resident/resident family is assigned a sponsor family to live with throughout the greater Phoenix Area. The individuals at this location were previously housed at U.S. military bases. While there, they were vetted by the U.S. State Department and vaccinated against COVID-19. Scottsdale is in contact with the organization operating this site, but has no current authority to prevent the hotel from being rented for this purpose. This is a federal government activity over which the city of Scottsdale has no oversight.”
Chaplik warned his constituents that their city council had, once again, allowed unsupervised foreigners to occupy a building at the heart of their community.
“Residents of Scottsdale, is this what you voted for? City Council refused to put up a fight when ICE took over this hotel and now the Feds are bringing in Afghan refugees with NO public notice whatsoever. And NO security hired yet,” wrote Chaplik. “This is our community and council doesn’t care.”
Residents of #Scottsdale, is this what you voted for? City Council refused to put up a fight when ICE took over this hotel and now the Feds are bringing in Afghan refugees with NO public notice whatsoever. And NO security hired yet. This is our community and council doesn't care pic.twitter.com/yxQSSou8h1
As AZ Free News reported last June, the hotel was converted into a migrant shelter by ICE almost overnight to offset the unprecedented surge of illegal immigrants caused by President Joe Biden. The shelter operated as a temporary migrant transition facility from May until the end of last month. Unlike the operations that concluded recently at the hotel, this shelter won’t be overseen by ICE.
On Friday, our other reporters drove by the hotel. They reported seeing garbage piled around the building, with employees hauling more garbage out of the building. There were no barricades around the hotel.
Walther claimed in closing that there have been few issues in the past with the refugees in the Phoenix area and across the nation. He informed the mayor and council that SPD met with IRC officials on Friday afternoon.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
