Hobbs vetoes Republican plan to end Election Day ballot drop-offs
An employee at Runbeck Election Services monitors early ballots being printed at the company's facility in Phoenix. Photo by Jerod MacDonad-Evoy | Arizona Mirror
Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed a Republican proposal to speed up election results by adopting policies used in Florida that would have eliminated the way hundreds of thousands of Arizonans cast their ballot each year.
Senate Republicans have called the idea 'wildly popular,' and the Arizona Republican Party has been pushing a phone and email campaign to encourage Hobbs to sign it into law.
But before House Bill 2703 had even been passed, its fate was known, after Hobbs declared she would veto it because Republicans were unwilling to make concessions. In response, Republicans lobbed the same accusation at the governor.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The bill passed through the House of Representatives on Feb. 12 by a vote of 32-27, and it cleared the Senate a day later by a vote of 16-10. In both chambers, only Republicans voted in favor.
Among the changes HB2703 would have made is ending the practice of voters dropping their early ballots off at a polling place on Election Day, and instead requiring that they either go to the county recorder's office if they want to drop a ballot off after 7 p.m. on the Friday before Election Day or stand in line at a polling place to show ID before inserting their early ballot in a ballot tabulator.
More than 264,000 Arizonans — nearly 8% of voters who cast a ballot — dropped off their early ballots on Election Day in November, according to the Secretary of State's Office.
The bill also would have required voters on the Active Early Voter List — who receive a ballot in the mail automatically — to confirm their address each election cycle or be booted off the list, and it sought to mandate that schools serve as polling locations if the county requested. Additionally, it would have expanded in-person early voting through the day before Election Day instead of ending it on the Friday before.
'While I too want faster election results, the solution should not needlessly restrict Arizona citizens' freedom to vote, or undermine the learning and safety of students in public school districts,' Hobbs wrote in her veto letter. 'This legislation effectively ends the Active Early Voting List, something that has nothing to do with faster election results, but disenfranchises voters by adding additional steps for the hundreds of thousands of Arizona voters who prefer to vote by mail.'
Hobbs has repeatedly said that she would veto any legislation that makes it more difficult to vote and outlined the compromises she said she was willing to make in order to make the legislation work. This bill is her first veto of the 2025 legislative session.
'Proposed changes included Friday early ballot drop off restrictions, while protecting the Active Early Voting List and some combination of same day voter registration, cross-county portability of voter registration, and expanded assistance for eligible voters to return their ballots in a timely manner,' Hobbs explained in her letter. 'A negotiated bill that included some of these provisions would have shown Arizonans that it is possible to both speed up counting and expand voter access.'
Hobbs said in her letter that Republicans rejected those proposals.
Senate Democratic Leader Priya Sundareshen echoed Hobbs, saying that Republicans rejected their proposals in a video statement on the veto posted on X.
'Republicans attempted to use this moment as an excuse to reduce voter access under the guise of having election results called earlier when, in reality, expanding voter access and achieving faster election results are not mutually exclusive,' Sundareshen said. 'I want to give my sincere thanks to Governor Hobbs for vetoing this measure and safeguarding Arizonans fundamental right to vote and to make their voices heard.'
Sundareshen's Democratic colleagues in the House made similar statements.
Senate President Warren Petersen called the veto a 'huge mistake' in a press release shortly after Hobbs announced the veto.
'This was a missed opportunity to increase voter confidence and reduce frustration on election night,' Petersen, a Queen Creek Republican, said in the written statement. 'Instead of working with Republicans in good-faith to provide much-needed reforms to our election processes, the Governor impeded all efforts to ensure Arizona can report the vast majority of votes on Election Night. This is not what Arizonans want from their state's leaders. Republicans and Democrats should be able to work together to solve these issues in a bipartisan manner without resorting to political talking points.'
The statement went on further to say that Republicans are weighing their options on how to continue to pursue the legislation. Last year, Republican lawmakers sent a record number of ballot referrals to voters to avoid Hobbs' veto pen.
'Status quo for our state's elections is not an option. Arizona should never again be the laughingstock of the nation for its woefully slow election reporting. Our caucus will be discussing a path forward on this issue in the days and weeks ahead,' Petersen said.
Republicans have a similar proposal, House Concurrent Resolution 2013, which would be sent to voters in 2026 if approved by both chambers.
'Katie Hobbs failing to sign even the most commonsense bills being placed on her desk. It's pathetic,' Republican Governors Association spokesman Kollin Crompton said in a statement. 'Arizona lags the nation in the time it takes to count ballots and report results. The insane wait in reporting results is bad for governance, and causes chaos and uncertainty for voters, elected officials, and the country. To voters this is common sense, and clearly Hobbs has none.'
Last November, Arizona was the last state in which the Associated Press called the presidential election results. The state has typically reported its full results about 13 days after the election for the past two decades.
Republicans began making a policy point of the count when Arizona started to become a swing-state and as the margins of victory became even more narrow in many races.
The bill would have curbed the drop off of 'late earlies' at polling locations in a voter's county by 7 p.m. the Friday before Election Day. Currently, voters can drop off their mail-in ballots at any polling place through 7 p.m. on Election Day. More than 264,000 Arizona voters drop off their early ballots on Election Day, according to the Secretary of State's Office.
***UPDATED: This story has been updated to include additional comments.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Iran Strikes Risk Dividing GOP at Crucial Time for Trump Agenda
By and Steven T. Dennis Save Donald Trump's unilateral decision to strike Iran's key nuclear sites on Saturday notably sidelined Congress just as he needs Republicans lawmakers to unite around one thing he can't do without them: Pass his legislative agenda. Senate Republicans are still planning to move ahead this week with votes on Trump's massive tax and spending bill, Stacey Daniels, a spokeswoman for Majority Leader John Thune, said Sunday.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Trump hits Iran: 5 questions on what comes next
President Trump's decision to authorize a military strike on Iran is a seismic moment that could reshape the future of the Middle East and his presidency. The administration on Sunday signaled it wants to contain the conflict, underscoring that it does not want an all-out war with Iran but will not accept a world where Tehran has a nuclear weapon. Whether it can contain the fallout is a different proposition and one that may depend largely on Iran. Politically, the vast majority of Republicans are sticking with Trump, while many Democrats are expressing outrage over what they see as a lack of strategy, as well as a lack of notification to Congress ahead of the strikes. The move by Trump is, in some ways, a surprise, as he came to office promising to keep the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. Now, less than six months into his second term, he is on the brink of a larger battle. Here are five big questions. This is the most important question. Administration officials on Sunday signaled that they are hopeful Iran will return to the negotiating table, but signs quickly emerged of a more aggressive response from Tehran. Iranian television reported that Iran's parliament had approved a measure to close the Strait of Hormuz, a key shipping route between Iran and Oman. State-run Press-TV said a final decision on doing so rested with Iran's Supreme National Security Council. Shutting off the waterway could have major implications for global trade, leading to increased oil and gas prices in the U.S. That would bite at Trump, who vowed to bring down prices after years of high inflation under former President Biden in the post-COVID era. It also risks turning the conflict into a broader war. Iran could also launch strikes against U.S. military targets, though its abilities to do so have been hampered by more than a week of strikes by Israel, which has allowed U.S. and Israeli planes more security to fly over Iranian skies. Another widely-discussed possibility is that Iran could back terror attacks around the world on U.S. targets. Of course, there would be serious risks to such actions by Iran. Just taking steps to move forward with its nuclear program, let alone striking out at the U.S., would lead to negative consequences, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned on Sunday. 'Look, at the end of the day, if Iran is committed to becoming a nuclear weapons power, I do think it puts the regime at risk,' he said during an appearance on Fox Sunday Futures. 'I really do. I think it would be the end of the regime if they tried to do that.' Before this week, Trump's Make America Great Again movement looked divided on a strike on Iran. Trump has long criticized past U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a big part of his draw to many voters was his promise to keep the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. MAGA voices from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) to political pundit Tucker Carlson to former Trump strategic adviser Steve Bannon have all cast doubt on getting the U.S. more directly involved in the Iran-Israeli conflict. In the immediate aftermath of the strikes, Republicans were notably united, with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) being a notable exception. And administration officials with non-interventionist records were taking rhetorical steps to keep the doubters in line. A chief example was Vice President Vance, who said the U.S. was at war with Iran's nuclear program, not Iran as a country. Iran may not see things that way, and if Tehran takes steps to hurt the U.S., GOP voices who doubted the wisdom of a strike may get louder. That will be something the administration watches closely going forward. Trump, in a Sunday Truth Social post, also touted 'great unity' among Republicans following the U.S. strikes and called on the party to focus on getting his tax and spending legislation to his desk. On the left, Democrats have hit Trump hard over the strike on Iran. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), speaking at a rally on Saturday night, reacted to unfolding events live, arguing Trump's action was unconstitutional as a crowd changed 'no more wars.' Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said Trump's action was an impeachable offense. That was a bold statement in that Democrats largely have avoided impeachment talk with Trump after twice voting to impeach him during his first term. Both of those efforts ultimately ended with Senate acquittals and, finally, with Trump's reelection last year. Presidents in both parties have taken limited military strikes without first seeking permission from Congress, but Democrats have also brought up the War Powers Act, saying Trump went too far with the strikes. At the same time, many Democrats are concerned about Iran's potential to go nuclear, and the party does not want to be cast as soft on Tehran. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), a vociferous opponent of Iran, called for his GOP counterpart, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), to put the War Powers Act on the floor so senators could vote to authorize Trump's actions. Going a step further, Schumer said he would vote for it. 'No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy,' Schumer said in the statement. 'Confronting Iran's ruthless campaign of terror, nuclear ambitions, and regional aggression demands strength, resolve, and strategic clarity. The danger of wider, longer, and more devastating war has now dramatically increased.' 'We must enforce the War Powers Act, and I'm urging Leader Thune to put it on the Senate floor immediately. I am voting for it and implore all Senators on both sides of the aisle to vote for it,' he said. Another Democrat further to the center, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, retweeted Trump's Truth Social post on the attack and said he fully agreed with it. In general, the strikes on Iran may further divide Democrats on liberal-centrist and generational lines. Yet much, again, depends on events. A successful Gulf War by former President George H.W. Bush did not save his presidency in 1992. And the second Gulf War ended disastrously for the Republican Party led by Bush's son, former President George W. Bush. Trump justly had a reputation as a president who is averse to foreign conflicts, given his criticism of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and his repeated calls that he would keep the U.S. out of such wars. So how did this Trump end up bombing Iran, becoming the first president to authorize the dropping of some of America's most lethal non-nuclear bombs? It's more likely Trump's shift is a bit of a one-off based on current world events than a complete change in philosophy. After Israel's initial strike on Iran on June 13, the administration distanced itself from the decision. Trump previously has been seeking to get Iran to agree to a nuclear deal, and many reports suggested he was not keen on an aggressive Israel attack. But that attack happened, and it went well. Israel had control of Iranian airspace, potentially clearing the way for U.S. B-2 bombers. Action by Russia was unlikely given its own war with Ukraine — something that was not part of the political fabric in Trump's first term. Iran's backers in Hamas and Hezbollah also have been devastated by Israel since Hamas launched its attack on Oct. 7, 2023, an event that has had a number of serious repercussions. Some U.S. officials on Sunday called for peace, a sign that Trump is not seeking a prolonged conflict. That could also be a message to his supporters who did not think they were voting for a leader who risked getting the country into a Middle East War. At least some of those voters may be asking questions in the days and weeks to come, and what comes next will make a big difference in shaping their views. Trump's decision to attack Iran and enter the Israeli-Iran war is a big win for hawkish supporters and allies of the president, most notably Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). It is also, oddly, something that will be cheered by certain Republicans who are more often critics of Trump, such as former National Security Adviser John Bolton and former Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). It seems clear Trump is listening to the voices of Graham, Rubio and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, despite the sometimes-tense relationship between the U.S. and Israeli leaders. Vance is clearly a part of the president's inner circle, and it was notable that he, Rubio and Hegseth were at Trump's side when he announced the strikes on Saturday night. Trump 2.0 has been notable for having few voices that offer pushback to Trump's decisions. It is difficult to see Hegseth pressing Trump to move in a different direction on a national security issue, for example. And Trump twice this week described assessments by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard that Iran was not close to developing a nuclear weapon as wrong. So, who has Trump's ear? Most of these key people surround Trump and others, like White House chief of staff Susie Wiles. But Trump is his own decider-in-chief, and the Iran strikes are a reflection of his own unpredictability.
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Hits Back at Republican Thomas Massie: 'Not MAGA'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump launched a scathing attack on Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky, declaring the Republican congressman is "not MAGA, even though he likes to say he is" on Truth Social following Massie's criticism of U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. Newsweek reached out to Massie's office via email on Sunday for comment. What It Matters Trump on Saturday evening announced what he described as a "very successful attack" against three Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan The president's decision came after Israel and Iran have exchanged consistent strikes since June 13. Israel had urged the U.S. to target Iran's nuclear facilities, saying that Tehran was moving close to creating a nuclear weapon. Iran maintains that its nuclear program is for civilian purposes—not for weapons. Taking to X, formerly Twitter, after Trump announced the strikes, Massie said, "This is not Constitutional." The strikes have sparked concerns from some Democrats and some Republicans about a wider war breaking out—with some lawmakers accusing the president of violating the U.S. Constitution with the strikes. What To Know Massie and Representative Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, introduced a bipartisan War Powers Resolution last Tuesday in a bid to curb Trump's ability to escalate tensions with Iran. "The Constitution does not permit the executive branch to unilaterally commit an act of war against a sovereign nation that hasn't attacked the United States," Massie said in a press release announcing the resolution. "Congress has the sole power to declare war against Iran. The ongoing war between Israel and Iran is not our war. Even if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution." Massie invited participation from lawmakers across the aisle, underscoring bipartisan concern about unauthorized military actions, Newsweek previously reported. Khanna quickly co-sponsored the measure and publicly called for Congress to reconvene and vote. "Stopping Iran from having a nuclear bomb is a top priority, but dragging the U.S. into another Middle East war is not the solution," Khanna said in a press release. "Trump's strikes are unconstitutional and put Americans, especially our troops, at risk," Khanna added. "Congress needs to come back to DC immediately to vote on Rep. Thomas Massie and my bipartisan War Powers Resolution to ensure there is no further conflict and escalation." The resolution has garnered support from over 40 House members, including Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, and Pramila Jayapal. MAGA (Make America Great Again) supporter Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Georgia Republican, has even signaled support, emphasizing on X that Americans want domestic priorities addressed "not going into another foreign war." Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, endorsed a companion resolution introduced by Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, stating "No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy." House Minority Whip Katherine Clark stated: "The power to declare war resides solely with Congress. Donald Trump's unilateral decision to attack Iran is unauthorized and unconstitutional." The list remains heavily Democrat, though more Republicans may break with the party in the coming days as the aftermath of Trump's military strikes continue to play out. Representative Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, arrives to speak to the press outside the US Capitol. Representative Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, arrives to speak to the press outside the US Capitol. ROBERTO SCHMIDT/AFP via Getty Images What People Are Saying President Donald Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Sunday: "Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky is not MAGA, even though he likes to say he is. Actually, MAGA doesn't want him, doesn't know him, and doesn't respect him. He is a negative force who almost always Votes "NO," no matter how good something may be. He's a simple minded "grandstander" who thinks it's good politics for Iran to have the highest level Nuclear weapon, while at the same time yelling "DEATH TO AMERICA" at every chance they get." He added: "Iran has killed and maimed thousands of Americans, and even took over the American Embassy in Tehran under the Carter Administration. We had a spectacular military success yesterday, taking the "bomb" right out of their hands (and they would use it if they could!) but, as usual, and despite all of the praise and accolades received, this "lightweight" Congressman is against what was so brilliantly achieved last night in Iran. Massie is weak, ineffective, and votes "NO" on virtually everything put before him (Rand Paul, Jr.), no matter how good something may be. He is disrespectful to our great military, and all that they stand for, not even acknowledging their brilliance and bravery in yesterday's attack, which was a total and complete WIN. Massie should drop his fake act and start putting America First, but he doesn't know how to get there — he doesn't have a clue!" Trump concluded: "He'll undoubtedly vote against the Great, Big, Beautiful Bill, even though non-passage means a 68% Tax Increase for everybody, and many things far worse than that. MAGA should drop this pathetic LOSER, Tom Massie, like the plague! The good news is that we will have a wonderful American Patriot running against him in the Republican Primary, and I'll be out in Kentucky campaigning really hard. MAGA is not about lazy, grandstanding, nonproductive politicians, of which Thomas Massie is definitely one. Thank you to our incredible military for the AMAZING job they did last night. It was really SPECIAL!!! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN." Representative Thomas Massie on X, formerly Twitter on Sunday: "I introduced a War Powers Resolution on Tuesday, while Congress was on vacation. We would have had plenty of time to debate and vote on this." What Happens Next? The House War Powers Resolution is scheduled for a mandatory floor vote within 15 days under the chamber's rules.
