Michigan | Arizona Capitol Times
Your Inside Source for Arizona Government, Politics and Business
Tue, 10 Mar 2026 19:06:27 +0000
en-US
hourly
1
/files/2023/05/az17.jpg
Michigan | Arizona Capitol Times
32
32
43761567
Data center growth threatens state climate goals
/news/2026/03/10/data-center-growth-threatens-state-climate-goals/
Tue, 10 Mar 2026 19:00:59 +0000
/?p=497735
EDITOR’S NOTE: This story is part of a special State Affairs series highlighting energy policy dominating state legislative action this year. See the full list of stories here. Climate-conscious state lawmakers […]
The post Data center growth threatens state climate goals first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
EDITOR’S NOTE: This story is part of a special State Affairs series highlighting energy policy dominating state legislative action this year. See the full list of stories here.
Climate-conscious state lawmakers have proposed policies to keep states on track to meet their environmental goals, as rising electricity demand spurred by data center development is threatening to hamstring efforts to rein in greenhouse-gas emissions.
Those proposals include requiring or incentivizing data centers to provide their own clean power; data center development moratoriums; establishing virtual power plants; ramping up rooftop solar; and establishing cap-and-trade programs.
Experts say the demand for electricity to power the surge in data centers is projected to be so great that even if states and utilities put more clean power on the grid, emission-heavy power sources such as coal and natural gas likely must be kept online to ensure reliability and prevent brownouts and blackouts.
“The data center industry operates on timelines that are just vastly different than the utility industry,” said Brendan Pierpont, director of electricity at Energy Innovation. “I think the expectations between these two industries are really mismatched, and that’s creating a lot of pressure on utilities and on the states that have these goals.”
Electricity usage is forecast to grow by an average of 5.7% per year over the next five years. Data centers are the largest driver of demand and energy growth, accounting for roughly 40% to 55% of demand growth in utility load forecasts, depending on what actually gets built, according to Grid Strategies, a consulting firm.
Data centers are specialized buildings that house networking and other computer equipment needed to support artificial intelligence, cloud computing, financial transactions, video streaming and numerous other essential parts of the economy. They can use as much electricity as a city and hundreds of thousands of gallons of water to cool their systems, depending on the size of the facility.
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act has cranked up data center development thanks to a provision allowing companies to take immediate deductions for certain capital investments — including the equipment housed in data centers — rather than spreading those write-offs over several years.
States must balance climate goals against the economic benefits of hosting data centers, though some critics say the costs in lost revenue outweigh the benefits. According to McKinsey, “States that can effectively plan, manage, and mitigate the risks of data center growth stand to unlock millions, perhaps even billions, of dollars in direct and indirect growth.”
Currently, 15 states — most of which are run by Democrats — have enacted legislation requiring that all energy needs be met by 100% clean or renewable energy by a certain date. Ten states, including five with 100% clean energy laws, also must reach economy-wide climate goals by a certain date under current laws. Those include California, Colorado, Illinois, Michigan and New York.
California, Illinois, and New York are among the roughly half a dozen states where legislation has been introduced to require or incentivize data center developers to provide or procure their own clean or renewable power.
In Illinois, Democratic Sen. Ram Villivalam unveiled his far-reaching measure, known as the Power Act, at a press conference in February. He underscored that the bill includes a Bring Your Own New Clean Capacity and Energy provision, “ensuring data centers power their operations with new locally deliverable renewable energy and battery storage.”
The measure would also require data centers to pay into a fund to support low-income energy assistance, avoid power cutoffs and boost home weatherization programs. They would also have to disclose water usage. A cumulative assessment would have to be done before being sited near low-income communities.
Opponents of the bill, including the Data Center Coalition and the Illinois Manufacturers Association, said it would hurt Illinois by prompting developers to go to other states. The Data Center Coalition is backed by companies including Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Meta.
Jen Walling, head of the Illinois Environmental Council, countered that data centers would continue to have a presence in the state thanks to its access to water and power.
“They are looking here, and they’ll still look here, even if we have regulations in place,” Walling said at the press conference.
Lawmakers in at least six states, including Georgia, Michigan and Oklahoma, have introduced legislation to pause data center development over concerns that a sudden surge in data centers could hurt consumers, the environment and the grid.
In Michigan, a resolution was introduced calling for a pause in construction and reviews by state agencies on the fiscal, utility and environmental effects of data centers. That includes assessments of electric load growth, water withdrawals and local infrastructure costs, as well as increased transparency and local government participation in siting decisions.
“Absolutely unchecked data center growth makes it harder for us to hit our clean energy targets,” said Ben Poulson, state government affairs director for the Michigan League of Conservation Voters. “It doesn’t have to be that way, and it really is a policy choice.”
To that end, Pam Kiely, associate vice president for the U.S. region at the Environmental Defense Fund, said some states will look to cap-and-trade programs to protect the climate from greenhouse gas pollution associated with growing electricity demand from data centers.
Cap-and-trade programs typically involve capping emissions and establishing a market for selling allowances that businesses and others can buy to emit more than the cap permits. The funds raised tend to be used to mitigate and prevent damage related to climate change.
Kiely pointed to California revamping its programs last year, Virginia Democrats pushing to return the state to the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, and U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet’s Colorado gubernatorial campaign platform including the establishment of a cap-and-trade program.
“We want increased demand in the power sector … because we know how to decarbonize that sector,” Kiely said. “But that also means we need a policy framework that’s capable of ensuring continued decarbonization even as demand grows.”The post Data center growth threatens state climate goals first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
497735
Census reveals where Arizonans are going to and coming from
/news/2024/10/28/census-reveals-where-arizonans-are-going-to-and-coming-from/
Mon, 28 Oct 2024 20:41:35 +0000
/?p=491611
Wondering where all those new Arizonans are coming from? New estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau show that more than 256,000 people moved here last year from somewhere else. And […]
The post Census reveals where Arizonans are going to and coming from first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
Wondering where all those new Arizonans are coming from?
New estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau show that more than 256,000 people moved here last year from somewhere else. And close to a quarter of them arrived here from another country.
Still, there was a lot of what’s called domestic migration.
That includes more than 54,000 former Californians who, if you believe some of the political rhetoric, are people fleeing because of that state’s liberal policies.
Yet if things are that bad there, that fails to explain the fact that some 21,000 Arizonans concluded during the same period that life is better on the West Coast.
And surely, if what has been driving people to Arizona is this state’s more conservative politics, that doesn’t explain the nearly 17,000 from deep-red Texas who decided they prefer Arizona. Still, that was dwarfed, if only slightly by the 19,900 Arizonans who decamped to the Lone Star State.
All this, of course, is speculation.
People move for all sorts of reasons, like better weather.
Consider the weather. More than 6,700 of new Arizonans last year came from Michigan and almost 5,700 from Minnesota.
Yet those bitter winters apparently were not a deterrent to everyone.
Some 4,000 Arizonans decided they would rather live in the Great Lakes State. And almost 4,800 decided they want to be in the Land of 1,000 Lakes.
Better fishing?
A lot of it comes down to people going where the jobs are.
Figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for 2023 show the number of jobs in Arizona grew by 2.1%. That was enough to rank it No. 12 in the nation.
By contrast, New York was fifth from the bottom at less than half that figure.
So it’s probably no surprise that more than 7,600 New Yorkers packed up and move to Arizona last year. Yet about 3,500 Arizonans went the other way, perhaps because of the bright lights of Broadway.
Another big contributor to Arizona’s growing population was Oregon, where almost 10,500 of its residents chose the Grand Canyon State. That compares with 7,144 Arizonans who went the other way.
And, speaking of the Northwest, more than 12,800 current Arizonans came from Washington versus 10,675 who went the other way.
There are some places beyond Texas that apparently were bigger lures for Arizonans than the number of their residents who came here.
For example, Arizona picked up 1,373 folks from Alabama last year. Yet nearly 4,500 residents here decided they’d rather be there. And more Arizonans moved to Colorado than residents of that state came here.
Ditto Kentucky and Nevada. And both North and South Carolina, which have growing economies, also attracted more Arizonans than those who came here from there.
And, for some reason, the number of Arizonans who left for West Virginia is 22 times higher than those who left the Mountain State.
Still, Arizona ranks No.14 in overall state population.
While the latest Census figures are just for 2023, other statistics from the federal agency show these migration patterns aren’t isolated.
Out of more than 7.43 million Arizonans, just 2.91 million actually were born here. That’s less than 40%.
By contrast, nearly 1.1 million current residents were born in a foreign country, about one out of every five Arizonans. The Census Bureau has no breakdown of their legal status.
Domestically, more than 768,000 current residents were born in California. Put another way, out of any random group of 10 Arizonans you meet on the street, one is from the Coast.
The state has more than 177,000 New York-born residents and 155,000 from the Lone Star State.
Other
Other big contributors to Arizona’s population include more than 138,00 from Michigan, 120,000 from Washington, close to 100,000 from Minnesota and about 98,000 from Pennsylvania.
State / 2023 inflow / 2023 outflow / Residents born there now living here
Alabama / 1,373 / 4,470 / 13,610
Alaska / 2,017 / 618 / 18,490
Arkansas / 1,896 / 1,112 / 23,352
California / 54,222 / 21,152 / 768,642
Colorado / 8,344 / 12,378 / 91,143
Connecticut / 1,085 / 657 / 29,281
Delaware / 514 / 476 / 6,078
District of Columbia / 74 / 242 / 10,488
Florida / 12,762 / 8,361 / 48,740
Georgia / 6,326 / 2,706 / 22,591
Hawaii / 2,226 / 1,932 / 20,750
Idaho / 5,132 / 4.026 / 34,232
Illinois / 9,030 / 4,417 / 279,846
Indiana / 2,974 / 2,123 / 86,553
Iowa / 6,805 /3,078 / 81,080
Kansas / 3,383 / 2,365 / 50,324
Kentucky / 1,555 / 2,484 / 17,545
Louisiana / 2,514 / 669 / 19,368
Maine / 350 / 375 / 14,041
Maryland / 1,972 / 2,202 / 30,780
Massachusetts / 3,316 / 1,427 / 50,093
Michigan / 6,740 / 4,049 / 138,544
Minnesota / 5,582 / 4,770 / 99,569
Mississippi / 816 / 1,356 / 11,783
Missouri / 7,390 / 5,699 / 61,681
Montana / 2,261 / 823 / 26,582
Nebraska / 2,694 / 1,367 / 48,650
Nevada / 6,341 / 7,972 / 34,802
New Hampshire / 612 / 702 / 8,237
New Jersey / 2,082 / 1,140 / 71,450
New Mexico / 6,397 / 3,535 / 86,125
New York / 7,627 / 3,934 / 177,725
North Carolina / 3,646 / 6,443 / 25,343
North Dakota / 424 / 1,325 / 29,388
Ohio / 3,091 / 4,352 / 128.803
Oklahoma / 2,925 / 3,093 / 34,474
Oregon / 10,465 / 7,144 / 63,426
Pennsylvania / 4,740 / 3,773 / 97,807
Rhode Island / 145 / 79 / 6,598
South Carolina / 1,186 / 2,578 / 11,564
South Dakota / 1,892 / 908 / 25,370
Tennessee / 4,498 / 3,907 / 23,976
Texas 16,679 / 19,900 / 155,610
Utah / 5,766 / 6,639 / 78,342
Vermont / 242 / 419 / 4,093
Virginia / 4,441 / 4,091 / 34.859
Washington / 12,844 / 10,675 / 120,355
West Virginia / 40 / 897 / 10,243
Wisconsin / 4,015 / 3,304 / 82,874
Wyoming / 2,501 / 1,526 / 17,266
Foreign country / 58,640 / NA / 1,078,602
– Source: U.S. Census Bureau estimatesThe post Census reveals where Arizonans are going to and coming from first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
491611
Little-noticed statehouse races could reshape election policies next year
/news/2024/09/25/little-noticed-statehouse-races-could-reshape-election-policies-next-year/
Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:35:24 +0000
/?p=490990
Americans agree the fate of democracy rests on the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, even if they don’t agree on what that outcome should be. But they may be […]
The post Little-noticed statehouse races could reshape election policies next year first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
Americans agree the fate of democracy rests on the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, even if they don’t agree on what that outcome should be. But they may be too focused on the top of the ticket
A small number of lower-profile state legislative races in districts around the country could shift partisan control of legislative chambers in several key swing states next year, potentially allowing state lawmakers to reshape how elections are run.
“What’s really going to impact most voters when it comes to how they experience their elections — the timing of their elections, when ballots are counted, how things are processed, security and infrastructure changes — that’s all happening at the state level,” said Megan Boler Bellamy, vice president of law and policy at Voting Rights Lab, a nonprofit group that monitors state legislation on voting and elections.
“The makeup of the state legislature is really, really critical to the voting experience of most of the citizens in these states,” Bellamy said. I think it’s something that’s not getting the attention it should.”
In states including Georgia, Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, she said, the Voting Rights Lab is watching how lawmakers handle several key issues: rulemaking around certification and other election administration issues, funding for elections, a push to require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship, and threats to election officials, among other things.
A shift in the balance of power in legislatures could send long-stalled bills on election policy shooting towards approval. It could also mean more abrupt changes in election laws and regulations for long-suffering election officials.
In Pennsylvania, for example, changes in the makeup of the closely divided Legislature could jumpstart efforts to give local election officials time to pre-process mail ballots, a Democratic priority, or a Republican push for new voter identification requirements. In Michigan, voters amended the state Constitution in 2022 to pass several voting and election changes, including allowing early voting and dropboxes, but lawmakers control funding and important choices about how the changes work in practice.
Republicans have long dominated state legislatures, but that means they’re playing defense in more states, a nonpartisan analysis by the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics found, and Democrats made more gains in 2022 than expected.
Republican and Democratic operatives alike are keenly aware that power and control in some states could shift hands, and both parties are focusing on a small number of seats they say could be decisive.
The prospect of Democrats regaining control of a majority of state legislative chambers for the first time since 2010 is “the greatest long-term threat to our party,” wrote the Republican State Leadership Committee, the party arm that takes the lead on legislative races, in a memo describing spending plans and highlighting battleground races in Arizona, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and other states.
The RSLC will spend $50 million in state legislative races this cycle, a new record, the group said.
Will Rusch, a spokesman for the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, the Democrats’ state legislative campaign arm, said that in both the 2022 and 2023 elections, state legislative majorities were decided by extremely close margins. For example, he pointed out, Democrats secured a single-seat majority in the Pennsylvania House in part because one Democrat eked out a victory by just 63 votes. That means either party could gain ground with less investment than might be required to move the needle on a competitive statewide U.S. Senate race, for example, and volunteering on behalf of a candidate could potentially have a big effect.
Rusch said the DLCC is focused on states at a tipping point, where investing resources could change the power balance. For example, he said, Republicans control both houses of the North Carolina Legislature, but flipping a single seat in the state House would take away the party’s supermajority and allow Democrats to sustain a governor’s veto.
“State legislatures are kind of the building blocks of democracy,” he said. “It’s where a lot of our election processes and voting laws right now are being passed.”
Here’s a look at the some of the states where shifts in the statehouse could determine the course of election policy:
Arizona: Democrats hope to chip away at voting restrictions
In Arizona, the Republican-controlled Legislature has been determined to overhaul the state’s election system, but has failed to get any substantive proposals past Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs in the last two years. That’s unlikely to change next year, no matter what happens with legislative races in November.
But Democrats may have their best chance in recent history to gain some legislative seats this election, according to some political observers, which would put Republicans’ narrow control at risk.
Wonder Woman herself, actress Lynda Carter, has even weighed in on one closely watched House race, declining to endorse her sister, who is running as a Republican.
A loss of control for Republicans would give Democrats a chance to chip away at Republican-led election policies that restricted voting access in recent years. And, considering that Republicans spent the last two years inviting election conspiracy theorists to speak at legislative hearings and entertaining extreme measures in committee, it would also mean a major change in the way lawmakers do business
Both parties are keenly aware that every vote could matter in the down-ballot races.
When election officials recently discovered a glitch in state systems that threw into question whether nearly 100,000 voters could vote in state and local races in addition to federal ones, the state GOP pushed for them to have a full ballot. In this case, the largest group of affected voters were Republicans. An analysis showed many lived in key legislative districts, which could be decided by slim margins. The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Friday that those voters will remain full ballot voters.
In order to win control of the Legislature, Democrats would need to both pick up seats and defend some vulnerable ones, said Republican political consultant Barrett Marson. Marson expects high voter turnout from young Democrats excited about a ballot proposition that would solidify abortion rights in the state, but he doesn’t know if those voters will take the time to fully fill out their ballot and vote Democratic on down-ballot races, especially given how long the ballot is this year.
If Democrats gain control, or if there’s a 50-50 split, Democrats may try to reverse some of the laws Republicans have passed in the name of election security. They might attempt to repeal a law requiring documented proof of citizenship for voters and bring back the permanent early voting list, which allows voters to receive a ballot in the mail every election even if they don’t ever vote by mail, for example.
A Democratic-led Legislature might also try to create automatic voter registration in the state, which automatically registers residents to vote when they interact with a state agency such as when they get a driver’s license, something that many Democratic lawmakers have said they support.
If Republicans maintain control, expect more proposals to restrict early and mail voting and to eliminate vote centers. Even though Republicans had a one-seat majority in both chambers the last two years, those proposals didn’t make it through the Legislature, in large part because state Sen. Ken Bennett, a Republican and former secretary of state, voted against them.
But Bennett lost his primary race this year to Mark Finchem, a former state lawmaker who has been a leader in the movement to spread election fraud conspiracy theories. A Republican-controlled Legislature next year could also continue to give generous speaking opportunities to those making election fraud claims, while limiting time for others.
Ben Scheel, executive director of the left-leaning group Opportunity Arizona, said that this would continue to erode voter confidence.
“It’s completely damaging to voter confidence when you have entirely unfounded claims going on in the government-sanctioned, institutionally sanctioned committee hearings,” Scheel said. “It makes it look like it’s true, and it’s just not true.
— Jen Fifield
Michigan: Laws related to Proposition 2 are at stake
In 2022, for the first time in decades, Democrats won control of both chambers of the Legislature, while holding on to the three statewide offices: governor, attorney general, and secretary of state. But they don’t hold the legislative majority by much: Control hinges on two-seat margins in the House and Senate.
Polling shows several statehouse races are nearly tied. If Republicans were to reclaim either chamber, the divided control would likely slow the passage of election legislation that Democrats have pushed for. If Republicans win back the House and Senate, first on the chopping block could be election laws that the party has opposed over the past two years.
That’s likely to include laws such as Public Act 74, which changes the requirements for recounts and includes felony charges for those who “willfully interfere” with recounts. The law wouldn’t go into effect until three months after the 2024 session fully adjourns, which hasn’t happened yet.
Republicans could also seek to weaken the laws prompted by 2022′s Proposal 2, which amended the state constitution to expand voting access, including early in-person voting. That could take a variety of forms, including limiting how jurisdictions conduct early-voting days.
A Republican majority would also imperil any bills that don’t make it through the legislature this year, such as the proposed Michigan Voting Rights Act. The package of bills, which aims to reinstate some of the protections of the 1965 federal Voting Rights Act that were weakened by the courts in recent years, passed the Michigan Senate just last week, moving on to the House committee on elections.
The legislation has been criticized by Republicans for going beyond federal standards.
“These bills would cost taxpayers millions of dollars and create new obstacles for our clerks and local units of government that are simply unnecessary,” Sen. Ruth Johnson, a Republican from Holly and a former secretary of state, said in a news release after the Senate passed the bills. “These bills go far beyond the voting rights protections already afforded to all of our citizens under both the U.S. and Michigan constitutions, and they would create a huge new bureaucracy under the secretary of state that would help interest groups sue our local units of government and our hardworking clerks.”
— Hayley Harding
Pennsylvania: Partisan shift could ease gridlock on election bills
All of the state House’s 203 seats and half of the state Senate are up for grabs this year. Pennsylvania currently has the nation’s only split Legislature, with Democrats in control of the House and Republicans holding the upper chamber.
Democrats hold the House by the thinnest of margins: A single seat. Any losses there could put both chambers squarely in the hands of Republicans, since the Senate is unlikely to see a shift.
The closely divided Legislature has essentially meant gridlock on election legislation. Early hopes for a grand bargain packaging both parties’ priorities came to naught. But shifts in control could shake legislation loose.
If Republicans win, they could return to a tactic they deployed in previous sessions: going straight to the voters with proposed constitutional amendments that get around the threat of a veto by the Democratic governor. Republicans could use this tactic to revive stalled voter ID legislation, though they would have to maintain their control during the 2026 midterm elections, since constitutional amendments have to pass in two consecutive legislative sessions before going on the ballo
Democrats are unlikely to win control of the state Senate, but if they do and also manage to maintain or expand their House majority, they could have an easier time passing their voting priorities, such as allowing pre-canvassing of mail ballots, which speeds the tabulation and reporting of results, and same-day voter registration.
“The very slim majority for Democrats in the House has made it difficult for them to get anything done,” said Kyle Miller, a policy advocate with the nonpartisan group Protect Democracy. And unless the Senate flips or becomes evenly split, giving the Democratic lieutenant governor a tie-breaking vote, Miller said, “we’re going to see more of the same” next year.
— Carter Walker
Texas: Race for state House speaker looms large
The fate of new election legislation in Texas could depend less on the outcome of the November elections, and more on who wins the race for House speaker in the next session.
Republicans easily control both chambers of the legislature, but some GOP-backed election administration and voting legislation stalled in the state House last year, including a proposal to eliminate the widely used countywide polling place program and a bill that would require proof of citizenship to register to vote.
Some Senate Republicans and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick have blamed House Speaker Dade Phelan.
Most proposals approved by the Senate last year “never even received a hearing in committee,” Patrick said in a statement in August. “The Texas Senate passed 23 election-related bills that did not pass the House. These bills would have been a step toward restoring the public’s confidence in fair and honest elections in the State of Texas. It’s an absolute disgrace that Speaker Phelan killed these critical bills.”
Phelan, a Republican from East Texas, is likely to win reelection in November, but whether he’ll be selected again as speaker is up in the air: At least five House Republicans and one House Democrat are challenging him for the gavel.
Phelan narrowly survived a primary challenge this year after he supported the 2023 impeachment of Attorney General Ken Paxton, a fellow Republican, on corruption and bribery charges. Paxton was acquitted.
A change in speaker could lead to other changes affecting the Legislature’s handling of election bills. Phelan has been criticized within his party for sometimes appointing Democrats as committee chairs, though the House committee on elections has been led by Republicans. Experts say the choice of chairman next year will dictate how quickly legislation advances between the two chambers, and whether election and voting legislation championed by the most conservative Republicans will stall again.
Something else to watch: Republicans are widely seen as attempting to establish a supermajority that would make it easier to pass such bills, as well as other conservative priorities such as school voucher legislation.
“People think that Democrats don’t have a say in governing because they’re in the minority of the legislature, but that’s not true. They do have a significant say,” said Brandon Rottinghaus, a political science professor at the University of Houston. “They can really gum things up if they wanted to, and they will if they don’t get a speaker who they think is right or that will work with them. The House Speaker is a traffic cop for the house’s agenda, and so how much trust they have among the members and their skills at navigating a tense session is critical.”
— Natalia Contreras
Wisconsin: Impact of a potentially split Legislature isn’t clear
The composition of the Wisconsin Legislature is all but certain to change significantly under new legislative maps that undid what experts deemed some of the most gerrymandered political boundaries in the nation. Under the previous GOP-drawn maps, Wisconsin Republicans were just a couple of seats short of a supermajority in both chambers, which would have allowed them to override a veto by Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, on election legislation.
The new maps make Democrats more competitive, but they still aren’t likely to gain a legislative majority in both chambers this cycle. Senate elections are staggered, so Democrats’ hopes of a majority will almost certainly have to wait until 2026. But they do have a chance of flipping the Assembly.
If they do, it would be the first legislative session in more than a decade with split control. It’s unclear whether that would affect which election legislation reaches the governor’s desk, because many of the bills that clerks and liberals have prioritized — for example, a bill that would have allowed clerks to process absentee ballots the day before the election — passed through the Assembly but didn’t receive a Senate vote.
Other bills, such as a proposal to bring Wisconsin in line with the federal Electoral Count Reform Act, passed the Senate but not the Assembly. A Democratic Assembly majority, or even a slimmer Republican majority, could lead to that bill passing in next year’s session.
One area where a Democratic Assembly majority could matter is the budget. Every two years, the Legislature processes different agencies’ budget requests. Last time around, legislative Republicans rejected a Wisconsin Elections Commission request to fund an office focused on building transparency and focusing on election compliance
The commission has a similar request in the upcoming budget, and it could get through if Democrats land an Assembly majority, giving them more seats on the budget-writing legislative committee.
But beyond narrow requests and compromises, other Democratic priorities — like reducing the residency requirement, letting 16- and 17-year-olds preregister to vote, and expanding early in-person voting — are unlikely to pass through the Legislature in the upcoming session. They stand a chance if Democrats secure a Senate majority in 2026.
— Alexander Shur
Carrie Levine is Votebeat’s managing editor and is based in Washington, D.C. She edits and frequently writes Votebeat’s national newsletter. Contact Carrie at clevine@votebeat.org.
Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization covering local election integrity and voting access. Sign up for their newsletters <a href=’; target=’_blank’>here</a>
The post Little-noticed statehouse races could reshape election policies next year first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
490990
Republicans in swing states say they see scant signs of groups door-knocking for Trump
/news/2024/09/23/republicans-in-swing-states-say-they-see-scant-signs-of-groups-door-knocking-for-trump/
Mon, 23 Sep 2024 18:56:18 +0000
/?p=490947
Republican activists in swing states say they have seen little sign of the teams tasked with knocking on doors and turning out infrequent voters on behalf of Donald Trump, raising […]
The post Republicans in swing states say they see scant signs of groups door-knocking for Trump first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
Republican activists in swing states say they have seen little sign of the teams tasked with knocking on doors and turning out infrequent voters on behalf of Donald Trump, raising concerns about the party’s presidential nominee relying on outside groups for an important part of his campaign operations.
Trump and the Republican National Committee he controls opted to share get-out-the-vote duties in key parts of the most competitive states this year with groups such as America PAC, the organization supported by billionaire Elon Musk.
It is difficult to demonstrate that something is not happening. But with fewer than 50 days until the Nov. 5 election, dozens of Republican officials, activists and operatives in Michigan, North Carolina and other battleground states say they have rarely or never witnessed the group’s canvassers. In Arizona and Nevada, the Musk-backed political action committee replaced its door-knocking company just this past week.
“I haven’t seen anybody,” said Nate Wilkowski, field director for the Republican Party in vote-rich Oakland County, Michigan, which includes crucial Detroit suburbs. He was speaking specifically of America PAC. “Nobody’s given me a heads-up that they’re around in Oakland County areas.”
Trump has relied on the loyalty of his fervent base, in an election expected to pivot on turnout. The spotty evidence, however, of what was portrayed as a sophisticated operation has some party activists questioning the operation’s value. Trump’s campaign views the race with Vice President Kamala Harris as a toss-up among likely voters but believes it has the edge among people who stayed away in 2016 and 2020, making it even more essential to reach them.
The work is particularly important in Michigan, where Trump lost by fewer than 160,000 votes in 2020, and where the GOP began the year mired in debt and fighting an ugly contest over the rightful state party leader.
Michigan’s Republican chairman, Pete Hoekstra, said he was told that America PAC canvassers had arrived in late August and were at work. A spokesperson for the PAC said canvassers were in Michigan, as well as Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — the seven most competitive states. The spokesperson declined to say how many canvassers there were across the states.
Meghan Reckling, a Republican canvassing firm owner in Michigan, said she spotted two America PAC canvassers Tuesday in Oakland County. Identifiable in blue polo shirts emblazoned with “America,” they were working an area that Reckling’s own data showed to be one with low-propensity voters, she said.
“They had, you could tell, a very pleasant exchange with the lady who answered the door, and probably talked to her for five minutes,” Reckling said. “From what I observed, they were obviously engaging in direct conversations.”
But in interviews with more than two dozen activists and party officials across the seven battleground states, such reports were rare.
“I don’t know what the PACs are doing,” said Mark Forton, the GOP chair in Macomb County, Michigan, a populous, suburban area northeast of Detroit. “I don’t know if they are going door to door.”
Trump aides say the campaign has an estimated 30,000 volunteer captains who are identifying less likely voters at the local level, including through neighborhood canvassing.
Campaign political director James Blair also estimates that close to 2,500 paid canvassers, with America PAC making up a significant chunk, are working in the seven states. The PAC has paid canvassing firms more than $14 million since mid-August for work on the presidential campaign, according to Federal Election Commission spending reports filed by the group.
Blair dismissed the statement that the campaign was ceding work to outside groups. Instead, he said, the campaign was making use of “the resources within those groups to bolster the frequency of contacts and the total coverage within the universe of where we would want them.”
“We very much are focused on low-propensity voters, because it’s what makes strategically the most sense in terms of how the president is going to win these states, and these groups’ efforts have helped reach them,” Blair said.
America PAC is run by former top aides to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ failed presidential campaign. Trump’s team also is sharing the responsibility of reaching less-frequent voters with groups that include Turning Point USA, led by conservative millennial personality Charlie Kirk, and the Faith and Freedom Coalition, headed by Christian conservative figure Ralph Reed.
Part of the reason for the campaign’s move was the result of an FEC ruling this year that a candidate’s campaign and outside groups could coordinate their canvassing efforts with super PACs, and specifically share voter lists and data that they collect door to door. It means campaigns could share much of their labor- and cost-heavy ground efforts with groups that can take unlimited donations.
Harris’ outreach on the ground in the seven states is being led by campaign-paid staff, a number the campaign puts at nearly 2,200 in more than 328 offices. Campaign aides said groups affiliated with labor organizations were canvassing independent of the campaign.
The vast majority of what outside groups that support Harris are doing is advertising. Based on ad reservations for Harris and the leading super PAC supporting her, they are on track to spend nearly $175 million more than Trump’s campaign and the leading super PACs supporting him by Election Day. Harris’ campaign has outspent Trump’s on advertising by 2-to-1 since she entered the race on July 23, according to the media tracking firm AdImpact.
Over the past week, there were complications for America PAC, the most high-profile of the groups helping Trump in 2024.
America PAC fired Nevada-based canvassing company September Group, according to two people familiar with the matter. America PAC had paid the company almost $2.7 million a month ago, according to FEC reports. The people familiar with September Group’s dismissal spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private business decisions.
A spokesman for America PAC declined to confirm the move.
Trump is not the first candidate to delegate some typical campaign-managed duties to outside groups. But the arrangement has not gone smoothly for some of the others who have tried it.
Last year, DeSantis entrusted much of the political outreach for his Republican presidential campaign to a super PAC called Never Back Down, with conflict between its board and top campaign personnel late in the lead-up to the Iowa caucuses. Despite starting the campaign with roughly $100 million, DeSantis dropped out after losing the first contest in Iowa.
In his unsuccessful quest for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush attempted something very similar, ceding much of the political infrastructure work to a super PAC called Right to Rise, which raised more than $114 million in 2015.
Beaumont reported from Des Moines, Iowa. Associated Press writers Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin, Marc Levy in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Gary D. Robertson in Raleigh, North Carolina, and Jonathan J. Cooper in Phoenix contributed to this report.The post Republicans in swing states say they see scant signs of groups door-knocking for Trump first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
490947
Battle for Senate majority escalates as Democrats spend $25 million to reach voters in 10 states
/news/2024/09/16/battle-for-senate-majority-escalates-as-democrats-spend-25-million-to-reach-voters-in-10-states/
Mon, 16 Sep 2024 19:10:37 +0000
/?p=490818
ATLANTA (AP) — Trying to defend their narrow Senate majority with a challenging slate of contests on Republican-leaning turf, Democrats are pumping $25 million into expanded voter outreach across 10 […]
The post Battle for Senate majority escalates as Democrats spend $25 million to reach voters in 10 states first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
ATLANTA (AP) — Trying to defend their narrow Senate majority with a challenging slate of contests on Republican-leaning turf, Democrats are pumping $25 million into expanded voter outreach across 10 states.
The new spending from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, first shared with The Associated Press, comes less than two months until the Nov. 5 election and as Democrats are benefiting from a fundraising surge since President Joe Biden ended his reelection bid in July and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris as the party standard-bearer.
“A formidable ground game makes all the difference in close races,” DSCC Chairman Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan said in a statement. “We are reaching every voter we need to win.”
The latest investment will be distributed across Arizona, Florida, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin. The money will go toward efforts to defend five Democratic incumbents and open seats in Michigan, Maryland and Arizona that are currently included in Democrats’ majority, as well as efforts to unseat GOP incumbents in Florida and Texas.
Plans for the money will vary by state but will include hiring more paid field organizers and canvassers; digital organizing programs targeting specific groups of voters online; texting programs; and in-person organizing events targeting younger generations and nonwhite voters.
Democrats currently hold a 51-49 Senate advantage, a split that includes independent senators who caucus with Democrats. But of the 33 regular Senate elections this November, Democrats must defend 23 seats, counting the independents who caucus with them to make their majority. They’ve devoted few national resources to West Virginia, a Republican-leaning state where Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat-turned-independent, is retiring.
The playing field gives Democrats little margin for error. If they lose West Virginia and hold all other seats, they still would have to upset Florida Sen. Rick Scott or Texas Sen. Ted Cruz to win a majority or hope Harris wins the presidential election — an outcome that would allow her running mate, Tim Walz, to cast the tiebreaking vote for Democrats as vice president, as Harris did in a 50-50 Senate during the first two years of Biden’s administration.
The DSCC declined to disclose a state-by-state distribution of the $25 million. But it’s no secret that Democrats’ defense of the majority starts with tough reelection contests for Sens. Jon Tester of Montana and Sherrod Brown of Ohio. Both are relatively popular, multiterm incumbents, but they’re running in states where Donald Trump, the former president and current Republican nominee, has twice won by comfortable margins. That means Tester and Brown would need a considerable number of voters to split their tickets between Trump and their Senate choice.
Senate Democrats already have financed field offices in Montana and Ohio, since those are not presidential battleground states where the Harris campaign leads Democrats’ coordinated campaign operations. And even with the money coming from national coffers, the additional on-the-ground spending will reinforce the two Democratic senators’ strategies of distancing themselves from Harris and the national party.