Arizona Senate president: Hobbs isn't 'putting her money where her mouth is' with border bill veto
Download mp3 (11.91 MB)Arizona legislative Republicans say they’re going to continue sending border-related bills to Gov. Katie Hobbs. That’s despite her veto of the Arizona Border Invasion Act last week.
The bill was modeled on Texas’ Senate Bill 4, which is the subject of a lawsuit by the U.S. Justice Department and is currently blocked from taking effect. Among other provisions, the Arizona measure would have allowed state and local police to arrest people who’d illegally crossed the border; critics called it the "son of SB 1070."
There are a handful of other bills GOP lawmakers say they’ll keep moving through the Legislature. They deal with issues ranging from making it a felony to use an electronic device for human smuggling to bills dealing with fentanyl. Legislative leaders expect it’ll take two to three weeks to get the new bills on the governor’s desk.
The Show spoke with state Senate President Warren Petersen about this, including one of the bills, which is being described as a carbon copy of the measure the governor vetoed. Petersen talked about whether he has any reason to believe sending Gov. Hobbs the same bill she already turned away will have a different outcome.
Interview highlights
PETERSEN: Yeah, I appreciate you asking that question. Even if we sent the same identical bill, I think she should sign it, because she made a huge mistake on opening day. She said that the Biden administration had failed us. She said the federal government was failing us. She said she, she wants to secure our border, and her veto of this bill to, to us, she's not putting her, her money where her mouth is. I do think the next bill that goes up will be slightly, there'll be a slight change to it, but it'll be very similar to the one that hit her desk. So I don't think it'll end up identical, but our hope is that she'll sign that one and many of the other ones that are moving,
BRODIE: What will be the difference or differences between that next bill and the one that she vetoed?
PETERSEN: Yeah. So I'm not the sponsor, but my sense would be that the sponsor is going to be looking at the veto letter and also just really listening to their constituents. I mean, this is something that every day you think the news can't get worse on the border and somebody gets killed, there's a crime. Somebody, another person dies from fentanyl poisoning. So, you know, it could be anything from her veto letter to constituent concerns of, you know, or some, something new, some new atrocity that's happened as a result of a wide open border.
BRODIE: Well, again, understanding that you are not the bill sponsor, do you get the sense that any changes will be based on conversations that, that have been had between the Legislature and the governor to see what maybe changes could be made to get her signature?
PETERSEN: Yeah, I think that's a great question for you to ask the governor. We want the governor to be engaged on this. This just shows her priorities. Here we are, the very first thing we did. Our top priority was to put a border bill on her desk and the next day she held a press conference or I don't know it was the next day, but right after, her next press conference was about contraception. My constituents are not talking to me about contraception. My constituents are talking to me about crime and about fentanyl deaths and they're talking about that, they're worried about the border.
BRODIE: So one of the things you mentioned, the governor's veto letter, one of the things that she mentioned in that letter is that this measure would be costly for the state in terms of litigation. And there's some question I know that some of your colleagues have talked about the U.S. Supreme Court makeup being different now than it was when it decided against many parts of SB 1070. But I'm wondering if there's utility in letting maybe Texas sort of be the, the one to pay for the litigation to go through the litigation with SB4, which has been enjoined currently. Is there a utility in letting Texas go through that, seeing what the end result is and then having Arizona sort of do what it wants to do based on that, knowing what is going to be allowed and what isn't?
PETERSEN: Well, the governor seems to think there's utility with blatantly breaking the law and entering into a lawsuit with us on her confirmations. I mean, she, it is black and white. She is supposed to send us her nominees and we are supposed to confirm them and yet she thinks she can spend money on litigation for that. I don't know why she wouldn't want to litigate the very top issue in the state of Arizona.
BRODIE: Do you see those two as related? I mean, they seem, with due respect, they do seem like kind of separate issues.
PETERSEN: No, the principle is the same. She's for her priorities. It's OK to litigate, it's OK for her to litigate on breaking the law and confirmations. Yeah, they're the same. It's all about following the law, but it's not OK for her to litigate on what's the top issue in Arizona? It's, it's the same principle.
BRODIE: I know that you have been asked about whether or not you would consider turning the Arizona Border Invasion Act into a ballot measure and bypass the governor, send it right to the ballot. Where are the conversations on that happening right now? What's the current thinking about doing that?
PETERSEN: Yeah, I'm glad you asked about that. So, last year we put a bill on her desk that would designate drug cartels as terrorist organizations that gives law enforcement more tools to go after the people committing the most heinous crimes due to an open border, she vetoed that. So this year we have an HCR, you know, we have something that can go to the voters to let the voters decide. I mean, the right process, especially when there's a lot of details, the way that our framers have set it up with constitutional republic with a Republican form of government is for the Legislature to craft bills and for the governor to sign it. When we heard the State of the State and her saying she wanted to secure the border, we were optimistic and hopeful that we could just go through the regular process. And so if she wants to veto these common sense bills that make Arizona safer, then yeah, we may have to go, you know, we have to, may have to look at the referral process and then, you know, look at ways to, to make sure that we can still make adjustments if we need to as a Legislature later on.
BRODIE: Do you have any expectation that there will be border-related issues in the budget?
PETERSEN: Yeah, I do. I'm, yeah, I think there will, there definitely will be, we'll be raising border issues and, I mean, she did have some things in, in her original budget but we don't feel like she's, you know, nearly going far enough. It's, it really feels like virtue signaling. So, but we will, whatever law enforcement, whatever the sheriffs say they need, we are ready to put that into the budget.
BRODIE: I know that there is a decent size list of other border-related bills going through the process right now. Do you prioritize any of them or are you able to, or willing to say that some are maybe more important than others? Or is it like you need all of them to go through for, for things to get better?
PETERSEN: Yeah, I think every bill that she signs, every one of these bills that she signs will make it better. We have about seven bills that are moving. I'm not prioritizing any of them over the others. They, they're all on track to, you know, go up into the next two to three weeks. There's not necessarily the order, but I would say all of them are the, you know, our, one of our top priorities this session is making sure all of these get onto her desk and, you know, based off of her rhetoric, I'm still hopeful that she's going to sign some of these.
BRODIE: Do you think that sort of the disagreement between the Legislature and the governor on this issue, does that carry over into budget negotiations or are those two separate things?
PETERSEN: Any of the funding that goes with it will carry into the budget, but as far as policy issues, it's, you know, policy doesn't, it, it, it doesn't directly impact the budget usually.
BRODIE: OK. So it's mostly like how much, how much money and where that money goes, that will be the border-related budget fights as opposed to the other policy that, that we've been talking about.
PETERSEN: Yeah, a lot of these policies don't have any money tied to them. When it comes to us supporting, you know, the sheriffs and their initiatives and having what law enforcement needs to be able to keep Arizona safe. We're gonna be all in on that and then it'll be a matter of how far she's willing to come on that, I think. And then these other issues, they don't, they don't require funding.
BRODIE: All right, we'll have to leave it there. That is Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen. President Petersen, thanks for your time. I really appreciate it.
PETERSEN: Likewise. Thanks for having me on.
