CEBV Weekly: May 13, 2024
Harmful ballot measures on racial profiling & early voting. A symptom of dysfunction prompted by a loss of power.
It’s a long-held truism that nothing good ever happens at this point in session. A case in point: Republican lawmakers are considering putting a new “SB1070 on steroids” immigration measure1 on our November ballot. They’ll also consider a second new ballot measure attacking mail-in voting, which could be the price of some lawmakers’ vote on the first.
“SB1070 on steroids.” First, the bill we know the most about. HCR2060 unconstitutionally2 reassigns federal immigration responsibilities to the state — classifying crossing Arizona’s international border as a state crime, allowing state officials to deport border crossers, toughening penalties for fentanyl sales that result in death, and boosting verification of employees’ immigration status. The similarities to Arizona’s SB1070, a stain on our state’s history, are undeniable. They also remind us of the 2012 US Supreme Court ruling which said Arizona has no right to enforce federal immigration law.
Multiple constitutional issues. In addition to the whole “states can’t enforce federal immigration law” thing, the bill also contains other constitutional red flags. HCR2060 requires Arizona to hold people in prison while they wait for legal proceedings (which could violate the due process clause of the US Constitution) and grants local police immunity from civil lawsuits related to their actions (which could shield officers from being held accountable for racial profiling).
The result of Republican dysfunction. The only reason Arizona is discussing passing this bill at all is because Republicans cannot govern at the federal level. Remember, Trump blocked Congress from passing a border bill because he wanted to try to blame the issue on Biden. For Republicans to now introduce and campaign on this bill as “the solution to Democrats’ open borders” is doublespeak of the highest order.
Building the plane as they're flying it. As Ken Bennett (R-1) pointed out, in just 72 hours, the Senate introduced a brand-new strike-everything amendment, amended it in committee, further amended it on the floor, then asked lawmakers to vote to put that Frankenstein’s mash-up on our November ballot. Bennett said he was "eager to see the engrossed bill" — a diplomatic way of saying he wanted time to actually read the thing.
After hours of debate, rather than push forward with a roll-call vote, the Senate adjourned until 10am on Tuesday, at which time we presume they will expect Bennett to vote with the rest of his caucus and approve their unholy creation.
The bill would then go back to the House, where it must receive a final reading due to the brand-new text. If every House Republican also votes for it, the measure will go directly to the Secretary of State for inclusion on our November ballot, bypassing Gov. Hobbs’ veto stamp.
$325 million a year. Shockingly, enforcement of this measure could cost Arizona taxpayers at least $325 million a year. That price tag is on top of the $1.8 billion that Arizona must already come up with by June 30 to address the budget shortfall Republicans created with their sweeping tax cuts and unfettered universal ESA vouchers. Since the bill doesn’t contain an appropriation, Republicans are falling back on the old standby of arguing without evidence that the $325 million estimate is a lie and that their measure will somehow pay for itself. (Yeah, sure. We’ve seen that movie before and know how it ends.)
Where will the money come from? Even Yavapai County Sheriff David Rhodes, who showed up Wednesday to support HCR2060, said the bill would force law enforcement to hire more personnel. He told lawmakers on the committee that, if the measure passes, he and others would return to the legislature to request “the resources necessary to enforce the bill.”
Enabling racial profiling. HCR2060, like SB1070, is built on “reasonable suspicion” that a person entered Arizona illegally. As multiple testifiers pointed out, unless law enforcement actually witnesses a crossing, local police will end up relying on the old Joe Arpaio standby of “driving while brown.”
“Arizona lawmakers pushing a ballot measure to crack down on illegal immigration aren't telling the truth on what it does… There’s no such thing as an immigration crackdown without racial profiling.” — Elvia Diaz in the Arizona Republic
No amount of evidence would make Republican lawmakers acknowledge this irrefutable fact. They insisted no profiling will occur. But as Pinal County Attorney Kent Volkmer (who supports HCR2060) told the committee, “I think it is highly concerning that there is legislation that we have not worked out these kinks.” And, as with the similar Texas law SB4, the chaos is its own damage.
Attacking mail-in voting. Senate leadership has also set a committee hearing this coming week to attach a striker to long-stalled HCR2056, which previously would have asked voters to OK a racist “anti-diversity” ban on teaching certain content in schools. The Senate Elections Committee hearing meets Thursday at 10am3, likely after the floor vote on HCR2060. The short title for the striker is simply "elections." We won’t have official bill language until next week, but we hear Republicans led by Wendy Rogers (R-7) plan to try to restrict drop-off times or deadlines for early ballots — another terrible, stagnant idea that has no business becoming law.
Disenfranchising the majority of voters. We’re told the measure will require voters to drop off their early ballots by the Friday before Election Day. This would void voters' ability to use drop boxes on the weekend before the election or to drop their ballots off on Election Day, affecting a wide swath of Arizonans. In 2022, 75% of us were signed up to get early ballots, and this November, Maricopa County alone expects 350,000 ballots dropped off across 235 voting locations. This bill will force many of us to instead wait in longer lines to vote.
Republicans are flailing. The attacks first on immigration, then on elections, aren’t an accident; they’re a result of panic from our state’s legislative Republicans. They’re plainly losing on abortion and they feel the power they’ve held for decades slipping away — so they’re casting about wildly for any cause they think might regain them that power.
The solution they’ve come up with this week is to advance ballot referrals that even county attorneys and business leaders, usually their staunchest allies, oppose.
"The striker is facially unconstitutional. The criminal provisions are unenforceable, bad public policy, and embarrassing for this state." — Cochise County Attorney Brian McIntyre
"By taking on this federal responsibility, we're saddling overburdened law enforcement and correctional agencies with a new, unfunded mandate... Arizona businesses will pay the price." — Danny Seiden, AZ Chamber of Commerce
"[This] immigration measure is an unworkable response to a federal problem with unknown consequences." — Greater Phoenix Leadership
Arizona’s business community has long stood by its Republicans, even as they’ve run up massive deficits, even as they’ve blown three straight elections by ignoring voter preferences to run to the extreme right. Business leaders don’t want to make an enemy of the majority party, but negotiating with them hasn’t worked; most moderate Republicans are gone, replaced with obstinate ideologues who consider business leaders the enemy and say they’d rather lose power than change. Political observers have long wondered what it will take to push business leaders off the fence and finally cost Republicans that support. These bills could finally be the last straw.
Deep down, Republicans know their days are numbered: HCR2060 also gives legislative minority leaders the authority to defend the bill against lawsuits. Why write that into a bill only the current majority supports, unless you expect to soon find yourself in the minority? That’s a tacit admission of awareness that voters are likely to opt for a change.
⏰ If you have 5 minutes: Use Request to Speak to oppose the striker to HCR2056.
⏰⏰ If you have 15 minutes: Contact your senator and representatives to oppose HCR2060. This issue has split firmly along party lines, so if you’re contacting Republicans, remind them that HCR2060 is too extreme, that it’s costing them support from longtime business allies, and that it may ultimately cost them majority rule in November. If you’re contacting Democrats, thank them for their fiscal conservatism and basic human decency, and for upholding the US Constitution.
⏰⏰⏰ If you have 30 minutes: Contact Gov. Hobbs and your own lawmakers (or legislative leadership of either party) and ask them to fight for a state budget that does something about our out-of-control ESA voucher problem this year. Save Our Schools Arizona has a handy tool that makes this easy.
⏰⏰⏰⏰ If you have 45 minutes: Arizona desperately needs a different legislature. Find the competitive legislative district nearest you4, then sign up to volunteer for, or donate to, the candidates that best represent your values.
⏰⏰⏰⏰⏰ If you have 60 minutes: Join us on Zoom at 4pm on Sunday for our next CEBV Happy Hour conversation. This week we’ll feature swing-district candidates Deborah Howard and Kevin Volk, discussing running against MAGA candidates. We’ll meet every Sunday at 4 PM through the end of session. Sign up here.
Some of our readers had questions about our mention of the governor's line item veto power. This legislative brief, which we also linked to last week, has the answers.
In a nutshell:
Article V, Section 7 of the Arizona Constitution lays out the governor’s line-item veto power.
Bennett is attempting to designate money in the budget for his ballot images idea — i.e., an appropriation — instead of getting a bill passed.
Courts have held that items of appropriation are subject to the governor’s line item veto power.
Remember, blue text in this report indicates a link. Don’t miss clicking on those links for a deeper informational dive into whatever subject we’re discussing.
HCR2056, sponsored by Steve Montenegro (R-29), is now subject to an unspecified striker on “elections.” Official language isn’t available as of this writing, but we’re told the measure will require voters to drop off their early ballots by the Friday before Election Day. This would void voters' ability to use drop boxes on the weekend before the election or to drop their ballots off on Election Day, affecting a wide swath of voters. In 2022, 75% of us were signed up to get early ballots, and this November, Maricopa County alone expects 350,000 ballots dropped off across 235 voting locations. This bill will force many of us to instead wait in longer lines to vote. Scheduled for Senate Elections Committee, Thursday. OPPOSE.
This past week, Gov. Hobbs exercised her power to protect Arizonans from the following harmful, CEBV-opposed legislation.
Vetoed:
SB1473, Kern (R-27), would have forced state agencies to repay 1% of their annual budget in fines for every 30 days they were late in filing audit reports. The bill was driven by a misplaced belief that government is wasteful and lazy. In committee, Kern stated that school boards are misusing and abusing taxpayer funds, that agencies are “thumbing their nose” at audit enforcement, and “if we take away some of their budget, that will light a fire under their rear end.” Yanking funds from Arizona’s chronically underfunded state agencies would only worsen their ability to file on-time reports. Vetoed 5/6; veto letter here.
2024 Session Timeline
Sunday, 6/30 Constitutionally mandated deadline for a state budget
Flag this handy list of contact info, committee chairs and assignments, updated for 2024.
Bookmark CEBV’s Linktree. Want to attend a Civics, Persuasion, Testimony, RTS or other training? Ready to register for an upcoming Spotlight Conversation or view a past one? Need to stay informed? Looking for our social media, inspiration, or self-care tips? It’s all here on our Linktree:
Sponsor Janae Shamp (R-29) insists HCR2060 is a border measure, not an immigration measure. That’s as ridiculous as insisting Arizona’s state tree is a palo verde, not a tree.
The core of the Arizona v. United States Supreme Court decision was that SB1070 unconstitutionally interferes with the federal government’s authority to set and enforce immigration policy.
Originally, Senate leadership was advancing long-stalled HCR2032 on Wednesday as a vehicle for the striker. It’s unclear why the bill changed; the likely answer is simply “more flailing.”
Those districts are 2, 4, 9, 13, 16, 17, 23, and 27. (Yes, we’re going to keep repeating this until November 5th, why do you ask?)
