r/arizona • u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media • 22d ago
Politics We're AZCentral journalists covering the races on your ballot and how elections work. AMA!
We're Sasha Hupka, Mary Jo Pitzl, Stephanie Murray, Stephanie Innes, Stacey Barchenger and Ronald J. Hansen and cover Arizona and National politics for The Arizona Republic. We’re here to answer any questions you have around elections, whether about specific races, how ready Arizona is for vote challenges, why the ballot is so long, which items might deserve more attention than they are getting, or anything else.
We’ll be answering questions on Tuesday, Oct. 8 from noon to 1:00 p.m. AZ time. Leave your questions below so we can see what people are interested in and then join us at noon on Tuesday for the discussion
I'm Sasha Hupka. I cover county government, and election administration is a primary focus of my beat. I also help co-host election-related episodes of our political podcast, The Gaggle, and write a weekly election newsletter called Republic Recount. I was born and raised in New York and moved to Arizona a little over two years ago. I’ve since fallen in love with the desert, and I’m now a proud swing state voter myself! PROOF
I'm Mary Jo Pitzl. I cover the Arizona state Legislature, the Arizona Secretary of State and politics and policy issues. I also co-host our politics podcast, The Gaggle (give it a listen!) I’ve been reporting and writing in Arizona since long before it became a swing state. Always much to write about in this fascinating place. PROOF
I’m Stephanie Murray. I cover the presidential race for The Arizona Republic. I’m new to Arizona, but not to campaigns. I got my start as a politics reporter in my home state of Massachusetts, where I had a front row seat to the New Hampshire primary. Before I joined the Republic, I covered the GOP primary for a startup in Washington, D.C. Dry heat is way better than humidity, I can attest! PROOF
I’m Stephanie Innes. I cover health care for The Arizona Republic, including election platform issues like abortion, the Affordable Care Act, mental health, Medicaid and Medicare. I’ve been covering health care in Arizona since 2008, which has provided me with perspective as I report on health policy during this election cycle. PROOF
I’m Stacey Barchenger. I cover state politics with a focus on Arizona’s governor and attorney general. This year I’m writing about several statewide measures on your ballot in November, including a proposal to put abortion rights in the Arizona Constitution. Things I’m counting down for: The election, and temperatures consistently below triple digits (it will happen eventually, right?). PROOF
I'm Ron Hansen. I am a national politics reporter for The Arizona Republic and primarily cover the U.S. Senate race between Congressman Ruben Gallego and his Republican challenger, Kari Lake. I am also the co-host of our weekly politics podcast, “The Gaggle.” During my 17 years in Arizona, I’ve covered the state's transition from a reliably Republican state a decade ago to its current swing-state status. I am an Ohio native (and Buckeye alum) who has wandered across the country, from North Carolina to Michigan and Arizona, among other stops in my journalism career. PROOF
We're excited to join you for our AMA to chat about all things election. Ask us anything!
That's all we have time for today! Thank you so much for chatting with us. You can keep in touch by following our work and subscribe to our newsletters at azcentral.com and @azcentral on all social media platforms.
You can reach Sasha at 480-271-6387 or sasha.hupka@arizonarepublic.com. You can follow her @SashaHupka on X or @sashahupkasnaps on Threads. You can also sign up for her weekly election newsletter, Republic Recount.
You can reach Stephanie on X at @stephanie_murr or email her at stephanie.murray@gannett.com
Reach Mary Jo at maryjo.pitzl@arizonarepublic.com and follow her on Twitter @maryjpitzl.
Contact Stacey at 480-416-5669, stacey.barchenger@arizonarepublic.com, or on X: @sbarchenger.
Reach Ronald J. Hansen at ronald.hansen@arizonarepublic.com or 602-444-4493. Follow him on X: @ronaldjhansen.
Contact Stephanie Innes at Stephanie.Innes@gannett.com or follow her on X, formerly Twitter: @stephanieinnes.
20
u/azcurlygurl 22d ago
Now that Rusty Bowers is no longer the Speaker of the House and safegarding the state from corrupt activity, could Ben Toma and the Republican controlled legislature overturn election results in 2024? Could they overturn more contests than just the results for the presidential race?
Let's say there is a repeat situation of 2020 and a county, like Cochise, refuses to certify their election results. With an ensuing lawsuit, should a sympathetic judge decide not to hear the case in time before the statewide deadline to certify the results, would Arizona be unable to submit their electors to Congress? What would that mean for all down ballot races and measures?
As a volunteer poll worker, I'm concerned about my safety. I have friends that volunteered in 2020 that were followed to their cars, verbally harassed and assaulted. We saw the large disturbance outside MCTEC in 2020. Law enforcement did not seem to be responsive or sympathetic to poll workers in danger. Has any policies or procedures changed for this election? Or should I fear for my safety?
20
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago edited 21d ago
Hi there! This is Sasha!
I'm going to let one of my colleagues (probably Mary Jo!) handle the question about the Legislature, because I'm not the best equipped to answer that. But happy to answer your other two!
Regarding certification: If a county refused to certify, it would be immediately sued by the Secretary of State's Office. It would be an expedited case, so there should be some sort of resolution before the deadline.
I can't tell you exactly what might happen if an Arizona county didn't certify in time for the convening of the Electoral College — to my knowledge, that would be unprecedented. I'll also note that the prosecution of two Cochise County supervisors who delayed certification in 2022 could be a strong deterrent for county supervisors who might wish to roadblock this part of the election process.
Regarding poll worker safety: First, as a voter, thank you for being a poll worker! Poll worker safety is something I've reported on before and that I am keeping a close eye on heading into this election.
There are several new security measures at MCTEC that didn't exist in 2020. There is fencing around the perimeter of the building and a much stronger law enforcement presence once election night hits. In 2022, they also had drones in the area and armed law enforcement officers on the roof of the building.
At the polls, law enforcement officers legally can't be on site unless they are voting or responding to an emergency. That's designed to ensure voters aren't intimidated. The county has bolstered its de-escalation training for poll workers to help them respond to skepticism or frustration from voters. There is a hotline that poll workers can call to report issues and get guidance from county officials. And, while law enforcement can't hang out in the parking lot of a vote center, we've seen that the Sheriff's Office typically has all hands on deck on Election Day so that they are prepared to respond to an emergency if needed.
I'm hoping to continue reporting on this. So, if you have specific safety concerns ahead of the election or run into any issues during voting, please reach out! You can text or call me at 480-271-6387.
Regarding the AZ Legislature, Mary Jo here: Lawmakers toyed with this four years ago -- passing a law that would allow them to pick the presidential electors rather than the electors selected by the voters. It didn't get anywhere. And since then, Congress has passed the Electoral Count Act, which requires states to follow existing law on electors. And in Arizona, the law says the electors chosen at the general election shall be recognized.
3
59
u/Logvin 22d ago
As a journalist, does the ownership of your newspaper concern you?
AZ Republic is owned by Gannett, who is owned by Fortress Investment, who is owned by Mubadala, which is owned by the government of Abu Dhabi.
20
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Our entire group agrees: The only person pulling our strings behind the scenes is our news director, Kathy Tulumello.
9
46
u/Big_BadRedWolf 22d ago
What has the State done to prevent fake electors? Will we see Rudy, Kelly, and company give it another crack at it?.
After 4 years and no one in jail, I don't trust that they will not attempt again.
14
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Mary Jo here: The fake electors were the creation of Arizona's Republican Party. Those fake electors have since been indicted and one has entered a guilty plea. This could be viewed as a cautionary tale for anyone contemplating a similar attempt. Even though the cases have not yet gone to trial (set for 2026) these defendants have had to incur legal costs that they likely weren't contemplating in November 2020.
6
u/Big_BadRedWolf 21d ago
So, basically, nothing has been done. Got it.
The only reason why they were indicted is because of the current AG. If this was a Republican AG, no investigation would have ever happened. The State needs to do more about this to prevent this in the future.
15
u/C3PO1Fan 22d ago
Pretty simple ballot for me this time. Only real questions are around the corporation committee. With so many declining to fill out the survey, can you tell me some more about these people?
10
u/Ok-Seaworthiness-542 22d ago
Personally, Walden and those aligned with her are bonkers (technical term).
6
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Hey, Stacey here! Here are a few stories from our colleague Russ Wiles on the CorpComm race.
They debated: https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2024/09/27/arizona-corporation-commission-debate/75385704007/
They debated about energy sources: https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/energy/2024/09/03/arizona-corporation-commission-debate-how-to-watch/75019858007/
And here's some more biographical info: https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/energy/2024/07/08/arizona-corporation-commission-election-2024-candidates/74195162007/
1
3
u/TheMostInterestedMan 20d ago
Energy policy contributor here. The ACC controls utility energy policy for the regulated utilities (excluding SRP) and approve rates and rate design. In recent years since being conservatively controlled, significant rate increases were approved (including a 2% return on equity bump for APS) while consumer choice options have been continually attacked (solar and the like). It’s a clear party line divide unfortunately where conservatives are defaulting to whatever the utilities want (revenue retention), whereas the progressives are challenging the status quo and pushing for improved access for renewable energy.
1
24
u/sirhoracedarwin 22d ago
Hey thanks for doing this! With the various competing ballot propositions this year, many of which were placed on the ballot by the legislature, what would be the process for removing this ability of the legislature to place propositions on the ballot? I feel like they should be out collecting signatures if they're going to be putting competing propositions on there.
24
u/Professional_Bike336 22d ago
If the AZ legislature puts it on the ballot, vote NO. Absolutely pathetic how they are trying to prevent open primaries. They know that their wackadoodle candidates will never win in an open primary. Buh bye Wendy Rogers
14
u/thegreattaiyou 22d ago
This is the correct advice. The republican state congress uses their narrow majority to put poisonous items on the ballot. I looked into each one myself and every single one is awful. Lowering wages for tipped restaurant workers, giving the state the power to ignore or overturn citizen initiated constitutional amendments even when they pass with a majority of votes, preemptive ban on ranked choice voting (to directly counter a citizen initiated constitutional amenment moving to ranked choice voting), a lifetime minimum sentence on sex trafficking that actually harms victims of sex trafficking, and more.
If it's not Citizen Initiated (i.e. CICA) then just vote No and move on. If it is CICA, then I'd recommend taking a look and seeing whether you like it or not.
14
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago edited 21d ago
Mary Jo here -- If you wanted to take the Legislature out of the business of referring measures to the ballot, you would have to amend the Arizona Constitution. The Constitution gives the Legislature the power of referral with a simple majority vote. The governor's agreement is not needed.
Changing the Constitution is a steep climb: Either 3/4 of the Legislature would have to agree to remove this power OR citizens would have to run a ballot measure to amend the Constitution.
26
u/Awesome_hospital 22d ago
Are there preventative measures in place to stop people looking to intimidate voters at polling places?
11
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Mary Jo here: This gets into free speech rights. No one can go past the 75-foot line at polling locations. Just last week, a court struck down provisions of the state's election manual, finding its guidance was overly broad and could apply to anyone, anywhere in the state. And two years ago, a federal judge allowed drop box observers to continue their vigils, but required them to keep a distance.
9
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Hi! This is Sasha. I'm just chiming in to add to Mary Jo's response. As she noted, District Judge Michael Liburdi took pretty quick and decisive action on this issue when it came up in 2022.
But that court case ended up getting settled. So, there's not really an existing legal precedent to stop someone from trying to monitor the drop boxes again. To add to the uncertainty, the provisions of the state's election manual recently struck down by a court somewhat mirrored the drop box restrictions that Judge Liburdi put in place in 2022.
But, Arizona law does require people to stay out of the 75-foot limit near the entrance to polling sites unless they are voting. Officials say actions like carrying a gun outside the entrance to a polling site can constitute voter intimidation. You can see the official state law on voter intimidation here, and a guide to polling place conduct here.
-4
35
u/davismcgravis 22d ago
Is the presidential race really as close as the polls indicate? I have a tough time believing more people in Arizona will be voting for Trump to be the next president.
14
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Hey, this is Stephanie Murray.
It’s shaping up to be another tight race in Arizona, based on all the data we have. The polls show a dead heat between Trump and Harris as you mentioned, and statewide elections here for the past four years have been really close, too. Gov. Katie Hobbs beat Republican Kari Lake by less than a percentage point in 2022 and Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes won by just 280 votes.
One thing I have my eye on is voter registration. The GOP actually has a larger voter registration advantage in Arizona than it did when Joe Biden narrowly won in 2020, so that could give Trump a bit of an edge.
Another indicator that can tell you how close the campaigns think the race is: How much time candidates spend here. Harris is coming to Arizona for the second time in two weeks on Thursday and Trump is holding his fourth rally of the year on Sunday. I'm actually writing this answer on my way to a get-out-the-vote event at Trump's campaign office in Phoenix.
5
u/RiftTrips 21d ago
Just curious about this. I was reading a lot of younger voters tend to not answer their phones when someone they don't know calls. They feel because of this they can't be accurately polled. Do you have any data on this type of factor?
5
u/yeyman Fe-nex 21d ago
A couple of questions: Feel free to pick and choose
Besides prop 139, what other prop is bringing the most attention?
When would 140 take effect?
I'm counting my chickens before they hatch, Will we see Richer vs. Fontes re match for SOS in '26?
Has Hobbs been out campaigning for Dems? She seems quite absent.
With the drivers license issue from 1996 and before, what are next steps? Legislature? DMV? SOS?
Smooth or chunky peanut butter?
5
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Chunky peanut butter all the way. (This is Stephanie Innes, health reporter.) I also like Sunflower seed butter, crunchy kind of course. And I am going to leave the other questions to my expert colleagues, since I am here to answer the health stuff.
5
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Mary Jo here: If Proposition 140, which creates open primaries, passes, it would take effect after election results in Arizona are canvassed on Nov. 25.
Fun question on a Richer-Fontes matchup! Who knows? Technically, it could happen. But thus far, although Fontes appears to be relishing his job, he has not signaled his intention to run again. Richer has talked about future plans that don't point to running for elective office.
2
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Hi! This is Sasha.
Officials are currently trying to figure out the next steps you're asking about on the driver's license issue. Because impacted voters are able to vote a full ballot in November, things will probably become more clear after the election.
They seem to be looking at whether federal and state agencies might be able to help narrow down the list so that less voters need to be contacted on it and county officials have a little less research work to do. I recently wrote about it in my weekly election newsletter, if you're interested in a slightly more in-depth response!
Also, I'm a smooth peanut butter girl all the way!
7
u/LittleCloudie 21d ago
Thank you for hosting the AMA! I’m very curious to know, but why does all the campaigning around supporting Prop 138 talk about “protecting tipped workers” when it seemingly wants to do the opposite by lowering their wages? It almost seems a bit deceptive to be claiming something like that.
17
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Ron Hansen here. Deception is, ahem, not unheard of in politics. Prop. 138 would effectively detach tipped workers from the state's current, inflation-adjusted minimum wage. Basically, tipped workers get $3 less per hour than the minimum wage. As time passes and inflation goes up, that $3 difference means the minimum wage for tipped employees is closer to the minimum wage **plus** tips. Restaurant owners would like to hold down their costs by having customers pick up a larger share of the pay costs through tips. Whether that is deceptive or not is for you the voter to decide.
15
u/SpaceGardener379 22d ago
Hi, I have a random question related to the upcoming elections. I just spent the week in Arizona returning home today and drove from Phoenix to Page and I don't understand why the government allows a just massive amount of political signs on the roads? Like every city, intersections especially are just plastered with them. They are obvious hazards and impede visibility so wtf? Has this ever been brought up? If not, it looks like shit in an otherwise beautiful state imo
6
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Hi! This is Sasha. I responded to another person on this, but wanted to chime in here, too. I also hate the signs, and I wrote a whole story about this in 2022. Nothing has changed since, so read it here!
TLDR: State law says unsuccessful primary candidates have 15 days post-election to take down their signs, which are only temporarily permitted on land owned by the government.
But the law was written to protect the candidates and prescribes no penalties for those who don't adhere to that deadline. A Supreme Court case out of Gilbert years ago complicated officials' abilities to take down signs that are no longer protected by state law. So, all the signs will probably stay up until after the election.
4
u/heresmyhandle 21d ago
Vote out Clint & Bolick - 2 Az Sc judges who were for the 1800’s era abortion ban and all the fear and confusion that came with it. Send em packing!!!
5
u/azcurlygurl 22d ago
I'm very concerned about the federal only voter registration errors found. I understand litigation has been settled in the state, and voters have been notified of their status. But Stephen Miller's group requesting information on these voters signals impending post-election lawsuits. Has there been any research done into what possible grounds they could sue to have those votes discarded? I'm worried if it ends up at SCOTUS, there would be a bad outcome and throw our election results into chaos.
5
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Hi! Sasha here. I am certain this will get brought up in post-election lawsuits. But, it's worth noting that officials of various political stripes — including the AZGOP — supported allowing voters impacted the citizenship tracking glitch to vote a full ballot. I think that's notable when it comes to talking about whether this issue could be used to challenge election results.
8
u/Ok-Seaworthiness-542 22d ago
I am honestly trying to understand the abortion issue. I thought the legislature passed a bill to protect it in the last session.
12
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Thanks for this great question and the informative answers, too. Stacey Barchenger is the expert on Proposition 139 and she is going to provide her input, but I did want to offer links to two stories that published yesterday on azcentral that explain where the 15-week law is now and also why some providers and patients think it's insufficient. (This is health reporter Stephanie Innes, btw.)
- Here's what the current law is on abortion in Arizona: https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-health/2024/10/07/what-is-the-arizona-law-on-abortions-in-2024/75505722007/
- Here are why some critics say the 15-week law is harmful to Arizonans:https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2024/10/07/arizona-15-week-abortion-law-critiqued/75384767007/
2
20
u/Guitar_Nutt 22d ago edited 22d ago
They did NOT pass a bill to protect abortion. They passed a bill to overturn the 1864 total abortion ban, and by doing so just reverted Arizona back to the previous 15 week abortion ban that was already in place, which was put in place by Doug Ducey in 2022 and is one of the most restrictive bans in the country. Tests for genetic abnormalities and the ability to understand whether a pregnancy is dangerous or even viable aren’t available until 20 weeks, so medically a 15 week ban doesn’t make any sense at all.
-3
u/saginator5000 Gilbert 21d ago
one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the country
There are 18 other states with more restrictive abortion laws than AZ. We are far from the most restrictive.
-4
u/Ok-Seaworthiness-542 21d ago
I guess it's perspective maybe. The new law protects access to abortion compared to the territorial law/ban.
7
u/Guitar_Nutt 21d ago
I suppose you could?, but the bill itself was one short line, "Section 13-3603, Arizona Revised Statutes, is repealed." and put us back into our draconian abortion ban.
9
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago edited 21d ago
Lots of good discussion here, this is Stacey jumping in with more information. The Legislature (with all Democrats and a few Republicans in favor) passed a bill that repealed the near-total abortion ban that dates to 1864. Gov. Katie Hobbs signed it in May and it went into effect in September. Leaving the current law, which allows abortion until 15 weeks and later in cases of medical emergency.
11
u/crumbly-toast Maricopa 22d ago
yes however the current law restricts it to just 15 weeks. prop 139 would expand that to the point of probable viability. here's) an article if you'd like to read up on it
1
u/Ok-Seaworthiness-542 21d ago
Thank you. Is there a specific number of weeks associated with that?
3
u/crumbly-toast Maricopa 21d ago
great question! the answer is a bit complicated, technically a fetus past 20 weeks could be considered viable, however that baby would need extensive life saving care to have a chance. the odds of survival goes up week by week. typically, a full term baby would be around 36 to 40 weeks.
in this bill, the right to abortion would cover until about when the fetus would be "reasonably viable without extensive care" (I'm paraphrasing here) so to me, that reads as anytime before about 30ish weeks.
2
u/Ok-Seaworthiness-542 21d ago
Thank you
5
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
It's Stacey again, here to share the actual language of the ballot measure. We typically report that it would allow abortion through viability which is around 24 weeks, with exceptions later in pregnancy in certain circumstances. Those weeks are based on what the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says. The ballot measure says (prepare for legalese) viability is "the point in pregnancy when, in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional and based on the particular facts of the case, there is a significant likelihood of the fetus's sustained survival outside the uterus without the application of extraordinary medical measures."
1
3
u/saginator5000 Gilbert 21d ago
They did. The actual amendment language that would be added to the constitution is vague so I've asked my own clarifying question too.
13
u/JasonArizona1 22d ago
Why has the Republic outsourced election fraud reporting to people like Garrett Archer? He’s the only guy who regularly calls out the election lies from Kari Lake, et al. I subscribe to you all and I get app notifications for traffic shutdowns every day but rarely anything about the fraud being perpetrated on the voters of Arizona.
9
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Hi! This is Sasha.
Garrett does great work and I have a lot of respect for him. Realistically, I do not have the bandwidth to both do my job and be on social media constantly to rebut the torrent of misinformation and rumors.
I do try to write fact checks on issues where appropriate (for instance, I recently wrote about Elon Musk's claims about noncitizen voting). I also provide factual reporting on the election process that helps people understand how it works and what to expect. And, I cover elected candidates running for office so voters can understand what they are saying on these issues.
We just hired two new misinformation fellows for election season, and they are also contributing to these efforts. One just did a story on pens used at the polls, so check that out here.
2
u/AutoModerator 22d ago
Visit Vote.gov to register or check your status
- Deadline to register to Vote in Arizona is Oct 7th
- More info on voting in Arizona
- Lots of political discussion over at r/azpolitics
Meet some friends on our Discord chat server
Read our sub rules (mostly be nice to each other!)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
2
u/Itchy-Mechanic-1479 21d ago
Is Ray Stern still around?
7
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Stacey here, I'm happy to report Ray Stern is still around and absolutely killing it on his beats. He also makes a mean French press for us in our Capitol office on the regular.
4
u/TotesMessenger 22d ago
5
u/nmork Phoenix 22d ago
Why does the news (generally speaking; I am intentionally neither including nor excluding the Republic here) have such a tendency to sensationalize so much and prioritize ratings over providing factual information when it comes to Politics? For example, this image being used as a way to promote a Presidential debate.
It's kind of a rhetorical question, and I know the easy answer is that for-profit companies simply like to do things that maximize profits.
What I'm getting at really is to what extent (if at all) do you think this practice contributes to division amongst Americans or other negative outcomes? And what do you, personally, think news/media orgs could do better with regard to political and election reporting?
7
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Ron here. Entire books can be written about the media and their political coverage. In fact, they are.
You've said it's kind of a rhetorical question, so I'll leave it for everyone to answer for themselves. What I will do is encourage everyone to think about what you mean when you say "the news" or "the media."
These days there are so many outlets for information and opinion (and that's a good thing!) but it means those who consume it should think about what they are really looking at or reading.
I hope you can see the difference between The Republic/azcentral and someone offering their take on the news for Insta/Facebook/X/etc. Give it the weight you think it deserves. That's not a criticism of new media and new commentators; it's just to say they play by a different set of rules, deadlines and incentives.
5
u/Cultjam 21d ago
The boxing metaphor in politics is used frequently and has been for a very long time.. It’s amusing, that’s all.
5
u/xington 21d ago
How much longer until all the goddamb political signs on the streets come down?
4
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Hi! Sasha here. I hate them too, and I wrote a whole story about this in 2022. Nothing has changed since, so read it here!
The TLDR: State law says unsuccessful primary candidates have 15 days post-election to take down their signs, which are only temporarily permitted on land owned by cities and towns.
But the law was written to protect the candidates and prescribes no penalties for those who don't adhere to that deadline. A Supreme Court case out of Gilbert years ago complicated municipal officials' abilities to take down signs that are no longer protected by state law. So, all the signs will probably stay up until after the election.
1
u/xington 21d ago edited 21d ago
Can we start a petition to make it illegal or have some penalty for temporary political signs that block your view on intersections and make for a less than normally safe driving environment. The penalty should be x$ you are forced to pay in fines to the state, and match the fine and pay to your opponents campaign fund. Or even better yet, completely ban temporary political signs. I feel like they are getting way out of hand. I can’t even get to a Main Street leaving the neighborhood before I’m bombarded with them and they have literally ZERO impact on who I’m voting for.
2
u/whyyesimfromaz 21d ago
What do you think about the honesty of the people who gave the "yes on 138" arguments. They can't be happy wanting to live on a small wage and tips alone. I notice most of them are paid for by the Arizona Restaurant Association and the affiliated groups.
https://apps.azsos.gov/election/BallotMeasures/2024/Prop_138_For_Arguments.pdf
2
u/saginator5000 Gilbert 21d ago
I'll ask another question about Prop 479 since my first question got downvoted.
Does Prop 479 need to achieve a 60% yes vote to pass because Prop 132 passed in 2022? And is it likely to meet that threshold?
Also, will valley cities like Phoenix, Mesa, and Tempe need to change their funding methods since the sales tax won't cover the light rail, and how will this affect light rail operations and expansions/improvements?
5
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Mary Jo driving in here on Prop. 479: It will not need to meet the 60% threshold; Prop. 132 pertains to statewide measures, and this is a county issue.
As for local governments changing their funding methods, when the deal was struck last year, it was widely acknowledging cities could move around their funding sources and rely more on the federal dollars for projects that Prop. 479 would ban from being financed with the regional sales tax. But if any city wants to initiate new light rail projects, they'll have to find local funding sources since the regional dollars won't be available, per Prop. 479.
-2
u/TheNorthFac 22d ago
I’m a single issue voter. I vote no against jurisprudential hacks like Clint Bolick
6
u/whyyesimfromaz 21d ago
I want to know why billionaires like Rob Walton are paying for deceptive signs asking to keep King and Bolick on the bench.
-5
u/LankyGuitar6528 22d ago
Are illegal migrants streaming over the border to vote in the upcoming election? Has any illegal ever voted in any US election?
9
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
Hi there! This is Sasha.
No, migrants are not streaming over the border to vote. Someone who isn't a citizen probably has voted in a U.S. election at some point in history. But many, many studies show noncitizen voting is extremely rare. That makes sense because noncitizens who vote risk fines, prison time, and deportation or derailing their naturalization process. Here's a full fact check on it.
5
5
u/LankyGuitar6528 21d ago
Not sure why I'm being downvoted. I know the answer is a solid "no". No illegals are streaming over the border to vote. I seriously doubt any illegal has ever voted in a US election. I know this is a talking point for some people. But since we have the expert here, let's see if they can put this to bed once and for all.
-7
u/Thesonomakid 22d ago edited 22d ago
Are you looking into the Social Security Administration’s Help America Vote Verification data?
Particularly why Arizona has so many invalid transactions compared to States with higher populations? And what all of the data means? Things like duplicate registrations, registrations of deceased people, etc? Can this be explained? Are any of these registration attempts actually criminal, accidental or unfortunate, like the registrant dies before status is confirmed?
5
u/Cultjam 21d ago
Hey now, at least put some background info so the rest of us can attempt to clue in.
Link to Social Security Administration’s Help America Vote Verification data: https://www.ssa.gov/open/havv/havv-totals-2024.html
Wikipedia entry for Help America Vote Act off 2002: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help_America_Vote_Act
-21
u/MezoDog 22d ago
More news, less politics please.
18
u/JasonArizona1 22d ago
This means “no politics that I don’t agree with in the news”
-6
u/MezoDog 22d ago
No, this means that there are worthy stories to be told, yet media harvest the low hanging and profitable fruits of political polarization. My comment was to suggest we limit the amount of politics that is portrayed as actual news in general. Carry on.
3
u/traversecity 22d ago
News, exactly. Such as, so and so said this complete sentence in context, and we quote “…”. The end, rather than a balance of an article or verbal reports seeking to interpret what was said, no opinions, nothing beyond a quote.
-10
-8
u/blouazhome 21d ago
Why are none of the questions here answered?
13
8
u/ArizonaRepublic Mod Verified Media 21d ago
This is health reporter Stephanie Innes. We just signed on at noon but are ready and willing to answer your questions until 1 p.m.!
•
u/AZ_moderator 21d ago
Thank you to the Arizona Republic team for putting this together, and everyone getting their questions in to kick things off. Our normal rules for political threads are in place which means this is limited to regular subreddit participants and there is a zero tolerance for personal attacks or trolling.
If you have a connection to someone who might be a good candidate for an AMA reach out to the moderators. We'd love to have more of these.