The Arizona House Ad Hoc Committee on Oversight, Accountability and Big Tech convened on Tuesday to discuss the influence of Big Tech on free speech.
Chairing the committee was State Rep. Alex Kolodin (R-LD03); the two other members were State Reps. Neal Carter (R-LD15) and Cesar Aguilar (D-LD26). The committee heard testimony from Robert Epstein, a renowned psychologist and Big Tech data researcher, and James Kerwin, senior counsel for Mountain States Legal Foundation. More individuals were reportedly scheduled to testify, but Kolodin disclosed that they were unable to do so for fear of retribution by Google.
Kolodin opened the committee meeting with allegations of the “disturbing parallels” between modern society and the fictional world depicted in the book “1984” by George Orwell. Kolodin referenced the Orwellian concepts of “thoughtcrime” and “newspeak,” claiming further that they exist currently.
“That crime was thoughtcrime, and the crime was not merely that you said something wrong, the crime was that you thought wrong, that you weren’t purely of a mind that matched the party’s ideology,” said Kolodin. “There is a fear that is exactly what’s going on in our country today. There’s an attempt to redefine free speech as misinformation.”
Epstein was the first guest speaker. He summarized his ongoing, near-decade data collection of Google’s practice of creating “ephemeral experiences,” or persuasive search engine results, to influence voters. The term was discovered to be regularly used by Google internally via their company emails.
Epstein dubbed Google’s practice the “Search Engine Manipulation Effect” (SEME).
Based on multiple experiments on SEME conducted domestically and abroad, Epstein determined that the practice consistently influenced voters to shift their voting preferences anywhere from 20 to 80 percent.
“The most disturbing set of scientific findings that I’ve ever encountered in my life. The more we have learned, the more disturbed I have become at what I’m finding,” said Epstein.
AZ Free News reported last November that there was an apparent, consistent bias for two Democratic candidates — then-gubernatorial candidate Katie Hobbs and then-secretary of state candidate Adrian Fontes — over their respective Republican opponents, Kari Lake and Mark Finchem.
We reported that search results for “Katie Hobbs” brought up her campaign website first, followed by news reports that portrayed her favorably, her Twitter feed, her Wikipedia page, an endorsement by Emily’s List, her Ballotpedia, and her Facebook.
By contrast, a search for “Kari Lake” didn’t yield her campaign website on any of the first 11 search result pages, and didn’t appear even when omitted results were included. Her search results yielded a Wikipedia page first alongside unfavorable media coverage.
It wasn’t until after our report was published that search results for Kari Lake were modified. Epstein declared during Tuesday’s meeting that Google’s interference resulted in a race-determining advantage for Hobbs.
“If you took Google out of that picture, Kari Lake would’ve won,” said Epstein.
According to Epstein’s data collection, Google would also discriminately deploy voting reminder graphics to certain voters at certain times, with reported favoritism to Democratic voters. Some voters reportedly didn’t get a reminder to vote.
Epstein disclosed that he voted for both Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020, but that he was concerned with Google’s influence over private decision-making.
“I object to the fact that a private company that is not accountable to the public in any way is messing with our elections,” said Epstein.
Epstein proposed implementing a monitoring system that would prevent manipulation from Google in the future.
After an hour break, Kerwin testified on the relationship between government and Big Tech concerning censorship. He explained that government wording in its communications determines whether a constitutional violation occurred. In most cases, Kerwin declared that the open relationship between government and social media companies to monitor speech exists in a “gray area” within the law.
Kerwin cited the ongoing case, Missouri v. Biden, as a “watershed” case on this gray area. The Biden administration was sued for coordinating with social media companies to flag and remove posts, and the federal judge in the case determined that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail based on preliminary evidence produced.
That’s when Kerwin broached the subject of Gov. Katie Hobbs. Kerwin reviewed several emails from Hobbs’ secretary of state staff requesting that Twitter remove certain tweets they classified as misinformation or disinformation.
“This suggests a troubling intention on part of a government official to stamp out speech they disagree with,” said Kerwin.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Gov. Katie Hobbs had a major drafting error in last week’s emergency declaration over the summer heat: it expired weeks before its announcement.
It appears that the governor had the emergency declaration drafted for release on or around June 30, but opted to wait until after the state legislative session ended.
Congratulations to @katiehobbs for declaring a “heat” state of emergency today for a time period that expired before she declared it. Only @GovernorHobbs could do this. Did she forget to edit an old draft while waiting for the legislature to end? pic.twitter.com/AUBK7SSdnP
The timing of Hobbs’ emergency declaration further evoked curiosity when contrasted with the release of another breaking news story concerning the governor: emails revealing Hobbs’ years-long coordination with social media companies to control online speech.
🚨 Today Arizona Capitol Oversight is releasing exclusive emails from @KatieHobbs' office
The evidence of Hobbs’ cozy relationship with social media companies came out on Thursday. Late Friday evening, Hobbs issued her emergency declaration to address the summer heat, which she called “extreme.”
I declared a State of Emergency and signed an Executive Order to support heat relief efforts while addressing extreme heat moving forward. Arizona is resilient, and I will ensure we have the tools we need to stay safe and continue growing sustainably. https://t.co/I9ucza5qsI
In an interview with KJZZ, Hobbs called the revelation a “sideshow.” The governor didn’t deny allegations of maintaining unscrupulous relationships with major social media companies. Rather, Hobbs laughed off the discovery as a means for her desired ends: water conservation, public housing expansion, and public education growth.
“I’m glad we’ve solved water, the public housing crisis, and public education — and have time for this sideshow,” said Hobbs.
AUDIO →@KatieHobbs is dismissing revelations that she misused government resources to censor critics during her 2022 #AZGov campaign as a "sideshow." #AZLeg
This latest email trove revealing Hobbs’ coordination with social media companies prompted elected GOP leadership to take action. House Speaker Ben Toma announced the Ad Hoc Committee on Oversight, Accountability, and Big Tech.
The committee, led by State Rep. Alexander Kolodin (R-LD03) will review legal standards and issues concerning censorship arising from government working with social media, as well as conduct any relevant investigations into state officials and executive officers falling short of fulfilling their constitutional duties.
State Rep. Neal Carter (R-LD15) and a Democrat, yet to be announced, will also serve on the committee.
The committee will first convene on Sept. 5.
As of this report, the erroneous emergency declaration remains listed on the governor’s website.
In addition to the emergency declaration, Hobbs also issued an executive order directing:
the Governor’s Office of Resiliency to develop an Extreme Heat Preparedness Plan by March 1, 2024, propose legislation to counter heat, and administer $13.3 million in Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act federal funding;
the Director of the Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting to allocate an unspecified amount of financial resources to counter “extreme” heat;
the Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services to contribute to the Extreme Heat Preparedness Plan, compile data reports on heat-related issues and infrastructures such as emergency room visits and cooling centers, and create public awareness materials on heat;
the Director of the Department of Emergency and Military Affairs to contribute to the Extreme Heat Preparedness Plan with plans to coordinate resources and emergency response systems, and how to quantify and define heat-related emergencies;
the Director of the Arizona Department of Administration to contribute to the Extreme Heat Preparedness Plan by identifying state-owned assets and equipment that could be appropriated for heat relief efforts, staff state employees at cooling centers and heat relief efforts while receiving their regular duty pay, and amend the State of Arizona Accounting Manual to allow the purchase of heat relief-related supplies;
the Director of the Residential Utility Consumer Office to contribute to the Extreme Heat Preparedness Plan with plans to coordinate with utility companies and energy cooperatives on heat relief efforts;
the Director of the Department of Economic Security to contribute to the Extreme Heat Preparedness Plan with proposed improvements to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program;
the Director of the Department of Housing to contribute to the Extreme Heat Preparedness Plan with arguments on the importance of housing for all;
and the Director of the Industrial Commission of Arizona to contribute to the Extreme Heat Preparedness Plan with the results of their newly-created state emphasis program ensuring availability of water, rest, and shade in at-risk workplaces.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
A bill to limit a certain government agency’s arsenal of communications is advancing through the Arizona Legislature, though it became a tough sell for Democrats on the House floor after earlier bipartisan votes in committees.
HB 2586, sponsored by Representative Neal Carter, “restricts the Arizona Department of Transportation’s (ADOT) dynamic message signs (DMSs) to display only messages that are directly related to transportation or highway public safety and outlines exceptions,” according to the purpose provided by the State Senate.
During his testimony to the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee, the bill sponsor, Representative Carter, explained that “this bill is the law in other states.” His reasons for introducing the bill were that some of the ADOT freeway signs are a “little bit distracting” because there are messages that may not be related to transportation and otherwise inappropriate to share with commuters; and that there was good cause to worry “about government effectively using it as an advertisement for other things.” He told the committee that this would be worrying “because the people making those decisions should be elected people,” and it would be a “slippery slope” to have bureaucrats at ADOT deciding what to market or message.
When questioned about the legislation by the committee chairman, Representative David Cook, Carter clarified that it would not be the intent of HB 2586 to “specify how to make the messaging” – for example, limiting the creativity of the content as long as it was directly related to transportation. Representative Carter’s chief concern was signs that aren’t communicating directly about transportation – like “No Burn Days.”
Chairman Cook and Carter both agreed that ADOT messaging about vaccines would be a good example of what should not be included on the signs for passersby.
Representative Carter amended his bill to allow “the Arizona Department of Transportation to display reminders to vote on dynamic message signs.”
The bill passed out of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee with a 7-4 vote, with one member absent from the final deliberation. One Democrat voted in support. The Rules Committee unanimously approved the legislation with an 8-0 tally.
On the House floor, Democrat Representative Cesar Aguilar highlighted his opposition to the bill, arguing that the policy “would impact Arizona’s culture of signs we see on the road,” noting his perception that the ADOT “Don’t Drink and Drive” signs would be banned should this legislation be signed into law. Carter rejected that assertion, saying that the aforementioned signs were transportation-related and would not be subjected to the updated regulations of his bill. Carter also touted the bipartisan support for the bill during the committee process. Unlike in committees, though, HB 2586 did not receive any support from Democrats on the House floor, passing 31-28 – with one Democrat member not voting.
HB 2586 was transmitted to the Senate and was approved by the Transportation and Technology Committee earlier this month with a party-line 4-3 vote. It awaits further action from that legislative body.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Over the past two years, Arizonans have experienced higher inflation than other parts of the country, and their state legislators are working on a solution to combat these higher prices.
This week, Republican legislators held a press conference at the Arizona State Capitol Rose Garden in Phoenix, promoting their efforts to eliminate the rental tax to help constituents struggling with high inflation.
Representative Neal Carter introduced HB 2067 in the House, and Senator Steve Kaiser introduced SB 1184 in the Senate. The bills would prohibit “municipalities from levying municipal tax on the business of renting or leasing real property for residential purposes effective January 1, 2024,” according to the overview provided by the Arizona House of Representatives.
SB 1184 was co-sponsored by six Senators (Ken Bennett, Jake Hoffman, Warren Petersen, Wendy Rogers, Janae Shamp, and Justine Wadsack). HB 2067 was co-sponsored by twenty Representatives (Leo Biasiucci, Selina Bliss, Joseph Chaplik, John Gillette, Travis Grantham, Gail Griffin, Liz Harris, Justin Heap, Rachel Jones, David Livingston, David Marshall, Cory McGarr, Quang Nquyen, Barbara Parker, Jacqueline Parker, Michele Peña, Beverly Pingerelli, Austin Smith, Ben Toma, and Justin Wilmeth.
In an exclusive interview with AZ Free News, House bill sponsor Neal Carter shared his thoughts on why he led this legislation in his chamber: “A tax on a citizen’s rent is terrible tax policy because it’s unfair. It’s anti-progressive, it inordinately affects lower-income Arizonans, and at a time of unprecedented rising inflation, taxing rents further exacerbates the affordability crisis that we are facing. Consider the neighborhood that I live in: about one-third of the houses are rentals, so about one-third of the people I see at the community center, or pass on the sidewalk walking our dogs are paying a tax that I don’t pay to live there, just because they pay rent but I pay a mortgage? It’s unfair.”
Legislative Republicans are serious about sending these bills to Governor Hobbs’ desk without delay. SB 1184 passed the Arizona Senate on February 9 with a party-line 16-14 vote. On Wednesday, February 14, the House passed SB 1184 with a 32-28 vote.
After the House vote on Wednesday, Representative Matt Gress tweeted, “NEW: I just voted to eliminate rental taxes in the state of Arizona #CommonSense”
Following the conclusion of the press conference, the Arizona Senate Republicans released a statement on Twitter, writing, “Your Senate and House Republicans are calling on @GovernorHobbs to support inflation relief for the hard-working citizens of our state, who are struggling to make ends meet in the face of historic inflation. SB1184 would eliminate the rental tax tenants are paying. This tax ranges from $20 to a couple-hundred bucks each month. That extra cash could help with a medical bill, gas, groceries, or other necessities. Governments are FLUSH with cash. It’s time to give back to families that are hurting right now. We are urging the Governor to sign SB1184.”
Your Senate & House Republicans are calling on @GovernorHobbs to support inflation relief for the hard-working citizens of our state, who are struggling to make ends meet in the face of historic inflation.
According to analysis from the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC), it is estimated that “municipalities will collect a total of $200.9 million in sales tax revenue from residential leases in FY 2023,” and “the municipal revenue loss is an estimated $(230.2) million” in FY 2025 – the first full-year impact of the legislation if signed into law.
When asked by AZ Free News about his support for this historic bill, House Speaker Pro Tempore Travis Grantham replied, “There is nothing more evil than taxing people’s food or the roof over their head. It’s time to get rid of this immoral residential lease tax and bring some needed relief to renters in our state.”
Democrats are not supporting their Republican colleagues’ attempt to give Arizonans a break from the rental tax. All committee action in both the House and Senate – as well as the vote from the entire Senate and House – has featured party-line votes, which may give a strong indication on what the Ninth Floor will do with the bill after it clears both chambers. Governor Hobbs has already set her sights on eliminating another tax, though – the state sales tax on feminine hygiene products.
Instead, Democrats have introduced other policies aimed at combatting the massive increase Arizonans have experienced in housing costs – specifically those in the rental market. On Thursday, House Democrats held their own press conference in the Rose Garden to push strategies to make the state’s housing more affordable. One of the Democrats’ solutions was HB 2161, a bill introduced by Representative Judy Schwiebert, dealing with caps on rental increases. That bill has been assigned to both the House Regulatory Affairs Committee and the Commerce Committee, and it has not been heard in committee.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Over the past three years, many parents in a number of school districts across the nation have demanded more transparency and involvement with their children’s education. The Republican-led Arizona Legislature has been working on solutions, and Members have introduced new bills this session to give parents the access and information that they have been requesting.
Representative Justin Heap has introduced one of those bills, HB 2786, which deals with requirements for parental notification for teacher training. The bill “mandates a school district governing board develop parental notification and access procedures if the school district is involved with a training for teachers or administrators,” according to the bill overview provided by the Arizona House of Representatives. If passed by the Legislature and signed into law, the bill would “require a school governing board to notify parents of these trainings and give parents access to any printed or digital materials used for the training.” It also stipulates that the governing boards adopt “a policy to provide parents the information contained in its parental involvement policy in an electronic format.”
In an exclusive interview with AZ Free News on why he introduced this legislation, Representative Heap stated, “Transparency will have the added benefit of bringing school district and school boards back into alignment with the values of the parents of the students they serve. The knowledge that their training materials must be made public will discourage school districts from implementing policies that are hateful to the parents of students in their districts. If any school district official, any school board member, principal, or teacher believes that what is going on in their schools should be hidden from the parents in their district, then they have no business being involved in education.”
The legislation currently has ten co-sponsors: Representatives Neal Carter, Lupe Diaz, Liz Harris, Rachel Jones, Teresa Martinez, Cory McGarr, Barbara Parker, Jacqueline Parker, Michele Peña, and Beverly Pingerelli.
On Tuesday, February 14, HB 2786 cleared the House Education Committee with a 6-4 party-line vote. Republican Representatives David Cook, Liz Harris, Lupe Diaz, Michele Peña, David Marshall, Sr (Vice Chairman), and Beverly Pingerelli (Chairman) voted in favor; while Democrat Representatives Jennifer Pawlik, Laura Terech, Judy Schwiebert, and Nancy Gutierrez voted against passage.
Representative Pingerelli gave the following statement to AZ Free News on why she decided to hold a hearing on this bill in her committee: “Parents should have information readily available about what teachers are learning as part of their professional development programs. Are they receiving instruction about better ways to teach reading, math, or science? Or, as was pointed out during the February 14 hearing and testimony, are the topics covered controversial, ideological or morally objectionable to parents? As I’ve always stated, the focus in K-12 education should be academics. Since it is a reasonable assumption that the training teachers receive is translated into classroom instruction, parents should have the right to be informed. That’s why I decided to hear House Bill 2786 in my committee.”
HB 2786 generated much opposition leading up to and during the hearing in the Education Committee, starting with the Arizona House Democrats. They posted that Representative Heap’s bill demands that “parents get to review every type of training teacher gets (including copyrighted materials),” adding that “he was upset when he learned teachers can get training about equity, inclusion and cultural sensitivity. The Arizona Education Association tweeted that “teachers need to focus on students’ learning – not spend all their time trying to satisfy the demands of people who see our classrooms as a way to score political points.”
Representative Heap disagrees with these analyses of the bill, saying, “I believe that sunlight is the best disinfectant. My bill does not ban this teacher training, or any training, which a school district wishes to implement. It simply requires that if a school district requires, endorses, recommends, funds, or facilitates teacher training programs then they must make all those materials used (Digital or Physical) in that training available for parents to review.”
Due to the partisan breakdown of HB 2786s support and opposition in the early stages at the Arizona Legislature, it is highly likely that Democrat Katie Hobbs would veto this bill should it pass through both chambers and reach the Ninth Floor later this session.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
