Center Square News

(The Center Square) - Tax negotiations between the Republican-controlled Arizona Legislature and Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs are causing confusion among taxpayers, according to Glenn Farley, the policy and research director for Common Sense Institute Arizona.

Arizona Republicans introduced a new tax plan, House Bill 2485, this week after Hobbs vetoed their previous version, which was projected to save Arizonans $1.1 billion over the next three years. Republicans don't have enough seats in the Legislature to override Hobbs' vetoes.

House Speaker Steve Montenegro, R-Surprise, said the legislation occurred “because inaction left taxpayers exposed, and the Legislature has a responsibility to step in and restore clarity.”

Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, noted state taxpayers “shouldn’t have to guess whether the forms they’re using are accurate, and they shouldn’t be forced to refile or pay more in taxes.”

“Tax reform was meant to make filing simpler and more predictable, not create confusion, anger, and frustration for Arizona taxpayers,” he added.

Farley told The Center Square that Arizona Republicans’ current tax plan is modeled on a “full conformity bill” to HR 1, also known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

However, based on Hobbs’ public statements, he noted the governor will “veto [it] for the same reason” as she vetoed the previous one.

Hobbs axed the previous bill because “she thought it went too far and it was more than just a conformity bill,” Farley explained.

The Republicans’ tax plan includes “elements of conformity that the governor wants [and] it still includes all the other elements of conformity that the governor is on record as not wanting,” he stated.

Farley said he anticipated the Arizona Legislature would transmit the new tax plan to Hobbs’ desk next week.

If Hobbs did sign the tax plan into law, Farley said it would make it easier for taxpayers.

The Internal Revenue Service is already accepting tax returns, so the Arizona Department of Revenue has “already issued forms that make assumptions about how [Arizona] conforms to HR 1," Farley said.

Based on his understanding, Farley said, the tax forms fully conform to Hobbs' middle-class tax-cut packages, including no tax on tips or overtime. He added that the tax forms also include “expensing and depreciation provisions” that the governor doesn’t want.

Farley said if the Republicans’ tax plan became law, “it would minimize disruption [and] the need to amend returns.”

If Hobbs does veto the tax plan, it will cause “confusion” for Arizona taxpayers, he said.

“The longer it takes and the noisier it is, the less certainty there is for taxpayers,” Farley said.

According to Farley, Arizona taxpayers can take two options to address the uncertainty.

The first is to delay filing taxes until the state Legislature and Hobbs reach a decision and adjust the law, Farley said. The second option is to file taxes using the current form the state Department of Revenue has already sent, then amend the tax plan in the future, he explained.

The best option for Arizona taxpayers is to make the tax plan law, as the tax form would be aligned with state and federal law, Farley said.

However, from a policy or state fiscal perspective, the Republican tax plan may not be optimal, he noted.

Farley said the earliest tax return filers tend to be people who “take the standard deduction” and “only have a W-2 income.” He added these tax returns are the “least likely to be significantly impacted by the [conformity] provisions.”

The tax issues the Arizona Legislature and Hobbs are negotiating will affect only a small percentage of Arizonans, Farley noted.

(The Center Square) - An Arizona bill aimed at helping counties plan for data centers and nuclear energy advanced out of committee.

On Thursday, the state House Committee on Artificial Intelligence and Innovation voted 4-3 in favor of House Bill 2452.

HB 2452 amends the state's comprehensive planning laws to permit accommodations for data centers and small modular nuclear reactors.

The bill prevents counties from using zoning to block data centers or SMRs from their comprehensive land-use plans.

HB 2452 says the plans need to include electric power production and demand, SMRs and data centers.

The legislation says counties with more than 125,000 people must designate land for data centers. Counties with a small population can choose not to designate land.

HB 2452 also requires counties to designate land for thermal and non-thermal electric generating units, including SMRs.

If the bill becomes law, counties with more than 125,000 residents will need to revise their comprehensive plans within two years.

HB 2452’s sponsor, state Rep. Justin Wilmeth, R-Deer Valley, said the state needs to be cautious with data centers as it moves forward.

At the hearing, Russell Smolden, representing the Arizona Municipal Power Users Association, testified in favor of the bill.

As Arizona has worked on data centers since 2013, one of the things people did not anticipate was the impact on local communities and governments, he said.

Upcoming Arizona economic projects, such as semiconductors and advanced manufacturing, depend on data centers for energy, Smolden noted.

He said planning for small modular nuclear reactors is “incredibly important."

Smolden said SMRs are a big part of the future of energy. The reactors can be set up at former coal and gas plants, especially in rural areas, he noted.

Dave Morris, director of grassroots operations for Americans for Prosperity Arizona, testified in favor of the bill. "A good regulatory structure has guardrails without speed bumps,” which he said is “exactly what this bill does.”

Jacob Emnett, representing the County Supervisors Association of Arizona, spoke in opposition.

The association is concerned the legislation “conflates a comprehensive plan, which is a document that broadly sets out general land use guidance with specific zoning on individual parcels,” he said.

Emnett noted when counties create comprehensive plans, they use broad categories such as industrial, rural, urban and commercial. He said projects such as data centers can fall into more than one of these categories.

Additionally, counties will use subcategories within those broad categories when developing a comprehensive plan, he told committee members.

Emnett explained the association doesn’t think it is “appropriate” to single out data centers and SMRs for “broad categories of their own.”

“As this bill contemplates, they likely fit better and indeed may already be included in some of these subcategories that already exist, such as commercial, light industrial warehousing and others,” he said.

Another of the association's concerns is that the bill seeks to amend comprehensive plans “outside of the established process,” Emnett stated.

He noted creating comprehensive plans is “very public” and long process that includes feedback from people with an interest in land use, such as residents, developers and industry.

During the bill's deliberations, Rep. Junelle Cavero, D-Phoenix, said she would vote "no" but could change her vote on the floor. Reps. Anastasia Travers, D-Chandler, and Betty Villegas, D-Tucson, also voted against the bill due to concerns about taking control away from counties.

Besides Wilmeth, state Reps. James Taylor, R-Surprise; Julie Willoughby, R-Chandler; and Nick Kupper, R-Buckeye, voted "yes."

Kupper said HB 2452 “was too important to be held in committee.”

Meanwhile, a Goldwater Institute report says Arizona needs to pursue free market solutions to remain a leader in the data center industry. See the story Friday at thecentersquare.com.

(The Center Square) - Lawmakers grilled Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on the Trump administration’s tariff policies and high profile lawsuits in the administration.

Bessent, speaking before the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs committee, defended the Trump administration’s tariff policies and argued prices were more affordable now than at times under the Biden administration.

Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., praised Bessent’s work on affordability and said the shift from climate change policy was essential to reducing costs.

“When families have savings, access to affordable credit and confidence in their financial future, they are better equipped to weather storms, weather economic shocks, and the system becomes more resilient,” Scott said.

Other lawmakers on the panel fiercely criticized Bessent over tariff policies and their effect on affordability. Sen Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., criticized the tariff policies and questioned whether grocery costs had gone down during the Trump administration.

Bessent pointed to inflation numbers over the past year of the Trump administration. In December 2025, inflation slowed to 2.7%, marking a significant decrease from 3.0% in September. Warren countered with data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics which found grocery prices increased 2.4% by the end of 2025 compared to 2024.

Bessent called for the Federal Reserve to obtain a 2% inflation rate. He said the policy would help Americans with costs across the board. Sen. Catherine Cortez-Masto, D-Nev., blamed the Trump administration’s tariff policies for decreased tourism, which she said her state relies on heavily.

Cortez-Masto said a large portion of Nevada’s economy relies on tourism income. A recent report valued Nevada’s outdoor recreation industry at $24 billion.

“This administration's blanket tariffs and insulting rhetoric towards our closest allies are damaging America’s tourism economy,” Cortez-Masto said. She pointed to declining numbers of Canadian tourists visiting the United States over the past year.

Bessent argued the Canadian economy itself was a reason for why fewer tourists are visiting the United States. He also refused to lower trade barriers for the sake of increasing tourism.

“Should we pull down all of our trade barriers with China so that 1.4 billion people can fill up the hotel rooms in Las Vegas?” Bessent questioned.

Lawmakers also raised concerns over whether taxpayers would be liable for President Donald Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS. Trump and his two sons filed the action over allegations that the IRS failed to prevent their financial data from being leaked in 2019 and 2020, the Center Square previously reported.

During those years, a former employee of Booz Allen Hamilton leaked thousands of wealthy clients' confidential tax filings, including those of the president, to various media outlets. Booz Allen contracted with the IRS during that time, and the lawsuit accused the IRS of neglecting to enforce proper security measures.

Bessent admitted that if Trump were to prevail in the lawsuit, the funds would come from taxpayers through the U.S. Treasury Department. Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., called the move a “shakedown of the American taxpayer.”

Gallego also brought up a $230 million inquiry Trump is pursuing over investigations into his previous presidential candidacy. If Trump were to prevail in that inquiry, Bessent would be responsible for providing the damages.

“This president is basically plundering U.S. taxpayer dollars,” Gallego said. “If this had been happening in any other country, it would absolutely look like a total shakedown of the American taxpayer.”

(The Center Square) - The Goldwater Institute petitioned the Arizona Supreme Court to overturn a lower court’s decision that said professor Owen Anderson could not sue Arizona State University for mandatory diversity, equity and inclusion training.

Stacy Skankey, a lawyer for the Phoenix-based nonprofit, told The Center Square this week that the petition to the Arizona Supreme Court is challenging an Arizona Court of Appeals decision made in December that said public employees can’t sue over a state law, “which prohibits certain blame or judgment on the basis of race, sex, and ethnicity.”

Skankey said Anderson is asking the state Supreme Court to “correct the legal error made” the court of appeals.

The lawyer called the court of appeal’s decision “far-reaching," adding that “it turned a civil rights law into a suggestion that no one can enforce, so it made the law effectively meaningless.”

“A law without any mechanism to enforce the law is just words on paper,” Skankey explained.

The Arizona Supreme Court “needs to correct” the error, she said.

Arizona law forbids local and state governments and universities from requiring DEI training, Skankey noted. She added the law prevents state taxpayers' money from funding that training.

In 2024, Anderson sued ASU after being required to attend the school’s “Inclusive Communities” DEI training.

Anderson told The Center Square this week that the things he had issues with regarding ASU’s training dealt with white skin being signaled out “as something that could be morally judged” and “anti-Christian rhetoric.”

He said many people who underwent the ASU DEI training said it was “not valuable” and a “waste of time.”

ASU still provides the “Inclusive Communities training,” Skankey said.

Anderson said he's suing over “really important employment issue facing Arizona.”

He added that his legal case “has implications” for state employees about whether they can take their “employer to court” if employees believe “they’re violating the law.”

If Anderson’s legal case doesn’t go to court, ASU is effectively striking down the law, making it “unenforceable,” the professor explained.

Anderson said the training ASU requires “shuts down free speech because it tells employees” that this is their boss’ political perspective, and if employees disagree with this, they could lose their job or lose a promotion.

“There’s really no place for the employer taking a political stand like this instead of just encouraging free debate,” he said.

The professor said it is of “supreme importance” that people at universities can speak freely.

”The whole value of a university is [to] pursue knowledge and wisdom. And if we can't have free debate and if we can't have free speech, then all those goals go out the window,” he explained.

According to Anderson, people on the left say they're for inclusion, but don’t include a conservative or Christian perspective.

“ I'm just asking ASU to live up to its own standards and promote and protect a minority viewpoint, which in our day and age means a conservative Christian viewpoint,” Anderson explained.

The Center Square reached out to ASU but did not receive a response before press time.

(The Center Square) - The Arizona Empowerment Scholarship Account program has surpassed the 100,000-participant threshold.

The school choice program, launched in 2011, was initially created for Arizona students with special needs. When the program became universal in 2022, it only had 12,127 students.

This shows the program has seen a 725% increase in participants since 2022.

Matt Beienburg, director of education policy at the Phoenix-based Goldwater Institute, called the ESA program's 100,000 participants an “extraordinary achievement.”

He said he thinks the number proves “ESAs are offering educational opportunity to kids [and] families” by “meeting the needs in ways often that the public school system is not.”

The program allows the money that would have paid for a student's education at a neighborhood school to follow the student to another school of the parents' choice. The money can also go for home schooling, according to the Arizona Department of Education.

Tens of thousands of students have switched from public school to the ESA program, Beienburg told The Center Square this week.

When the ESA program expanded, there was a lot of “pent-up demand,” said Katie Ratlief, executive director of Common Sense Institute Arizona.

“Parents wanted to try something new [and] different," Ratlief told The Center Square.

Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne said Arizona parents “are learning that if the local public school is not meeting their child’s needs, they have choices.”

“I am a big defender of their right to find a school that meets their child’s needs,” Horne told The Center Square.

Going forward, Ratlief said the number of ESA program participants will grow at 1% to 2% per year, similar to the state’s K-12 education system's population growth.

Students entering the ESA program “will come from students leaving public schools,” she said.

Arizona public school enrollment has “been flat” since 2008, Ratlief told The Center Square.

With all these new ESA participants, Arizona faces a staffing problem, Horne said. He noted the program has the same number of administrators as it did when it had 11,000 participants.

Last year, the state House included in its budget funding to increase the Arizona Department of Education's budget to hire administrators for the ESA program, but Gov. Katie Hobbs, who has veto power, told the chamber to remove it, Horne explained.

When a person reads about the ESA auditing problems, that is due to a lack of staff, he said.

Horne said the department is discussing with Class Wallet, the vendor for the ESA program, the ability for Arizona to audit accounts through automated processing.

On top of this, Beienburg said there's an effort to “reduce administrative burdens on families” and “those who are charged with administering the program in state government.”

The Goldwater Institute currently has a lawsuit that is attempting to stop an “illegal mandate on families who are using the program,” Beienburg said.

He explained the illegal mandate is state Attorney General Kris Mayes' rule that directed families using the ESA program to document their purchases and explain why they made them.

This requirement is nowhere in Arizona law, Beienburg noted, adding, “It does nothing to improve the efficiency of the program.”

“All it does is burden families and the administrators who then have to review this content,” he explained.

The Goldwater Institute filed the lawsuit against Arizona in 2024, challenging the requirement.

The nonprofit is providing legal representation for two mothers who were prevented from using their ESA funds for educational items for home schooling such as books, pencils and erasers due to “the curricula they use don’t explicitly list these items.”

The court case is still ongoing.

(The Center Square) - Arizona’s job growth increased at more than double the national pace from December 2024 to December 2025, a new report shows.

The Common Sense Institute of Arizona released a report detailing Arizona’s latest employment figure.

Year over year, Arizona gained 24,000 jobs and grew at a 0.75% rate, compared with the national average of 0.34%.

Zachary Milne, a CSI senior economist, told The Center Square this week that he projected Arizona would see between 1% and 2% year-over-year growth in employment.

Arizona has relied on the education and health sector for job creation during this period, he said.

Milne estimated 70% of all Arizona job growth came from this sector.

Without this sector, Arizona’s employment growth would be “stagnant,” Milne said.

Job growth in Arizona has slowed compared with 18 months ago, he said.

Milne added that this trend is happening across America.

Arizona has continued to experience a decline in manufacturing, he noted.

The CSI report found that, year over year, Arizona lost 2,600 manufacturing jobs, representing a 1.3% decline in the industry.

Arizona’s biggest industry is trade, transportation and utilities at nearly 20%, Milne said.

Year over year, this sector declined by 1.2 percentage points.

Private sector wages in Arizona increased by 3.5% year over year, ranking 23rd in America, the report said. Wages increased from $33.90 to $35.10 per hour.

Despite these increased earnings, Arizona wages, when adjusted for inflation, have declined by 3.6% since April 2020, according to the report.

Looking at the job numbers month-to-month, Arizona gained 6,400 jobs from November 2025 to December 2025. The state’s current unemployment rate is 4.3%, which ranks 31st nationwide

The state’s fastest-growing industry was construction month-over-month, which added 3,900 jobs and grew by 1.75%.

The mining and logging industry was the second-fastest-growing sector during this period, increasing by 0.61%.

The report cautioned against relying on monthly figures to assess Arizona’s current economic condition. It said Arizona has experienced positive job revisions in the past.

For example, Arizona initially reported 2,200 jobs in September 2025, but after revisions, the state reported 3,500. This represents nearly a 60% increase in jobs.

(The Center Square) – Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray stressed his decisions on defendant Tyler Robinson – including his intention to seek the death penalty if Robinson is convicted of aggravated murder – weren’t influenced by the fact that the adult daughter of one of his senior prosecutors was at the Sept. 10 rally where conservative leader Charlie Kirk was shot and killed.

The senior prosecutor's identity was publicly revealed for the first time Tuesday afternoon in the Fourth Judicial District Court in Provo, Utah, after Judge Tony Graf denied prosecution's motion to conduct the prosecutor's testimony under a closed hearing. The defense had no objection to a closed hearing, but Graf ruled the public's right to transparency outweighed other concerns.

The prosecutor is Chad Grunander, who took the witness stand and under questioning from a defense lawyer, said his daughter was at the rally at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah.

Robinson's attorneys have moved for Graf to remove the prosecution team over what they call a conflict of interest because Grunander's daughter was at the event.

Grunander testified he was at a prosecutors' conference in Layton, Utah, with Gray, the elected Utah County attorney, when Grunander's daughter texted her father and family members at 12:25 p.m., "SOMEONE WAS SHOT" or "SOMEONE GOT SHOT."

"There was another text that came in that said to the effect, 'I'm OK. Everyone's running inside,' " Grunander said.

The prosecutor recalled his daughter called him at 12:28 p.m. and talked for one minute. "I was checking on her well-being, to make sure she was OK," he said, noting they didn't discuss the details of what happened.

Grunander recalled a text he sent his daughter a few minutes later.

"I remember asking her a question a few minutes later whether she heard about what sounded like a gun shot," Grunander said. "She responded, 'I for sure heard it. Everyone started screaming and running. A few people said they saw a shot hit his neck. ... Not sure.' "

"I was startled. I was concerned for her welfare," said Grunander, who was aware she would be attending the rally. "She would watch Charlie Kirk from time to time online and was excited to go see him at this rally."

Kirk, a Scottsdale, Ariz., resident, was cofounder and CEO of Phoenix-based Turning Point USA.

Grunander testified he talked to Gray as soon as he learned about the shooting and that after communicating with his daughter, called other members of the prosecution team in the Robinson case, Chris Ballard and David Sturgill.

Grunander said he went with Gray to the scene of the rally at Utah Valley University, "trying to connect the dots with what happened, make ourselves available to assist" with matters such as warrants.

Robinson, 22, charged with aggravated murder and five other felonies and one misdemeanor, attended Tuesday's hearing but wasn't seen during a livestream.

Earlier Tuesday before Grunander's identity was publicly revealed, Gray repeatedly said the prosecutor's adult child's presence wasn't a factor in his decisions in the case under questioning from Richard Novak, one of the attorneys representing Robinson.

Novak noted Gray was elected to office after a campaign promise to seek the death penalty. Gray replied, “It was a commitment I would seek the death penalty in all appropriate cases.”

Gray was cross-examined by a member of his prosecution team, Ryan McBride, who referred to Grunander simply as “Prosecutor A.”

“Have you met Prosecutor A’s child?” McBride asked Gray.

“Not that I can remember,” Gray replied.

Answering McBride’s questions, Gray said the adult child’s presence at the rally had “zero” impact on any of his decisions about the case.

“Who makes the ultimate decisions in this case?” McBride asked Gray.

“I do,” Gray replied.

“Does the buck stop with Prosecutor A?” McBride asked.

“No,” Gray said.

Before Gray testified, Judge Graf denied the defense’s motion to block the Utah County Attorney’s Office from representing itself during the hearing about whether there was a conflict of interest.

Graf also briefly mentioned the filing by Erika Kirk, Charlie Kirk’s widow, to invoke her rights as the victim’s representative for a speedy trial. Graf didn’t elaborate further on the filing, which Erika Kirk’s attorney, Jeffrey Neiman, made on Friday. Utah is one of several states that extends the U.S. Constitution’s promise of a speedy trial to victims.

(The Center Square) - An Arizona bill would prohibit the use of fluoride in state public water systems.

State Sen. Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, introduced Senate Bill 1019, which would prevent people and political subdivisions from adding fluoride or fluoride-containing compounds to Arizona’s public water system.

The Senate Committee on Government recently advanced SB 1019 to the floor for a full Senate vote.

Shamp, a registered nurse, said SB 1019 is a “clear challenge to government overreach.”

“Healthcare freedom should not be partisan, and Arizonans should have the right to make informed choices about what they consume,” Shamp said, answering The Center Square's questions by email. “Currently residents are required to ingest fluoride in public water, which undermines informed consent.”

Due to fluoride being in toothpaste and other items, Shamp noted, “The government should not medicate water.”

The senator said Arizona “needs to be cautious about our children’s health.”

“Fluoridating public water is effectively forced medication without individual or informed consent,” she explained.

In America, Shamp said “health care has become sick care,” and Arizona needs to “prioritize statewide health and individual choice.”

She added that as science advances, Arizona must “stay current with evidence-based practices.”

“Unfortunately, we don’t always embrace change, but the evidence shows that current methods are ineffective at reducing tooth decay among our public health population,” she said.

A report from the National Toxicology Program found “fluoride levels above 1.5 milligrams per liter in drinking water” can reduce children’s IQ, Shamp said.

Furthermore, the senator said “excessive fluoride can lead to dental fluorosis,” a condition that occurs when someone ingests too much fluoride.

Dental fluorosis can cause tooth discoloration, according to the Cleveland Medical Clinic.

A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study found 41% of children ages 12 to 15 had dental fluorosis. The study also showed 36% of people aged 16 to 19 had the condition.

Shamp also noted dental fluorosis has been “connected to weakened bones, increased fracture risks, arthritis, and thyroid dysfunction, although these usually occur at higher exposure levels.”

As the bill banning flouride progresses, Shamp said she expects “pushback from local governments and public health agencies."

If SB 1019 becomes law, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality would enforce it, Shamp told The Center Square. She added enforcement would be intended to “ensure compliance, not to punish local providers.”

If Arizona were to pass SB 1019, it would join Florida and Utah as the only states that prohibit fluoridation of their water systems.

Shamp said if the Arizona Legislature passes the bill, she expects Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, to veto it.

“I believe it's important to force this conversation and put lawmakers on record,” Shamp said.

The senator added that Arizona needs to “embrace medical liberty and protect our citizens' health by ensuring that our drinking water remains free of unnecessary chemicals.”

(The Center Square) - An Arizona bill attempts to address the police shortage throughout the state.

Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, introduced Senate Bill 1107, which would provide a pathway for honorably discharged veterans and former military police officers to become peace officers.

The Senate Public Safety Committee unanimously passed SB 1107 to advance to a full Senate vote.

Arizona’s police shortage is “bad enough that people feel it when they call for help," Petersen said, answering The Center Square's questions by email.

“When departments are short hundreds of officers, calls take longer to answer, response times stretch out, and officers are pulled in too many directions. In some situations, those delays can mean the difference between life and death,” he said.

During the 2025 holiday season, the state had a 41% decrease in police officers participating in traffic enforcement compared to the 2024 holiday season, according to Arizona Governor’s Office of Highway Safety.

Police departments “stretch limited staff across more calls, shifts and responsibilities than they were ever meant to handle,” Petersen noted.

He said when agencies overwork their police officers, it leads to “fewer patrols, fewer proactive stops and less time for community policing because officers are constantly reacting instead of preventing.”

With the new pathway opening up to veterans and former military police, success will be determined by “real-world results, including how many officers are certified, hired and retained by Arizona agencies, not just how fast applications move,” Petersen said.

“This approach is supported by the Arizona Police Association, the state’s largest police organization, which has publicly endorsed the bill,” he told The Center Square.

If someone becomes a police officer through this program and is later found to be unprepared, Petersen said, the “same oversight and accountability mechanisms apply to these officers as to any other certified peace officer in Arizona.”

“If an officer is unprepared or violates standards, the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board can review the case and take action, including additional training requirements, suspension, or revocation of certification, and lawmakers can adjust the program if problems emerge,” he said.

Petersen noted the new alternative program does not lower standards for police officers in Arizona. He added that the bill “simply cuts bureaucratic delays so already-qualified officers aren’t stuck waiting on paperwork.”

The Senate president added he's confident Gov. Katie Hobbs would sign SB 1107 into law.

(The Center Square) - U.S. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nevada, has co-introduced bipartisan legislation to extend a federal $450 million water recycling grant for Western states until 2032.

The federal grant, signed by former President Joe Biden in 2021, has already allocated roughly $308 million on water recycling projects in Colorado River states. Without its renewal, the remaining nearly $150 million could go unspent.

“There is still $150 million in unused funds, and the authorization for the grant program is set to sunset this year,” the Office of Sen. Cortez Masto wrote, answering The Center Square's questions by email. “Without the passage of her bipartisan Large-Scale Water Recycling Reauthorization Act, those funds – which have already been appropriated – face an uncertain future.”

The Large-Scale Water Recycling Project Grant Program funds are available to all Western states, but have only been granted to five programs in Utah and Southern California, totaling roughly $308 million.

If the program were not extended, it would expire at the end of the U.S. government’s 2026 fiscal year on Sept. 30. The grant’s extension, the Large-Scale Water Recycling Reauthorization Act, proposed by Cortez Masto and U.S. Sen. John Curtis, R-Utah, would give allow grant funds to be allocated through the end of 2032.

The Office of Cortez Masto told The Center Square it did not know what exactly would happen with the funds if they were not allocated in time or if the timeline was not extended.

“They may not get distributed. They could be repurposed for other uses, or they could be prematurely rushed out the door at the end of 2026 without a thorough vetting process,” said Cortez Masto’s office.

Combined, the five grant recipient programs are estimated to produce 154.5 million gallons of recycled water per day – enough to serve 1.8 million Americans, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the federal Environmental Protection Agency.

The federal grants can only cover up to 25% of projects that cost at least $500 million in total. The largest grant recipient, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California’s Pure Water Southern California program, received $125.5 million for an estimated $4 billion-$5 billion project. The Southern Nevada Water Authority agreed to contribute $750 million in 2021 to the Californian project, in exchange for additional water usage rights to Lake Mead, located along the Nevada-Arizona border.

Colorado River Basin states - Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming - today recycle on average 26% of municipal wastewater. But these states have shown varying degrees of success and commitment to the water recycling programs, according to a 2025 report from University of California’s Institute of the Environment and Sustainability.

No Colorado River Basin state has had more success than Nevada, with an estimated 85% of municipal wastewater recycled. Next best is Arizona (52%), followed by the largest producer of wastewater in California (22%) and New Mexico (18%). Colorado (3.6%), Wyoming (3.4%) and Utah (less than 1%) do not reuse “meaningful volumes of treated wastewater,” according to the UCLA report.

The Office of Cortez Masto stressed that the program’s continuation was an important piece of the region's water infrastructure.

“So far, $300 million of that funding has been used to help fund large-scale water recycling projects that will conserve water and mitigate drought for years to come,” the office said. “This legislation will provide certainty and clarity for local and state governments and water authorities looking to start large-scale water recycling projects in the years to come.”

(The Center Square) - Arizona’s improving economy and welfare reforms have led to better outcomes for children, according to a new report.Common Sense Institute Arizona released a report called "Trends in Child Welfare: The State of Arizona’s Child Welfare Services Child Welfare Needs" last week, highlighting improvements in the state's child welfare system.

“Good economic policy is good child welfare policy,” Glenn Farley, CSI's director of policy and research, told The Center Square.Farley said fewer Arizona children “need to be removed from their family homes today than there once were because of improving conditions for children in the state.”The CSI report showed that, in 2010, the average median family income in Arizona was $58,317. The percentage of Arizona children who were in low-income households was 52%, and the food insecurity rate for children was 29%.In 2023, Arizona’s median family income increased to $89,000. The share of children in low-income households fell to 38%, and the child food insecurity rate decreased to 18%.While Arizona's economy was improving, the state implemented reforms to strengthen its child welfare system.Arizona’s reform efforts, which began under the administration of former Gov. Jan Brewer, to reduce out-of-home populations have been successful, Farley said.The state has “far fewer children in foster and congregate care today than it did back in 2015,” he said. The CSI report showed Arizona has had 1,000 fewer children in its congregate care system than in 2015.The state has become more reliant on kinship care, in which children are placed with a relative when they must be removed from their parents’ home, Farley explained. The report stated kinship care has grown from 35% in 2010 to 43% in 2024.CSI’s report indicated that, from 2010 to 2024, the number of foster homes in Arizona decreased by 48%. The number of spaces available for each child decreased by 52%. In 2024, the number of Arizona foster care services fell below 1,000, the report said.According to Farley, child welfare research that came out in the 1990s and early 2000s showed that the best places to put foster children are with family members.The federal government in the 1980s and 1990s directly supported foster care systems, Farley said, creating incentives for states to increase their foster care populations rather than reduce them.From 1980 to 2000, the number of children in out-of-home care increased by 82%, peaking at 567,000, according to the report. That number came down to 328,947 in 2024.Farley said the federal government modified these incentives in the 2000s to encourage states to assume a more active role in managing their foster care systems.As much as possible, Farley noted, states should attempt to keep those familial relationships together. Since 2015, Arizona reforms have “largely been successful” at doing this, he said.Farley added that an advantage to relying on kinship care is that it saves Arizona money.The report said the Arizona Department of Child Safety’s budget has increased from $711 million to $1.4 billion. Farley stated the increase in the agency’s budget is attributed to “cost-of-living adjustments.”The agency spends a lot of its budget on care services for children removed from family homes or placed temporarily in state custody, he said.When shelter, food, clothing and education get more expensive, “the cost of providing those services also goes up,” Farley explained.Arizona spends an estimated $8 billion annually on its state agencies and nonprofit foster care partners, Farley said. However, he added that “the growth in that spending since 2015 is relatively tame.”Farley said this spending has grown more slowly than the state’s general fund.

(The Center Square) - The new Arizona GOP chairman says the most important issue facing Arizona Republicans and Arizonans is “the alarmingly radical Democratic Party.”

“They are so busy catering to a fringe that is increasingly militant and extreme while we're trying to undo the damage done by the failed Biden administration's policies,” Sergio Arellano told The Center Square.

The Arizona Republican Party recently chose Arellano as its newest leader.

State Committeemen of the Arizona Republican Party selected Arellano, a small business owner, over Pam Kirby, who was the Arizona GOP’s former executive director, by a vote of 761 to 621. Arellano started his term as chair immediately.

Arellano, who is the first Latino Arizona GOP chairman, is succeeding Gina Swoboda, who stepped down to run as a Republican for Arizona’s 1st Congressional District.

Arellano pointed out that the media likes to talk about the division within the Arizona GOP, but he noted that he got elected “by a broad coalition of State Committeemen because they want unity, they want us focused on the real battles, and they want to win, [and] not be distracted by a few troublemakers who want us divided.”

He said the Arizona GOP doesn’t have any “‘big’ internal divisions,” but rather the party has some “high-priced consultants and activists who figured out how to make a lot of money off of infighting, so making sure they don't whip up trouble to profit themselves will always be a necessary distraction.”

Despite these consultants and activists, the Arizona Republican Party will focus on the 85-90% of issues that members agree on and the party's real opponents, "which is the Left," the chairman said.

“If we stay engaged and united, we will win,” said Arellano, who is leading the Republicans as they prepare for the gubernatorial race and other statewide elections. The general election is Nov. 3.

Arellano told The Center Square that he has “less than one year to prepare and win statewide.”

“Anyone looking will probably notice that we are very intense and very focused. And we want to make sure our people have the access they deserve to what we're doing, how we're doing it and why,” Arellano said.

During the Arizona Republican primary elections, Arellano said the state party will remain neutral. The party has a “long-standing tradition” of remaining neutral in primaries, but it has been “broken from time to time,” he explained.

Republicans across Arizona should be the ones to determine who the party’s candidates will be in the general election, the chairman told The Center Square.

“Our job is to take those candidates and get them elected in November. I love my fellow Republicans and trust them to nominate the people who best represent our values and who can win,” he said.

According to Arellano, people will know the Arizona GOP has been successful in a year if the party is working hard statewide to elect Republicans.

“If you see that we're funded and organized and visible with our message, then you'll know we brought everyone together and are focused on winning elections,” he added.

(The Center Square) - A report released by congressional Democrats showing the overall average costs of goods in the state and America increased from 2024 to 2025 lacks context, according to Zachary Milne, a senior economist at the Common Sense Institute Arizona.

Last week, the Joint Economic Committee-Minority released a report showing the overall average cost of goods increased nationwide. In Arizona, the report said the average overall costs increased by $1,569, including $188 more for housing and $251 more for transportation.

The report by the Democrats on the committee, which consists of members of the House and Senate, found the national average was $1,625.

After the report was released, Arizona congressional Democrats - U.S. Sens. Ruben Gallego and Mark Kelly, as well as U.S. Reps. Greg Stanton of Tempe, Yassamin Ansari of Phoenix and Adelita Grijalva of Goodyear - all issued statements decrying the estimated price increase.

Kelly said the president “promised to lower costs for working families. Instead, he called the very real affordability crisis a ‘hoax’ while his policies have driven prices up and left Arizonans paying over $1,500 more in just one year.”

Gallego said in Trump’s America, “people pay more and get less.”

Stanton said people are struggling to get by because of Trump’s tariffs.

“I’m fighting in Congress and the courts to end the chaos because Arizonans deserve better,” Stanton added.

Ansari noted Trump promised Americans lower prices, but instead they went up, and “Arizonans are suffering – unable to afford groceries and medication, let alone save for a home.”

Grijalva blamed Trump’s tariffs and economic policies for driving up the “price of housing, transportation, food, and health care,” which leaves “working people and families stretched thinner every day.”

According to Milne, the report's missing context is that it is normal to expect prices to increase by 2% annually.

The report issued by Democrats is citing “raw year-over-year changes” between 2024 and 2025, he told The Center Square.

"Eighty-five percent of the difference between 2024 and 2025 is just what we'd call ‘normal inflation’ or normal year-over-year price increases," Milne said.

Using his own methodology, the economist estimated the nationwide average costs are $2,100 higher in 2025 than in 2024.

Looking at his projection of $2,100, $1,800 of that is “normal year-over-year price inflation,” Milne said, adding that the remaining $300 was due to high inflation.

“ I don't think it is capturing necessarily what some people may think it's capturing. In other words, that is just the raw difference in spending a household would have to spend in 2025 to consume what they consumed in 2024,” he noted.

Based on his determination that 85% of overall costs are due to normal price inflation, Milne applied this to $1,569 and estimated that overall costs would be $1,334 higher from 2024 to 2025.

The $235 remaining from the $1,569 estimate reflects the impact of high inflation from 2024 to 2025.

The perception that prices are unaffordable stems from the large price increases in recent years, Milne told The Center Square.

Examining fixed consumption levels in the U.S. from 2019 to 2020, Milne reported that consumers spent an additional $3,254 in 2021.

Furthermore, a year later, American consumers would need to spend an extra $10,879, he said.

In 2023, Milne said, consumers spent an additional $14,682 more than they “spent in 2020 to consume the same number of goods.”

Inflation rates from 2021 to 2023 were “way above normal,” the senior economist explained.

These price estimates from 2021 to 2023 did not account for a 2% year-over-year inflation rate, but looked at raw year-over-year data, he added

Bringing down inflation to the normal 2% doesn't mean prices are going to come back to normal.

America’s current inflation rate is 2.7%, which Milne said is “more back to normal,” while “affordability and price levels” are not. The economist noted the Federal Reserve likes to keep inflation around 2%.

The Center Square reached out to Kelly and Gallego, but they did not respond before press time.

(The Center Square) – Franklin Arnett Clifton was sentenced this week to death after being convicted of killing a woman in a drive-by shooting in Phoenix, according to Maricopa County Superior Court records obtained this week by The Center Square.

In addition to the murder charge, Clifton, 39, was convicted of attempted murder and kidnapping combined with sexual assault of another woman during the same shooting. For those convictions, he received two concurrent 23-year sentences, according to the court's order of confinement. The order was issued on Thursday, the same day as the death penalty verdict.

Clifton was convicted of a deadly shooting that happened on Oct. 17, 2014, in the area of Campbell and 27th avenue in Phoenix. According to investigators, Clifton drove by on a motorcycle and shot two women he argued with during the previous week. One woman died from the gunshot, and Clifton was convicted of attempted murder, kidnapping and sexual assault of the other woman.

The Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry said there are 109 death row inmates in the state. Three of them are women.

Some inmates have been on death row since the 1990s.

The department's website said the six inmates executed since 2013 spent an average of 25.56 years on death row before their execution. All executions happen at the Arizona State Prison Complex in Florence. Male inmates on death row are incarcerated at the Arizona State Prison Complex in Tucson. Female inmates are at Arizona State Prison Complex-Perryville, near Goodyear.

(The Center Square) - Auto insurance prices are expected to continue to go up in 2026 in Nevada, but have cooled off from the skyrocketing prices in recent years.

A Lending Tree report found that auto insurance rates will creep up around 1% this year. In Nevada, rates are expected to stay the highest in the country after another year of rising prices.

“Insurance companies spent the last few years rapidly raising rates to catch up with higher claim costs from inflation, expensive vehicle repairs and elevated accident severity,” auto insurance analyst Lindsay Bishop at LendingTree told The Center Square. “As those costs level off, companies no longer need to raise rates as aggressively.”

The less than 1% national increase in auto insurance prices is the lowest since 2022. Since then, drivers across the country have experienced insurance price shock. Averages of 11.57% (2023), 17.13% (2024) and 7.56% (2025) make 2026 look tame by comparison. Today, the average full coverage car insurance is $208 per month in the U.S., according to a report by Lending Tree’s Value Penguin.

But not all states are created equal when it comes to auto insurance. Southwestern states (Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and Utah) were all more expensive than the national average for auto insurance in 2026.

From rapid population growth to large metro areas with fewer uninsured drivers and above average traffic fatalities, Bishop said, “Southwestern states tend to face a mix of factors that push insurance costs higher.”

While New Mexico ($212) Utah ($224) and Arizona ($236) were closer to the national average, Colorado ($272) and Nevada ($335) were among the most expensive for insured drivers. The Lending Tree report named Nevada the most expensive state for the average full coverage plan.

“Nevada’s auto insurance costs are well above average because the state has a lot of severe accidents, high theft rates in urban areas and a large number of uninsured drivers,” said Bishop. “These factors led to large rate increases in 2023 and 2024 because they created significant losses for insurance companies in the state.”

Nevada drivers were also most likely in the country to see their insurance rates go up – 6.42% in 2026 according to the Lending Tree report. For the two years prior in 2024 (27.93%) and 2025 (13.65%), the Silver State easily outstripped the U.S. average for rate increases as well.

“The slower 6% increase projected for 2026 suggests that Nevada's auto insurance market may be stabilizing,” said Bishop. “It doesn’t mean rates are coming down yet, but it does indicate that the most extreme increases may be behind us, assuming claims trends continue to improve.”

But drivers in Nevada and other expensive insurance markets are not powerless, according to Lending Tree's research. In Nevada, switching car insurance companies can save consumers up to $287 per month. The 139% difference from the most expensive ($493) to the cheapest full-coverage rate in the state ($206) could count for $3,444 in annual savings.

“The biggest takeaway for consumers is that shopping around matters more now than it has in years,” said Bishop. "Price gaps between insurance companies can be huge.”

Bishop also said a wide variety of insurance companies are expected to reduce rates for 2026. “Consumers should make a point of comparing quotes from companies that may not have had the cheapest rates for them in the past, because those same companies may have lower rates moving forward.”

(The Center Square) - Arizona is facing $6 billion in improper state Medicaid payments yearly, according to state Sen. Janae Shamp.

Shamp, R-Surprise, gave a presentation to the Arizona Senate Health and Human Services Committee on Thursday about what she called fraud.

“We cannot put our heads in the sand and act like there’s not fraud, especially when we have people going hungry in the state. It’s unacceptable,” she told lawmakers.

Of these improper payments, 63.4% comes from the federal government, and 36.6% comes from Arizona’s general fund, she explained.

This means $2.2 billion in Arizona taxpayer money is going toward improper Medicaid payments, according to Shamp.

During the hearing, Shamp noted only 23% of the state’s Aged, Blind or Disabled Medicaid-enrolled patients underwent any form of verification.

She said when these enrollees had their eligibility checked, 34% failed, but were not removed from the program.

“If we utilize the numbers and we extrapolate it through the transactions that were analyzed, we're looking at over 130,000 ineligible enrollees that may be drawing benefits in the state of Arizona,” Shamp explained.

The senator said these people are “robbing the system that is supposed to provide resources for the vulnerable.”

Shamp said her investigation into Arizona’s ABD Medicaid program also showed thousands of enrollees have “substantial liquid assets."

Federal eligibility for ABD Medicaid limits liquid assets to no more than $2,000, she said.

Arizona had more than 5,000 people with liquid assets exceeding $50,000, the senator noted.

Furthermore, Shamp's presentation showed Arizona’s ABD Medicaid program had 18 millionaires enrolled.

Arizona is one of two states in the U.S. that do not have an asset limit for its ABD Medicaid program because the state has filed for a waiver from that requirement, she noted.

Shamp called the asset limit exemption a “huge policy gap” in Arizona, saying a piece of legislation is being worked on this year to eliminate the exemption.

Currently, Arizona is at a “federal compliance risk,” she said, adding that the Trump administration has frozen certain state funds for other states.

The Trump administration halted specific federal funds earlier in January for California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York because of fraud concerns in state-administered programs.

On top of all this, Shamp said Arizona has nearly 50,000 residents receiving state aid while enrolled in another state assistance program. This information comes from the federal government’s Public Assistance Reporting Information System.

The beginning of the “inadequate fraud prevention” began in 2023 when Gov. Katie Hobbs appointed Carmen Heredia as the director of the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, Shamp said.

In April 2025, Heredia “resigned abruptly” without having to answer questions from legislators, Shamp said.

A month after Heredia’s resignation, Shamp said, she sent this information to Hobbs’ office and the Trump administration, but said their responses were “less than ideal.”

Shamp said these findings should be referred to Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes and Attorney General Pam Bondi for prosecution.

“This is fraud. This is criminal,” she explained.

(The Center Square) – The Arizona Senate Thursday passed a resolution calling for state Attorney General Kris Mayes to resign over her comments saying it’s legal to shoot masked federal officers.

The vote was 17-13 along party lines. Republicans voted for the resolution. Democrats voted against it. Mayes, a Democrat, made her comments after the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by U.S. immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis.

The resolution marks the first time the Senate has called on an attorney general to step down, according to the Senate’s Republican majority.

"The Attorney General publicly suggested Arizonans could invoke self-defense laws against law enforcement officers," said Senate Majority Leader John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, who sponsored Senate Resolution 1036. The resolution calls on Mayes to retract her comments, issue accurate guidance on Arizona law and resign.

"Her statements were wrong, dangerous and fundamentally inconsistent with Arizona law,” Kavanagh said in a statement emailed to The Center Square and other media. “When the state's top law enforcement officer implies that police officers may be lawful targets, the Senate has a duty to act."

Things won't go well for any Arizonan who attempts to invoke the "Stand Your Ground" law against an officer, the majority leader said.

Kavanagh previously told The Center Square that Mayes’ comments about people being able to legally “shoot law enforcement officers if their faces are covered and they’re wearing non-traditional SWAT-type uniforms is false.”

State law doesn’t allow Arizonans to shoot law enforcement officers, Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, said Thursday.

"Insinuating otherwise is unacceptable coming from the state's chief legal officer," Petersen said in a statement. "Our responsibility is to protect public safety and make the law unmistakably clear."

Petersen is running for attorney general against Rodney Glassman and Greg Roeberg in the Aug. 4 Republican primary. The winner will run in the Nov. 3 general election against Hobbs, who's running unopposed for the Democratic nomination.

State Senate and House Democrats have rallied in support of Mayes. But Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat who is running for reelection this year, called the attorney general’s comments “inappropriate” and said Mayes should retract them, according to media reports.

The controversy started when Mayes said during a TV interview that the state’s Stand Your Ground law says “if you reasonably believe that your life is in danger and you’re in your house or your car or on your property, that you can defend yourself with lethal force.”

She told 12News that she wasn’t giving people a license to shoot an officer, but asked how anyone would know someone is law enforcement unless they’re clearly identified as such.

Mayes said Sunday in a video that the "idea that [she] would want the life of any member of law enforcement put in danger is wrong and offensive, and it is an outright lie."

She noted she appreciates the work by Arizona law enforcement who keep the state safe, but would not be deterred from criticizing the Trump administration for "its ongoing abuses of power."

Democrats in the Arizona Senate and House defended Mayes at a news conference Thursday morning at the Capitol in Phoenix and in written statements.

“I trust my own ears,” said Lela Alston, the Senate’s Democratic Caucus chair. “Attorney General Mayes was issuing a warning that guns and this ICE regime can be a lethal combination, especially when ICE’s conduct violates the rule of law and legitimate law enforcement tactics.

"Alex Pretti’s murder has shown that our Attorney General’s concern is valid," Alston said.

Senate Minority Whip Rosanna Gabaldon said “masked and often unidentified ICE officers” drag people off the street with no probable cause and seize children and put them in detention centers. She accused ICE officers of entering homes without valid judicial warrants and now murdering U.S. citizens.

(The Center Square) – The debate by Southwestern members of Congress over the fatal shootings in Minneapolis is continuing along party lines as the U.S. Senate Thursday failed to advance funding bills.

There are now less than 40 hours left for the Senate to approve House-passed legislation to avert a partial federal government shutdown.

Two Democrats whose votes allowed the federal government to reopen in November said they won't support a spending bill that includes Homeland Security following the deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, who were shot and killed by agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol.

In Nevada, U.S. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, a Democrat, has criticized the Trump administration and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem specifically for “putting untrained, combative federal agents on the streets” with no accountability.

“They are oppressing Americans and are at odds with local law enforcement,” said Cortez Masto this week in news release. “This is clearly not about keeping Americans safe; it is brutalizing U.S. citizens and law-abiding immigrants.”

Because of this, Cortez Masto said she “will not support the current Homeland Security funding bill.”

Cortez Masto and U.S. Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nevada, were among the Democrats whose votes brought the Senate to the 60 votes it needed to reopen the government in November. Rosen earlier this week announced she would vote against funding Homeland Security and called for Noem's impeachment.

U.S. Rep. Abe Hamadeh, R-Arizona, said he's not surprised by Democrats' objection to funding Homeland Security.

"As I said before, the Democrats were willing to shut down the government over handouts for criminal illegal immigrants, so the fact that they are now threatening to do it again over funding for immigration enforcement proves that they prioritize illegal immigrants over American citizens,” Hamadeh told The Center Square.

Hamadeh, a first-generation American, said "no one in their right mind" would support shutting down the government to protect hardened criminals, yet that is exactly what the Democrats are doing.

“Our law enforcement officers should be able to safely arrest criminals who are convicted spouse abusers, child molesters, and murderers, which, contrary to the fake news, is exactly who ICE agents are trying to take into custody,” said Hamadeh, a former U.S. Army Reserve captain and intelligence officer as well as a former Maricopa County prosecutor.

On the other side of the issue is U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Arizona. The former astronaut and Navy veteran announced Wednesday he will vote “no” for the Department of Homeland Security budget this week following the fatal shootings in Minneapolis.

“We can enforce our laws without this chaos,” said Kelly, the son of two police officers. “We can enforce our laws without federal agents killing people, killing people in the streets of American cities.”

In Nevada, U.S. Rep. Mark Amodei, R-Nevada, issued statements this week, saying that “the loss of any American life is tragic" and that his “thoughts are with the loved ones of Ms. Good and Mr. Pretti.”

However, Amodei said he felt it's unwise to shut down the Department of Homeland Security because of what it could mean for institutions such as Federal Emergency Management Agency, the U.S. Coast Guard and the Secret Service. These fall under the umbrella of DHS.

“There is another player in the room who has not been exemplary, and that is the local agitators and politicians who have encouraged the continued interference with immigration enforcement operations,” said Amodei. “They share equal responsibility for creating a warzone mentality on the ground. State, local, and federal agencies must unify their efforts, leveraging their distinct authorities and resources to restore safety and order in Minnesota.”

U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California, has also weighed in on the situation. In a video posted on X, the senator from Burbank said, “ICE and CBP are out of control and need a total overhaul.”

CBP stands for U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

“It all comes back to the Big Ugly Bill,” said Schiff in a tongue-in-cheek reference to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Signed by President Donald Trump in 2025, the bill increased funding for ICE and CBP as a means of aiding the administration’s efforts to find and remove individuals in the United States illegally.

Someone who supports that idea is U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-California.

In a post on X, Issa, whose district include parts of San Diego and Riverside counties, wrote, “Democrats need to rethink their immigration reform ideas if they give a free pass to criminal illegals.”

Amodei, Cortez Masto, Schiff and Issa did not respond to The Center Square’s requests for comment.

Elsewhere in the Southwest is U.S. Rep. Gabe Evans, R-Colorado, who voted recently to fund the federal government.

“Today I proudly voted in favor of the final bipartisan appropriations package, to keep our government fully funded for fiscal year 2026," Evans said in a statement after voting Jan. 22 for the final four of 12 appropriations bills. "These four bills strengthen our national security, support America’s service members, promote a healthier nation, and empower local communities through economic development priorities. This package also delivers more than $18.9 million in direct funding for Colorado’s Eighth Congressional District, securing meaningful wins for my constituents and our state."

U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colorado, meanwhile, said he's developing legislation to impose new guardrails and accountability on the Department of Homeland Security, including ICE and CBP.

Bennet said the legislation would prohibit the use of DHS funds to detain children and strengthen protection of minors and would require warrants to enter homes. It's also designed, among other things, to restrict DHS operations to the enforcement of immigration law and enhance hiring, training and performance standards for immigration agents.

Bennet's office said the senator continues to call for Noem to resign.

(The Center Square) – U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly has announced he will vote "no" for the Department of Homeland Security budget this week following the fatal shootings in Minneapolis.

In a speech Wednesday on the Senate floor, the Arizona Democrat said DHS needs an overhaul from the top down and the bottom up.

“Over the weekend, Americans watched what happened to Alex Pretti in Minneapolis,” Kelly told senators. “A U.S. citizen and ICU nurse at the V.A. who took care of veterans, he was shot and killed by federal agents for no good reason.”

Kelly also pointed to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's fatal shooting of Renee Good in Minnesota.

“Renee was a mother and a wife,” said Kelly. “She was shot and killed in her car, and her family will never see her again.”

The Center Square reached out Wednesday to the Department of the Homeland Security and the White House for comment, but did not hear back as of press time.

President Donald Trump has said the ICE officer who shot Good acted in self-defense after Good hit him with her car. Vice President JD Vance also addressed this in an early January White House press briefing.

Meanwhile, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem defended the Border Patrol agent, saying he acted in self-defense when he shot Pretti.

In its report to Congress, Border Patrol said an agent discovered Pretti was carrying a gun.

“This individual showed up to impede a law enforcement operation and assaulted our officers,” Noem said in a story published by The Center Square. “They responded according to their training and took action to defend the officer’s life and those of the public around him.”

Kelly does not see it that way.

He described it as two Americans being dead at the hands of their government.

“This administration has lied to the American people,” said Kelly. “They have slandered these Americans as terrorists. They have told us not to believe what we see with our own eyes. They blamed Alex Pretti because he was in lawful possession of a firearm. They have tried to block the investigations into what happened.”

According to Kelly, these are not isolated incidents.

For example, Kelly said ICE recently conducted “a series of workplace raids at a sports bar in Phoenix” where officers “wore masks and tactical gear.” Kelly also mentioned a video of ICE officers doing a drive-by and spraying a woman with mace when Kelly said she was just standing on the sidewalk.

“They violated her constitutional rights,” said Kelly, the son of police officers. “These are the actions of a rogue agency that is storming cities, violating the constitutional rights of Americans, and creating volatile situations where tragedies happen.”

The Trump administration views tougher law enforcement as a way of making Americans safer. However, Kelly said this is doing the opposite.

“From a very young age, I learned that law enforcement should exist to serve and protect people,” said Kelly, a retired Navy combat pilot and former astronaut. “We can enforce our laws without this chaos. We can enforce our laws without federal agents killing people, killing people in the streets of American cities.”

These may be divisive times, but Kelly said senators should demand things be better and use their power to make it happen.

“That's why I will not vote for the Department of Homeland Security budget this week because that agency needs an overhaul from the top down and the bottom up,” said Kelly. “The head of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, and the guy who everybody knows is actually making the decisions and calling the shots and running the show, Stephen Miller, both of them should be out of jobs because they have lost the trust of the American people.”

Miller is the deputy White House chief of staff and homeland security adviser.

Near the end of his remarks, Kelly used the opportunity to promote his legislation known as the Stop Excessive Force in Immigration Act. Co-sponsored by U.S. Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Arizona, Kelly said the bill sets limits on the use of force, and the use of firearms by immigration agents. It also restricts the use of tear gas, flash bang grenades and pepper balls.

“It requires body cameras to be used, and it restricts the use of face masks,” said Kelly. “It requires accountability and transparency so that when somebody is hurt or killed, the American people will get some answers.”

(The Center Square) - Several blue states appear set to lose electoral college votes while red states will make sweeping gains, new data from the U.S. Census Bureau suggests.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Census Bureau announced a significant decrease in U.S. population growth, largely due to less international immigration.

However, analysis of the census data revealed several noteworthy takeaways in domestic migration trends that could affect electoral college and congressional makeup.

Electoral votes are allocated to states based on the Census. Each state is allocated a number of electoral votes based on the number of U.S. Senators and Representatives in that state.

The District of Columbia is allocated three electors in the Electoral College.

The American Redistricting Project estimated Texas would gain four seats in 2030 based on recent Census data and Florida would gain two seats. On the other end, California is projected to lose 4 seats.

North Carolina, Georgia, Idaho, Utah and Arizona would gain one additional seat respectively. However, New York, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois and Oregon would lose one seat, respectively.

Democrat leaders expressed concern over these new projections and criticized mid-decade redistricting efforts across the country. John Bisognano, president of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, called on Democrats to respond to redistricting efforts.

"Republicans have enacted mid-decade gerrymanders in states like Texas and North Carolina by drawing maps that aim to further silence the very communities driving the most population growth," Bisognano said.

Jonathan Cervas, a redistricting forecaster at Carnegie Mellon University, shared similar predictions as the American Redistricting Project. However, Cervas predicted Florida would gain four seats instead of two and New York would lose two seats instead of one.

David Hogg, a former leader in the Democratic National Committee, called on Democrats to build support in the South to counter reapportionment.

"If we don’t start building infrastructure in the South and start winning states like Texas, Georgia, North Carolina and Florida, we can kiss goodbye any chance of winning the White House in the 2030s," Hogg said.