by Jonathan Eberle | Oct 25, 2025 | News
By Jonathan Eberle |
Arizona Public Service (APS) is seeking to raise electricity rates by 14% starting in 2026 — a move the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AZFEC) argues would unfairly burden Arizona families while subsidizing costly “green energy” initiatives and the early closure of a key coal plant.
According to filings with the Arizona Corporation Commission, APS attributes the proposed rate increase largely to battery storage projects and the early retirement of the Cholla Power Plant. The Arizona Free Enterprise Club filed an official response criticizing APS for attempting to block the organization’s intervention in the case, while allowing environmental groups such as the Sierra Club to participate. “APS has no issue letting radical groups like the Sierra Club into their hearings, but they’re trying to block the one organization fighting for Arizona families,” said AZFEC President Scot Mussi.
Mussi contends APS’s “carbon free” and “carbon neutral” commitments over the past five years have shaped their energy plans — including their Integrated Resource Plans and large-scale renewable energy projects — resulting in higher costs for consumers. “For years, their voluntary commitments have very likely increased costs for Arizona ratepayers,” the organization said in its filing.
Two days after filing its response, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club announced it had been officially granted intervention in the APS case. This designation allows AZFEC to participate directly in proceedings, making it the only organization representing ratepayers who oppose the rate hike.
In the ruling, the Administrative Law Judge overseeing the case described the Club as “the lone proponent” of an energy approach emphasizing reliability, affordability, and independence — priorities the group says align with President Trump’s “American Energy Dominance” agenda.
“While others are lobbying to shut down Arizona’s coal plants and pour billions into unreliable Green New Scam projects, we’re standing up for the ratepayers who will be left to foot the bill,” Mussi said. “We’re proud to be the only organization in this case fighting to keep Arizona’s energy secure, affordable, and free from political interference.”
The Club’s participation ensures that Arizona ratepayers have a voice during the proceedings, according to Mussi and AZFEC Deputy Policy Director Greg Blackie. “This isn’t about politics — it’s about protecting Arizona families and ensuring that our state doesn’t fall victim to the same radical energy policies destroying affordability across the country,” said Blackie. “We intend to shine a light on the real costs, the real numbers, and the real consequences of this so-called green transition.”
The case before the Arizona Corporation Commission will determine whether APS can move forward with its proposed rate hike. The Arizona Free Enterprise Club says it plans to continue pressing for “transparency, accountability, and energy freedom,” ensuring that “ratepayers are not forced to fund reckless green energy policies.”
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Sep 22, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
The Legislative District 10 Republican Committee in East Mesa has unanimously censured Councilwoman Julie Spilsbury for using her non-partisan office to campaign for Democrats in 2024. The censure also condemned her for voting in favor of allowing men to use women-only facilities.
Spilsbury, who is facing a recall challenge this year, became embroiled in a scandal after making public endorsements of Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 Presidential Election, in addition to endorsing Arizona Democrats Congressman Greg Stanton, Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, and Senator Ruben Gallego. The recall campaign, supported by Turning Point Action, submitted the 5,000 required voter signatures in May. Spilsbury is facing a challenge for her seat from conservative Dorean Taylor.
The censure from the LD10 Republicans lays out a case against Spilsbury for her endorsements of Harris, Stanton, Fontes, and Gallego despite her membership in the Republican Party, as well as her vote for “a non-discrimination order that allows men in women’s private spaces, and potentially penalizes business owners, forcing them to disregard or contradict their religious convictions and compromise their religious freedom and rights or be fined due to the ordinance,” according to a statement from the Committee.
The Committee also alleges that Spilsbury, “has benefited from her endorsements and publicly announced the offer of support and assistance in the current recall election, including Democrat Senator Ruben Gallego, the Democrat CD4 Representative, Greg Stanton, and the Democrat Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes.”
Spilsbury told Axios in July that the three Arizona Democrats have reached out to her to offer their support in her recall. She openly acknowledged the likely outcome of her endorsement of Harris in the 2024 Presidential election, telling the outlet, “I did what I did with my eyes wide open. I knew it wasn’t going to be popular.”
In the text of the censure, the committee resolved, “The Republican Committee of Legislative District 10 calls on Republican voters in Mesa to heed this vote of no confidence, cease recognition of Recalled Councilwoman Spilsbury as a Republican in good standing and cease support for Julie Spilsbury in any elected or appointed capacity, or future election for any prospective office.”
Earlier this month, the Arizona Freedom Club PAC officially endorsed Dorean Taylor in the Mesa Recall Election. Scot Mussi, Chair of the Arizona Freedom Club PAC said in a statement posted to X, “Dorean Taylor is exactly the kind of leader Mesa needs—someone who will stand up for taxpayers and put families first. Her vision for safer communities, responsible government, and protecting hard-working families from higher taxes aligns with the values we fight for every day.”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Ethan Faverino | Sep 18, 2025 | News
By Ethan Faverino |
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club escalated its call for accountability, urging the County Attorneys of Mohave, Pinal, and Yuma Counties to launch investigations into Arizona State University (ASU) leadership for allegedly manipulating 2022 gubernatorial debate rules to favor Democratic Katie Hobbs over Republican Kari Lake.
The action follows a complaint filed by the Club in August 2025, with the Arizona Attorney General and Maricopa County Attorney, which was dismissed without a thorough review, prompting a broader push for enforcement under state law.
In a sharply worded letter addressed to the Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith, Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller, and Yuma County Attorney Karolyn Kaczorowski, Club President Scot Mussi detailed evidence of ASU’s deviation from established debate protocols, accusing university officials of using public resources to influence the election in violation of A.R.S. § 15-1633.
The statute states: “A person acting on behalf of a university or a person who aids another person acting on behalf of a university shall not spend or use university resources for the purpose of influencing the outcomes of elections or to advocate support for or opposition to pending or proposed legislation.”
This call-to-action stems from a September 2022 debate co-sponsored by ASU, Arizona PBS, and the Citizens Clean Elections Commission (CCEC).
Under longstanding CCEC regulations (Ariz. Admin. Code § R2-20-107(K)), a candidate declining an invitation to debate their political opponent forfeits airtime, granting the attending opponent a 30-minute solo interview.
When Hobbs announced she would skip the debate, ASU and PBS bypassed set regulations, granting her an exclusive 30-minute interview, a first in years to do so.
Internal communications, obtained and reported by the Arizona Republic, exposed the intent behind the decision. ASU President Michael Crow, Chief of Staff James O’Brien, and ASU Media Enterprise Managing Director Mi-Ai Parrish allegedly prioritized Hobbs’ comfort over neutrality.
Parrish’s emails to O’Brien highlighted concerns that “Katie is getting roasted hard” for dodging the debate and pressed CCEC staff to limit Lake’s discussion of election integrity, arguing that airing “a person with those views was wrong.” CCEC Executive Director Tom Collins confirmed to the Republic that Parrish sought to suppress Lake’s platform.
Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly listed the names of the County Attorneys. They have now been corrected.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Sep 14, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Attorneys from the Goldwater Institute, representing the Center for Arizona Policy and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, joined former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould on Thursday to challenge Proposition 211. The measure, called the “Voters’ Right to Know Act,” is being contested on the grounds that it violates the state Constitution’s protections for free speech and privacy.
In the wake of Turning Point USA co-founder Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and a decade marked by attacks on political figures—the security risks of effectively doxxing political donors loom large in the case.
If upheld, the law would force nonprofit groups that weigh in on ballot measures or reference incumbents near an election to publicly disclose their donors—not just names and amounts, but also home addresses and employers—in a searchable database.
In today’s climate of escalating political violence—from death threats and swatting to vandalism, arson, and even assassinations—a database like this could essentially become a “hit list.”
In a press release the Goldwater Institute explained its position stating, “While proponents of the Voters’ Right to Know Act say they’re simply combatting so-called ‘dark money’ in politics, it is clear to Goldwater and its clients — the Center for Arizona Policy, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, and individual donors — that their real intent is to intimidate their political opponents into silence.”
“Arizona’s Proposition 211 is as un-American as it is dangerous. No one should be exposed to retaliation or violence simply for supporting causes they believe in,” said Jon Riches, Goldwater’s Vice President of Litigation. “The law also violates Arizona’s Constitution, which provides stronger protections for freedom of speech and privacy than even the U.S. Constitution. That’s why we at the Goldwater Institute believe the Arizona Supreme Court will ultimately strike down Proposition 211.”
Arizona Free Enterprise Club President Scot Mussi added, “They’re afraid of the activist organizations out there. They’re afraid of politicians and others that want to exact retaliation because they simply support a position or belief that they disagree.”
Mussi characterized the law as “a dangerous threat to our right to free speech and association.”
“As drafted, the law can be used to unconstitutionally target and harass private citizens, including our organization and our supporters,” Mussi stated. “We are confident that the Supreme Court will recognize the danger this law poses and will rule in our favor.”
In a statement to AZ Free News in May, Mussi elaborated on the potential for political intimidation: “Both the U.S. Constitution and the Arizona Constitution guarantee citizens the right to speak freely, which includes the right to not be forced to speak. Prop 211 not only violates this right for donors by silencing them from supporting causes they believe in but impairs the speech of nonprofits like ours as well.”
Peter Gentala, President of the Center for Arizona Policy, stated in a press release that Proposition 211 “creates an atmosphere of fear among those who support nonprofits that engage in the most pressing issues in Arizona today.”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Sep 1, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Goldwater Institute attorneys and former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould are set to argue against Proposition 211 at the Arizona Supreme Court on September 11th. The Goldwater attorneys and Justice Gould argue that Prop 211, which requires nonprofit organizations to disclose the personal information, including names and addresses, of all their donors, violates the Arizona State Constitution’s guarantee of privacy.
According to Goldwater, “Under that law, donors to organizations that spend money on initiative campaigns must have their names, addresses, phone numbers, and employment information placed on a publicly accessible government list—thereby inviting retaliation, ostracism, and even violence.”
Goldwater Vice President of Litigation Jon Riches told AZ Free News, “Arizona’s Proposition 211 is as un-American as it is dangerous. No one should be exposed to retaliation or violence simply for supporting causes they believe in. The law also violates Arizona’s Constitution, which provides stronger protections for freedom of speech and privacy than even the U.S. Constitution.”
He continued, “That’s why we at the Goldwater Institute believe the Arizona Supreme Court will ultimately strike down Proposition 211 and offer the first clear roadmap for mounting state constitutional challenges to donor-disclosure laws across the country.”
The legal challenge was brought by Goldwater Institute on behalf of the Center for Arizona Policy and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, working on the basis that “Arizona’s constitution forbids the state from stripping people of their confidentiality as the price of supporting or opposing a political view.”
The Arizona State Constitution, unlike its federal counterpart, offers explicit protections for privacy in Article 2, Section 8, which reads, “No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.” Likewise, under Article 2 Section 6, the right for all Arizonans to “freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects,” when coupled with the landmark Supreme Court of the United States case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission would seem to overwhelmingly uphold the right of Arizonans to donate privately to support or oppose a political cause.
As the late Justice Antonin Scalia observed, “The dissent says that ‘speech’ refers to oral communications of human beings, and since corporations are not human beings they cannot speak. Post, at 37, n. 55. This is sophistry. The authorized spokesman of a corporation is a human being, who speaks on behalf of the human beings who have formed that association—just as the spokesman of an unincorporated association speaks on behalf of its members. The power to publish thoughts, no less than the power to speak thoughts, belongs only to human beings, but the dissent sees no problem with a corporation’s enjoying the freedom of the press.”
In May, Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, echoed that sentiment writing, “We are thankful that the Arizona Supreme Court accepted review of this vital case for our First Amendment liberties. Both the U.S. Constitution and the Arizona Constitution guarantee citizens the right to speak freely, which includes the right to not be forced to speak. Prop 211 not only violates this right for donors by silencing them from supporting causes they believe in but impairs the speech of nonprofits like ours as well. We are hopeful that the Arizona Supreme Court will rule in favor of the Constitution after considering the merits of the case.”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
