by Staff Reporter | Jul 15, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
New expert analysis warns that the Arizona government’s plan to reduce the Salt River wild horse population to 120 horses could prove devastating to their continued existence.
The herd currently has approximately 274 horses, nearly half of what the herd was at its peak in recent decades.
Dr. E. Gus Cothran, equine population geneticist and professor emeritus at Texas A&M University, issued a statement expressing concern that the plan may prove detrimental to the future existence of the wild horses. Cothran says wild horse populations require 150 to 200 horses minimum for long-term genetic health, though no number can provide an exact guarantee on a herd’s survival.
“At the most basic level, 150 to 200 animals is a minimum number,” said Cothran. “This is the number that, if everything goes right and only population genetics is involved, should maintain genetic health for 200 years or so.”
Cothran said genetic testing of just 20–25% of the herd would allow for insight into the herd’s genetic health: approximately 55 to 70 horses.
Citing that assessment, advocates and community members have raised concerns that the state’s current plan of removal for the horses would have the potential for permanent and devastating impact to the wild horse population.
The Friends of the Salt River Wild Horses have asked Gov. Katie Hobbs to pause the permanent removals pending an independent genetic study and scientific review.
“Once that diversity is lost, it is gone forever!” said Friends of the Salt River Wild Horses in a statement. “Before a single horse is permanently removed, Arizona should demonstrate through independent science that the remaining herd will be genetically healthy and capable of surviving for generations. Friends of the Salt River Wild Horses calls upon Governor Hobbs to halt removals, to do the science, and respect the public process.”
Some contend the Arizona Department of Agriculture’s (AZDA) plan to remove these horses violates the Salt River Wild Horse Protection Act passed in 2016. The act empowers the state to exercise discretionary management of the horse population, with protections against the obstruction, chase, capture, removal, or euthanasia of the horses without government permission.
AZDA awarded the management contract to the Salt River Wild Horse Management Group (SRWHMG). The company is operating on a goal to reduce the herd size over the next five years through natural attrition, fertility control, and manual relocation, per a press release issued by AZDA in February.
SRWHMG has already been involved in population reduction efforts. They reduced the population from 450 horses using fertility control methods.
AZDA promised that all removed wild horses were only permitted for the relocation to approved sanctuaries — no horses may be donated, traded, slaughtered, or sold.
According to AZDA, the contract procurement process included input from an assessment panel consisting of veterinarians, a rangeland management scientist, and a federal wild horse manager.
AZDA Director Paul Brierley said the management plan represented the responsible promotion and protection of the “Salt River experience.”
SRWHMG President Simone Netherlands called the plan “a pragmatic compromise.”
Last month, the Arizona legislature failed to pass a proposed three-year moratorium on the herd reduction and mandatory study on the Salt River horses’ genetic diversity. The House passed the bill, SB 1199, but the Senate declined to pass it on concurrence.
Republican Reps. Juan Ciscomani (AZ-06) and David Schweikert (AZ-01) were among the founding members of the bipartisan Congressional Wild Horse Caucus last year.
These and other members of Congress have been pushing for the passage of the Wild Horse and Burro Protection Act, HR 4356, which would eliminate helicopter roundups.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Corrections adjust the name of “The Friends of the Salt River Horses” to “The Friends of the Salt River Wild Horses” and clarify that the Arizona Senate did not pass SB 1199 on concurrence.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Ethan Faverino | Jul 14, 2026 | Economy, News
By Ethan Faverino |
Arizona taxpayers could face nearly $200 million in additional costs if the state fails to reduce its Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) payment error rate in the coming years.
Data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture shows Arizona’s SNAP payment error rate reached 10.8% in Fiscal Year 2025, ranking 33rd nationally and rising from 8.84% in Fiscal Year 2024.
Under changes enacted through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1), states with SNAP payment error rates below 6% by Fiscal Year 2028 will avoid cost-sharing requirements with the federal government.
States with error rates between 6-8% must provide a 5% match, those between 8-10% a 10% match, and states exceeding 10% a 15% match.
If Arizona’s error rate remains at 10.8% in Fiscal Year 2028, the state would be subject to the highest matching requirement.
Based on Fiscal Year 2025 figures, eight states recorded error rates below 6% (Idaho, Nebraska, Nevada, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming), while six fell between 6-8%. Another 16 states posted rates between 8-10%, and 20 states exceeded 10%.
Zach Milne, senior economist at Common Sense Institute Arizona said the state has a strong incentive to improve its performance.
Mile told The Center Square, “Improving program accuracy strengthens program integrity and helps the state avoid potentially significant federal cost-sharing penalties.”
He described Arizona’s elevated error rate as a relatively recent development, noting that the state’s rate stood at 5.2% in Fiscal Year 2019 — below the new federal threshold.
The Arizona Legislature passed several measures during the 2026 session aimed at lowering the state’s SNAP payment error rate, but they were vetoed by Governor Hobbs.
Senate Bill 1002 would have expanded eligibility verification tools for the Arizona Department of Economic Security, while Senate Bill 1331 proposed work requirements for SNAP recipients age 60 and younger.
Senate Bill 1334 would have barred the department from seeking work-requirement waivers for able-bodied adults without dependents. House Bill 2206 sought to require the state to reduce its SNAP payment error rate to below 3% by 2030.
In her veto messages, Hobbs argued that the legislation duplicated ongoing efforts by the Department of Economic Security to improve accuracy, including enhanced eligibility verification, additional staffing and training, and investments in technology.
“SNAP is the most robust and effective anti-hunger tool we have in Arizona-I know this firsthand,” Hobbs said in her veto letter of the three Senate Bills. “It’s also the most secure, thanks to strong anti-fraud measures and oversight. Instead of creating more needless frustration for Arizona families, I invite you to join me in actually lowering costs for them.”
She also criticized H.R. 1 for imposing unfunded mandates that she said have strained agency resources, noting that she allocated $7.5 million to increase the department’s capacity. Hobbs maintained that the vetoed bills would have added further unfunded requirements without providing resources for implementation or modernization.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Jun 29, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Gov. Katie Hobbs rejected legislation that would have imposed an accountability-based intervention system for expectant mothers who abuse substances.
Arizona does not currently punish expectant mothers for drinking alcohol or using drugs.
Lawmakers who passed the bill, SB 1476, said it would have protected children from the harmful consequences of mothers who drink alcohol or use drugs while pregnant.
The bill would have classified those adverse behaviors as child neglect, a class six felony. Expectant mothers would then have several options before them: face legal consequences, or undergo alcohol or drug treatment.
Class six felonies may be modified as class one misdemeanors. This felony level is considered the least severe; punishments can range from probation or prison time from four months to nearly six years, depending on the total number of past felonies and the severity of the offense.
Hobbs dismissed the approach of the bill in her veto letter, arguing that punishments wouldn’t deter mothers from abusing substances while pregnant.
“Further criminalization will not yield safer pregnancies and births in Arizona,” said Hobbs. “I instead invite you to join me in efforts to expand access to substance use treatment.”
Sen. Shawnna Bolick (R-LD2), sponsor to SB 1476, said in a press release announcing the bill’s passage earlier this month that the legislation would enable the justice system to intervene on the child’s behalf and get the mother into drug or alcohol recovery programs.
“Every child deserves a safe and healthy start in life,” said Bolick. “When substance abuse harms a child before they’re even born, the law should recognize that reality while also encouraging mothers to seek treatment and recovery. This bill strikes an appropriate balance between accountability and compassion, with both the mother’s and child’s well-being remaining the top priority.”
The latest data cited by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that, on average, about six out of every 1,000 newborns in the hospital are diagnosed with neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS), the clinical term for babies born with drug dependence. Per the CDC, NAS increased by over 80% from 2010 to 2017.
Arizona has one of the highest NAS rates in the nation. Out of every 1,000 hospitalizations of newborns, nine are diagnosed with NAS. NAS diagnoses have steadily increased in the state since 2009.
The latest reporting from the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) stated that 97% of babies diagnosed with NAS, Substance Exposed Newborns (SEN), or Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome (NOWS) received treatment services within 30 days of birth in the 2025 fiscal year.
During her first year in office, Hobbs vetoed legislation that would have required infants born alive during an abortion to receive medical interventions to preserve their life and health.
The governor said the bill impermissibly interfered with the relationship between the woman and her doctor, and a breach of her campaign promise to kill any bill perceived as interfering with abortion rights.
“It’s simply not the state’s role to make such difficult medical decisions for patients,” said Hobbs.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Jun 27, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Gov. Katie Hobbs once again vetoed key election bills, blocking a Republican-backed reform package.
The governor rejected six Senate bills restricting election equipment internet connection, expanding chain-of-custody requirements, publicizing cast vote records and voter registration rolls, increasing anti-counterfeiting measures for election ballot vendors, clarifying voter registration standards for those residing temporarily out of state, and requiring disclosures for out-of-state circulators.
Similar proposals were included in bills passed by the legislature and vetoed by Hobbs last year.
The following were the veto explanations Hobbs gave for the election reform package:
- SB 1037: Hobbs said further specifications regarding election equipment belonged in the Elections Procedures Manual, citing her 2025 veto of SB 1064
- SB 1038: Hobbs claimed jeopardization of constitutional protections for voter privacy, citing her 2025 veto of SB 1280
- SB 1040: Hobbs claimed that voter registration information could be redistributed or posted online, citing her 2025 veto of SB 1375
- SB 1057: Hobbs claimed election officials would endure added expenses and complexities, citing her 2025 veto of SB 1123
- SB 1060: Hobbs claimed the bill would prevent U.S. citizens from registering to vote, citing her 2025 veto of SB 1052.
- SB 1429: Hobbs claimed U.S. citizens would be prevented from registering to vote, namely those born overseas to service members, citing her 2025 veto of SB 1052
Arizona Senate Republicans rejected Hobbs’ arguments as unconvincing, and accused the governor of “a troubling pattern” in which she has been intentionally “keeping Arizona voters in the dark.”
A press release from the caucus issued Tuesday made the case that voters should have more opportunities to verify the integrity of their elections — not be forced into their current position where Republicans say their only option is, allegedly, to trust the outcome.
State Sen. Mark Finchem (R-LD1) insisted that these election reforms were necessary to combat voter insecurities over election results.
“When questions about election results come up, and they always do, election officials and poll workers need real tools to show their work and defend the outcome,” said Finchem. “These vetoes strip away the very things that would help good people running elections prove the system is working. Public cast vote records, stronger ballot security, and clearer chain-of-custody rules aren’t about attacking anyone. They’re about giving the people who administer elections the ability to back up their results with evidence instead of just statements. Blocking these reforms year after year doesn’t build trust, it makes the job of defending Arizona’s elections harder.”
State Sen. Wendy Rogers (R-LD7), chair of the Senate Judiciary and Elections Committee, argued that Hobbs had also prevented additional means for voters to have hands-on oversight of their elections.
“She blocked public cast vote records, stronger anti-fraud features on ballots, tighter security on voting equipment, and more transparency on voter rolls and ballot measures. If everything is already so secure and trustworthy, why is she fighting so hard to keep voters from seeing more of it?” said Rogers. “These bills weren’t radical, they were basic safeguards. The governor keeps telling people to just trust the system while she works to keep it in the dark.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Warren Petersen | Jun 26, 2026 | Opinion
By Sen. Warren Petersen |
Earlier this spring, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) released a new policy on protecting women’s sports in future Games. The Committee concluded that “for all disciplines on the Sports Programme of an IOC Event, including individual and team sports, eligibility for any Female Category is limited to Biological Females.”
The IOC’s rationale was very thorough and scientific. The Committee found that “to protect fairness in sports and events that rely on strength, power, and/or endurance, as well as safety particularly in contact sports, it is necessary and adequate to base eligibility for competition on biological sex.” The IOC’s new policy should be applauded, yet it came on the backs of decisive and unapologetic leadership from President Donald J. Trump, former female athlete Riley Gaines, and so many others.
For the vast majority of Americans, this finding was celebrated. Most people still believe in science and common sense to drive their thoughts about everyday life, including the line between men’s and women’s sports. A 2025 NBC News Stay Tuned Poll showed that 75% of respondents disagreed with biological male athletes competing in female sports. In a January 2025 Iposos survey, 94% of Republicans, 67% of Democrats, and 64% of Independents also indicated their preference for protecting the integrity of women’s sports.
While the IOC and the majority of the American public may agree on the scientific facts behind biological men and women and the necessities of safeguarding women’s sports, many elected Democrats around the nation, including in Arizona, do not. It was unfortunate to see that while only a minority of national Democrats think boys should be able to play in girls’ sports, one hundred percent of Arizona’s out-of-touch liberal legislators voted to allow boys in girls’ sports. These Democrats are holding on to crazy, unscientific, and dangerous fantasies about opening women’s sports for any and all comers. They would rather jeopardize the safety of girls and women to protect the feelings of men pretending to be women.
The issue transcends women’s sports, as it has included a malicious desire to allow men into women’s private spaces, such as bathrooms, showers, and locker rooms. Across the country, Democrats have continually blurred the lines between men and women and what we have historically held sacred in this country (for very good reasons). Again, most reasonable people do not believe that a biological man should be allowed to walk into a woman’s restricted area. Yet this has been happening for years and celebrated by the left.
The ultimate gaslighting is telling a boy that he is a girl or that he can invade girls’ private spaces and arenas. I can’t wake up one day and decide I want to identify as a cat – no matter how much I match my appearance to our feline friends. If I did so, then people would rightly think I’ve lost my mind. This is what has been happening, though, around America. People are showing their insanity by working to bend the rules of biology.
That’s why as Senate President, I’ve refused to capitulate to the crazy and dangerous ideas of the left – and I’ve actually gone on the offensive for what’s right. I’ve led the charge on safeguarding girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and sports. I’ve even spearheaded the defense of Arizona’s commonsense law protecting the integrity of women’s sports, taking our case (Jane Doe v. Warren Petersen) all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). Currently, SCOTUS is considering two of these women’s sports cases (from West Virginia and Idaho), and the forthcoming opinion will decide the fate of other laws being held up in federal litigation, including Arizona’s. In fact, I was sitting in the Supreme Court next to Attorneys General McCuskey and Labrador during the oral arguments for this case at the beginning of the year. It was sadly unsurprising to hear that some of the Justices didn’t know the biological definition of a woman. Fortunately, though, for the rest of real America, most of the Justices did know the biological definition of a woman – and I believe we will receive a 6-3 ruling in favor of science and common sense.
Unfortunately, for Arizonans – especially the girls and women depending on their government officials to protect their safety and decency in public spaces – our state has a Democrat governor and attorney general who are both unwilling to listen to the majority of reasonable people and stand for the integrity of women’s sports or the decency of privacy in bathrooms, showers, and locker rooms. Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed several reasonable attempts by the Republican-led Arizona Legislature to protect females in these arenas and spaces, while Attorney General Kris Mayes has been absent throughout the process to defend Arizona’s Save Women’s Sports Act.
As the IOC found in creating its new policy for future Olympic Games, “biological sex, which is divided into categories (Male and Female, based on their reproductive biology, including their sex chromosomes, gonads and hormones, is distinct from gender identity, which is a person’s sense of themselves as a woman or a man or neither/non-binary.” This finding didn’t used to be controversial at all, and it still isn’t in most American circles. The problem is that we’ve allowed a few (though growing number of) radicals to influence our policies across our states, nation, and world, leading to chaos and insanity about these unalterable scientific laws.
Though this debate has been raging now for several years, we are still relatively in the early stages of the war over women’s sports and private spaces. We cannot lose this battle or allow future generations of Americans to grow up in a new normal, where boys and men are allowed unfettered access to girls’ and women’s restricted areas or sports. That’s why I’m fighting every day to protect women’s sports and private spaces.
Warren Petersen is the President of the Arizona State Senate and represents Legislative District 14. He is currently running to be Arizona’s next Attorney General.
