by admin | Jul 17, 2024 | Elections, News and Updates
PHOENIX, ARIZONA – Today, America First Legal, on behalf of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club and Strong Communities Foundation of Arizona, wrote a letter to each of the 16 county recorders in the state, reminding them of their obligation to remove foreign citizens from their voter rolls ahead of the November 2024 General Election.
In 2022, the Arizona Legislature passed – and then-Governor Doug Ducey signed – HB 2492, which bolsters safeguards to the state’s voter registration process to require proof of citizenship ensuring only U.S. citizens are voting in our elections. This legislation cracks down on state voter registration forms submitted without Documentary Proof of Citizenship, requires counties to attempt to ascertain the citizenship status for those who utilize the federal form, and makes proof of citizenship a requirement to vote by mail and for President of the United States. A district judge recently upheld many of the voter list maintenance provisions after challenges from liberal special interests and the Biden-led Justice Department.
HB 2492 was authored by the Arizona Free Enterprise Club.
“With the General Election quickly approaching, Arizonans still have serious concerns about the integrity of their votes – and for good reasons,” said Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club. “It is unconscionable why any county would fail to clean its voter rolls to ensure that only American citizens are able to vote in U.S. elections. We intend to follow through with aggressive litigation should any of these elections’ officials ignore our request for strict compliance with state and federal laws. Arizonans deserve no less.”
In the letter, the coalition presents three arguments for county elections officials to consider.
First, that state and federal law prohibit foreign nationals from voting or registering to vote. No foreign national is authorized to register to vote in or to vote in state or federal elections, regardless of immigration status; and that there are severe immigration-related consequences for any violations. According to the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office, there are 35,273 registered voters in the state as of April 2024, who failed to provide proof of citizenship.
Second, that state and federal law impose requirements for counties to conduct voter list maintenance and remove foreign nationals from voter rolls. Arizona law requires counties to perform monthly list maintenance to confirm the citizenship of federal-only voters, and the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) requires list maintenance to ensure the removal of ineligible voters. The Arizona Attorney General is also required by law to verify proof of citizenship of these voters.
Finally, that county recorders have access to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to verify citizenship or immigration status of registered voters on voter rolls – and DHS has a legal obligation to provide such information. These tools, enacted by the U.S. Congress, have existed for decades, along with provisions to initiate legal action should DHS fail to comply.
The coalition warns that failure from any county recorders to adhere to their responsibilities under the law may result in legal action.
Read the letter here.
Help Protect Freedom in Arizona by Joining Our Grassroots Network
Arizona needs to have a unified voice promoting economic freedom and prosperity, and the Free Enterprise Club is committed to making that happen. But we can’t do it alone. We need YOU!
Join our FREE Grassroots Action List to stay up to date on the latest battles against big government and how YOU can help influence crucial bills at the Arizona State Legislature.
by admin | Jul 12, 2024 | Elections, News and Updates
This fall, the people of Arizona will have a number of critical decisions to make about the future of our state. But one initiative may be the most important issue facing voters in November.
Earlier this month, the special interests behind a plan to bring California-style jungle primaries and ranked choice voting to Arizona submitted signatures with the Arizona Secretary of State to qualify the so-called “Make Elections Fair Act” for the November General Election. If approved, this proposed constitutional amendment would not only make our elections unfair, but it would radically change how Arizonans select and approve candidates for public office in several alarming ways.
The Measure Grants One Politician Too Much Power
It’s never a good idea to give one politician total power over anything—especially an election—but that’s exactly what the Make Elections (Un)Fair Act would do. The measure grants one politician, in this case the Secretary of State, the power to determine how many candidates will appear on the general election ballot for each race. On top of that, the Secretary of State could even decide how many candidates advance in his or her own race.
Think about what this could mean.
The Secretary of State could go up and down the ballot selecting just two candidates for the general election in one race while selecting five in another race despite the fact that only one candidate can win. But it gets even more confusing. When two seats are open in the general election, meaning that two candidates would be elected, the Secretary of State can select four candidates for one race, but seven in another! This means that the Secretary of State could literally pick and choose all the way up and down the ballot the number of candidates in each race that would most benefit his own political party.
But that’s not even the worst part!
In his own race, if the Secretary of State determined that it would be better for him to go head-to-head with just one opponent, this measure allows him to unilaterally declare that just two candidates will be on the ballot. But if he felt like it would be better to “crowd the field,” he could put five candidates on the ballot to have his opponents fight with each other while he sneaks his way to victory. The Democrats like to talk about “protecting Democracy” (even though we’re a constitutional republic). Does that sound like Democracy to you?
Jungle Primaries Will Result in Races Where Only One Political Party Is on the General Election Ballot
It’s bad enough that some Arizona voters have been disenfranchised in recent elections, but jungle primaries would take this to a whole new level. If this system becomes our reality, we will most certainly see elections in which candidates from only one political party will appear on the general election ballot. That would mean that under this scheme, we could have a November election where your choice for governor only includes Democrats or vice-versa.
This possibility should concern every Republican, Democrat, and anyone in between.
A system like this gives voters no real choice in the general election. It’s completely unfair and is another radical way to leave even more voters in our state disenfranchised.
The Measure Would Force Voters to Navigate Two Completely Different Voting Systems on the Same Ballot
Are you confused enough already? Well, we’re not done. The language of the Make Elections (Un)Fair Act would create a confusing new system for voting that requires the use of a complicated ranking system for some candidates but not for others.
That’s right. Under this flawed system, we would end up with a patchwork ballot where you’re choosing between two candidates in one race and then ranking a set of candidates in your order of preference in the very next contest. This insane voting process would increase tabulation errors, require longer ballots, create longer lines at the polls, and delay election results for months. Clearly, this is not the road Arizona should be heading down.
The reality is that jungle primaries and ranked choice voting are radical election schemes imported from California by out-of-state special interests with a thirst for more influence and control over our state’s political process. Both systems are confusing, unfair, and will disenfranchise voters. And the only ones who stand to gain are the ones with the money to manipulate the system.
As you’re preparing to vote this November, just remember that copying our election system after California is an insane idea. And vote NO on the Make Elections (Un)Fair Act.
Help Protect Freedom in Arizona by Joining Our Grassroots Network
Arizona needs to have a unified voice promoting economic freedom and prosperity, and the Free Enterprise Club is committed to making that happen. But we can’t do it alone. We need YOU!
Join our FREE Grassroots Action List to stay up to date on the latest battles against big government and how YOU can help influence crucial bills at the Arizona State Legislature.
by admin | Jul 10, 2024 | Elections, News and Updates
PHOENIX, ARIZONA – Last week, the special interests behind a plan to bring California-style jungle primaries and ranked choice voting to Arizona submitted signatures with the Arizona Secretary of State to qualify their initiative for the November General Election. If approved by voters, this proposed constitutional amendment would radically change how Arizonans select and approve candidates for public office.
“This fall, Arizonans will have a number of critical decisions to make about the future of our state, but this initiative may be the most important one facing voters,” said Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club.
If passed by voters, The Make Elections (Un)Fair Act, which copies the California voting system, would do the following for future Arizona elections:
- Allows one politician, the Arizona Secretary of State, to decide how many candidates qualify for the general election ballot for every single contest, including his or her own race.
- Would result in some races where candidates from only one political party appear on the general election ballot.
- Would force voters to navigate two completely different voting systems on the same ballot, with some races requiring voters to rank candidates and others that do not.
- Will increase tabulation errors, create longer lines at the polls, and significantly delay election results.
“This initiative is nothing more than a California-style election scheme, which would give unilateral power to one politician to determine the candidates on our ballots. It is not fair, and it is not honest,” said Mussi. “If it is determined that this measure did submit enough valid signatures, we will ensure voters know exactly how undemocratic and unfair these policies will be for future generations.”
Read more about this radical and confusing initiative here.
by admin | Jun 6, 2024 | Elections, News and Updates
Last Friday, the AZ Free Enterprise Club filed a lawsuit in federal court against Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes for failing to comply with the National Voter Registration Act’s (NVRA) mandate that he maintain accurate and updated voter registration records. Why? The data shows that there are 500,000 unaccounted for registered voters who are not qualified either due to death or moving out of the state, and in total, up to more than a million voters on the rolls who should not be registered.
Clean and accurate voter rolls are the bedrock of elections run with integrity. Ensuring only those eligible to vote may register and are on the rolls means that only eligible voters may vote in an election. It’s a basic principle: garbage in, garbage out. If we begin with bad data – ineligible individuals on the rolls – the system is susceptible to allowing ineligible ballots to be cast.
That’s why in 2022 we championed two landmark pieces of legislation to accomplish just that, and why, unsurprisingly, Marc Elias and the left’s lawfare machine immediately sued to stop these commonsense safeguards from going into effect. HB2492 ensures only eligible citizens who have provided proof of citizenship can register to vote and HB2243 requires regular and routine voter roll maintenance using several databases of information, with regular reports to the legislature of the results.
Both these laws are consistent with the NVRA’s mandate that states maintain accurate voter registration lists. But right now, Adrian Fontes is failing in his obligations under both, and that’s why we have filed a lawsuit in federal court to force him to do his job.
Four Counties Have More Registered Voters Than People
How do we know? According to the most recent census and voter registration data, more than 90% of the voting age population in Arizona is purportedly registered to vote. The national average is 69.1%. Why would Arizonans register to vote at an absurdly higher rate than the rest of the country? The only answer is that the state and counties are failing to adequately remove individuals who are no longer eligible, leading to bloated rolls.
It is even worse when looking county by county. For example, somehow 117% of the voting age population in Apache County is registered to vote. That’s right, the most recent census data reports that while there are only 48,096 people in Apache County that are of voting age population, 56,461 people are registered to vote – more people registered than live there! La Paz and Santa Cruz counties also exceed 100%, and in the state’s most populous county, Maricopa, 2,939,138 of the 3,128,330 (91.3%), voting aged residents are registered to vote. Again, that’s far higher than the national average rate of 69.1%.
No Recorded Responses of Registration Confirmation Notices
Even more alarming in Maricopa County is that of the 752,387 confirmation notices sent, 131,682 voters were removed from the rolls, but there is no reported response from a staggering 620,000 individuals. By contrast, in every other county, almost every single confirmation letter is accounted for. Meaning, if 100,000 letters were sent out, there is a recorded response for all 100,000 of them. Not so in Maricopa County, where more than 82% have no record.
Fontes’ List Maintenance Procedures Are Still “In Development”
All of this unfortunately comes as no surprise, considering just last year we sent a letter to Fontes demanding he clean the rolls. The numbers have not changed much since then, and the quarterly reports from the Secretary of State required by HB2243 make the growing problem even more evident.
In the most recent report, 43,305 individuals in just the first three months of 2024 moved to and obtained a driver’s license in another state. But no notice was sent to them, because according to Adrian Fontes the process is still “in development” two years after the law was passed. More than 4,000 people also self-reported they are no longer a resident of the county, but they will remain on the rolls because Fontes’ process for handling this is also “in development.”
On its face, a registration rate of over 90% is not plausible. But digging into the data reveals hundreds of thousands of individuals that should not be on the rolls, and according to Fontes himself, they will remain because his removal process is still “in development.” That flies in the face of the NVRA’s mandate for uniform statewide list maintenance, and that is why we have sued. We expect the courts to agree and compel Fontes to do his job.
Help Protect Freedom in Arizona by Joining Our Grassroots Network
Arizona needs to have a unified voice promoting economic freedom and prosperity, and the Free Enterprise Club is committed to making that happen. But we can’t do it alone. We need YOU!
Join our FREE Grassroots Action List to stay up to date on the latest battles against big government and how YOU can help influence crucial bills at the Arizona State Legislature.
by admin | Jun 4, 2024 | Elections, News and Updates
PHOENIX, ARIZONA – Late last week, Scot Mussi, the President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona over the State’s failure to comply with Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), which requires states to “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the officials lists of eligible voters by reason of … (A) the death of the registrant; or (B) a change in the residence of the registrant” to maintain accurate voter-registration records in a uniform manner across the state.
“Election integrity is a serious issue in our nation,” said Mussi. “Ensuring that Arizonans can have faith in the integrity of our election system and representative government starts with clean voter rolls that leave no doubts about who is able to cast a ballot. That’s why we sent a prelitigation notice to Secretary Fontes last August highlighting the artificially high voter registration rates. Unfortunately, most Arizona counties continue to have voter registration rates far exceeding the national average. We hope that the court compels Secretary Fontes to comply with his obligations under the NVRA to clean up Arizona’s voter rolls.”
Joining Mussi as Plaintiffs in this challenge are the Chair of the Republican Party of Arizona, Gina Swoboda, and Steven Gaynor.
In their lawsuit, the Plaintiffs argue that Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes has failed to perform his mandatory list maintenance duty under the NVRA. For example, the most recent voter registration and census data show that up to four Arizona counties – Apache, La Paz, Navajo, and Santa Cruz – have more registered voters than eligible citizens. The remaining counties across the state have implausibly high voter registration rates that far exceed the average national and statewide voter-registration rates in recent years. Consistent with these artificially high registration rates, the complaint alleges that Arizona has at least 500,000 registered voters on the rolls who should have otherwise been removed because they are deceased or no longer reside in Arizona.
The Plaintiffs ask the federal court to find that Secretary Fontes is in violation of Section 8 of the NVRA, and to require the Secretary to fully comply with any existing procedures Arizona has in place to ensure ineligible voters are identified and removed from the rolls.
Read the complaint here.
by admin | May 21, 2024 | Elections, News and Updates
Who thinks it is a good idea to let voters decide which candidates appear on the general election ballot? Probably everyone. How about letting just one politician decide instead? You would hope that question is rhetorical, and the answer is no one. But right now, out-of-state special interests are spending millions of dollars to put their so-called “Make Elections Fair” measure on the ballot that would do just that.
The groups pushing these ideas are trying to trick voters into signing their petitions and supporting their poorly written constitutional amendment, arguing it will lead to less partisanship and more centrist candidates on the general election ballot. But hidden in the measure is a provision that lets just one politician, the Secretary of State, decide how many candidates move from the primary to the general election.
And it isn’t limited to just some elections. Under the measure, the Secretary of State would have the power to decide for every single election on the ballot, including his own! The Secretary of State could go up and down the ballot, selecting just two candidates for the general election in one race, then select three, four, or five in another when only one candidate can win in the general.
It gets even more confusing when two candidates can win the general election for two seats (like for the State House). The Secretary of State can select four candidates for one race, but seven in another, picking and choosing all the way up and down the ballot for every single race however many candidates would most benefit his own political party.
How about his own race? If it is better for him to go head-to-head with just one opponent, he can unilaterally declare that just two candidates will be on the ballot. But if it is better to “crowd the field,” he can let five candidates show up on your ballot to have his opponents fight with each other while he sneaks his way to victory.
This new candidate selection scheme would be in addition to the fact that their measure will result in some races where candidates from only one political party appear on the general election ballot, depriving many voters of any choice at all. If this sounds familiar, it’s because California uses this exact same system to select its candidates. That’s right. The proponents are trying to fix Arizona’s election system by bringing in ideas from San Francisco.
When the legislature writes election laws, their bills have to pass through two legislative chambers consisting of 90 different lawmakers elected from every corner of Arizona. There are committee hearings, public testimony, amendments, recorded votes, and then the Governor has to approve it too.
But according to the proponents of this measure, what is “fair” is removing all those checks and balances and just consolidating all power into the hands of one politician so he can install a confusing system no one wants.
California politicians like to pick their opponents. In Arizona, we like to let the voters make that choice. Placing all power in the hands of one politician isn’t fair, it won’t lead to more centrist candidates, and for a group that purports to support and defend “democracy,” this is one of the most undemocratic measures ever written.
But the drafters of this measure likely don’t care. Their goal is to buy their way onto the ballot, then hope voters won’t discover all the easter eggs they hid in the initiative. No question that this is a very cynical strategy that speaks volumes about their low opinion of voters, but given that they thought it was a good idea to give one politician the power to pick their own opponents, it shouldn’t come as a surprise.
Help Protect Freedom in Arizona by Joining Our Grassroots Network
Arizona needs to have a unified voice promoting economic freedom and prosperity, and the Free Enterprise Club is committed to making that happen. But we can’t do it alone. We need YOU!
Join our FREE Grassroots Action List to stay up to date on the latest battles against big government and how YOU can help influence crucial bills at the Arizona State Legislature.
Recent Comments