Arizona Democrats will bypass struggling state party in midterms, with key races on ballot
Gov. Katie Hobbs, Secretary of State Adrian Fontes and Attorney General Kris Mayes — who all are seeking second terms next year — said grassroots organizing will be outsourced to a small county organization rather than the Arizona Democratic Party.
The workaround comes as party disarray threatens to complicate Democrats' efforts to hold on to a decade of successes in a state long dominated by Republicans. Arizona has no Senate contest next year but will have at least two battleground U.S. House races, and the campaigns for governor, other top state offices and legislature could dictate how Arizona handles the 2028 presidential election.
National Democratic committees, including the Democratic Governors Association, signed on to the move.
Conflict with Arizona Democratic state party
Arizona Democrats unexpectedly ousted former Chair Yolanda Bejarano after the party's disastrous showing in the 2024 election, when Donald Trump won the state after losing it to Joe Biden in 2020. New Chairman Robert Branscomb promptly fired most of the senior staff.
Behind-the-scenes tension exploded into public view in April. Branscromb sent a letter to members of the state Democratic committee blasting Sens. Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego, a highly unusual move against the state's top Democrats.
Kelly, Gallego, Hobbs, Fontes and Mayes responded with their own letter saying they'd lost trust in Branscomb.
Last month, the party's treasurer warned that Branscomb was spending more money than he was raising and the party was on track to run out of money by the end of the year. Meanwhile, the party is operating without a budget approved by the executive committee.
Allies of Branscomb, the party's first Black chair, have said the pressure on him is racially motivated. He faces a potential ouster later this month but has refused to step aside.
After Tuesday's announcement, Branscomb projected a united front with the officials who spurned him, predicting the split would not hold back Democrats.
'I think the people are ready to solidify our democracy, and democrats are in a position to win up and down the ticket,' he said. 'Because we're focused on different areas doesn't mean we're not together.'
Navajo County Democrats to run get-out-the-vote
The Arizona Democratic Party has traditionally housed the coordinated get-out-the-vote campaign designed to turn out voters for Democratic candidates up and down the ballot. Hobbs, Fontes and Mayes said Tuesday they'll run it instead through the Navajo County Democratic Party for 2026.
Democrats are well-organized in Navajo County, which is small by population but large geographically in rural northeastern Arizona. The party has long invested in organizing there among Native American voters.
The county party can do most everything the state party can do, with one major exception—only the state party can send mail at a discounted postal rate. Branscomb said that won't be an issue.
'We'll still cooperate and work together on this,' he said. 'We all have the same vision, we all have the same goal to get them all re-elected.'
Running a statewide campaign through a county party is not without precedent. Former Sen. John McCain leaned on the Yuma County GOP in his 2010 re-election campaign after a faction hostile to him took control of the Arizona Republican Party. In Nevada, Sen. Catherine Cortez-Masto ran her 2022 coordinated campaign through the Washoe County Democratic Party after progressives took control of the state party.
In this case, the rupture between the officials and the party is not driven by ideology but by concerns of mismanagement and financial constraints.
___
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Canada News.Net
36 minutes ago
- Canada News.Net
Trump administration escalates feud with judges on immigration policy
WASHINGTON, D.C.: In a striking escalation of tensions between the executive and judicial branches, the Trump administration has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland and all 15 of its federal judges, challenging a recent order that temporarily blocks migrant deportations in the state. The lawsuit, filed late June 24 by the Justice Department in a Baltimore federal court, targets a standing court order issued last month that imposes an automatic two-business-day delay on deporting any migrant in Maryland who files a new habeas corpus petition challenging their detention. The Justice Department argues that the order exceeds judicial authority and violates Supreme Court precedent on injunctions. It contends that under the Immigration and Nationality Act, federal courts are barred from interfering with active deportation proceedings. Calling the Maryland court's action an "egregious example of judicial overreach," the administration is seeking a ruling to invalidate the order and an injunction to prevent its enforcement. The lawsuit also requests that all Maryland judges recuse themselves and ask that a judge from another jurisdiction handle the case instead. A representative for the Maryland court declined to comment. Chief U.S. District Judge George Russell, an appointee of a Democratic president, signed the court's order. It cited a "recent influx of habeas petitions" involving detained migrants at risk of imminent removal. It noted that many of these filings occurred during evenings, weekends, or holidays, resulting in rushed hearings where judges struggled to get clear information on detainees' locations and legal status. The two-day pause was intended to give judges time to review such cases before deportations proceeded—an effort at judicial due process amid the Trump administration's aggressive immigration enforcement. The issue gained national attention after the 2023 deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national who had lived in Maryland with his American wife and child. Though an immigration judge ruled in 2019 that Abrego should not be deported due to the risk of gang violence, he was nonetheless removed in March of this year. He was returned to the U.S. on June 6, after a Maryland court ordered his return. That only happened, however, after the Justice Department filed criminal charges against him for migrant smuggling—a charge he has denied. He is now awaiting a court ruling in Tennessee on the conditions of his release. The Justice Department's lawsuit frames the Maryland court's order as part of a broader pattern of judicial resistance to the president's immigration policies. "Every unlawful order entered by the district courts robs the Executive Branch of its most scarce resource: time to put its policies into effect," the lawsuit stated. "In the process, such orders diminish the votes of the citizens who elected the head of the Executive Branch." While the Maryland judges have not responded publicly, the legal battle could have major implications for how courts nationwide handle emergency immigration filings and how far the executive branch is willing to go to counter them.
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
The Latest: The House returns in a rush to pass Trump's bill
Republican leaders in the House are sprinting toward a Wednesday vote on President Donald Trump's tax and spending cuts package, determined to seize momentum from a hard-fought vote in the Senate while essentially daring members to defy their party's leader and vote against it. It's a risky gambit designed to meet Trump's demand for a July 4 finish. Here's the latest: Paramount to pay $16 million in settlement with Trump over '60 Minutes' interview In a case seen as a challenge to free speech, Paramount has agreed to pay $16 million to settle a lawsuit filed by President Trump over the editing of CBS' ' 60 Minutes' interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris in October. Paramount told media outlets the money will go to Trump's future presidential library, not to the president himself. It said the settlement did not involve an apology. Trump's lawyer said the president had suffered 'mental anguish' over the editing of the interview by CBS News, while Paramount and CBS rejected his contention that it was edited to enhance how Harris sounded. They had sought to get Trump's lawsuit dismissed. There was no immediate word from the White House about the settlement of the case, which Trump filed in Amarillo, Texas. Trump urges House Republicans to vote for his tax and spending cuts package The encouragement comes as the Republican-controlled House sprints toward a vote Wednesday on the bill after it cleared the Senate by the narrowest of margins a day earlier. Vice President JD Vance, in his role as Senate president, cast the tie-breaking vote on the measure. Some House GOP members have voiced reservations about the bill. House Democrats are united in their opposition to the legislation. 'Republicans, don't let the Radical Left Democrats push you around. We've got all the cards, and we are going to use them,' Trump said in a post on his social media site.
CTV News
2 hours ago
- CTV News
House Republicans race toward a final vote on Trump's tax bill, daring critics to oppose
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., gives reporters an optimistic outlook to passing U.S. President Donald Trump's big tax and immigration bill by July 4th, during a news conference at the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, June 24, 2025. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) WASHINGTON — Republican leaders in the House are sprinting toward a Wednesday vote on U.S. President Donald Trump's tax and spending cuts package, determined to seize momentum from a hard-fought vote in the Senate while essentially daring members to defy their party's leader and vote against it. 'The American people gave us a clear mandate, and after four years of Democrat failure, we intend to deliver without delay,' the top four House GOP leaders said Tuesday after the bill passed the Senate 51-50, thanks to U.S. Vice-President JD Vance's tiebreaking vote. It's a risky gambit, one designed to meet Trump's demand for a July 4 finish — and there's a steep climb ahead. Since launching early this year, Republicans have struggled mightily with the bill nearly every step of the way, often succeeding by only a single vote. Their House majority stands at only 220-212, leaving little room for defections. Some Republicans are likely to balk at being asked to rubber stamp the Senate bill less than 24 hours after passage, having had little time to read or absorb the changes that were made, many at the last minute to win the vote of Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski. House Republicans from competitive districts have bristled at the Senate bill's cuts to Medicaid, while conservatives have lambasted the legislation as straying from their fiscal goals. It falls to Speaker Mike Johnson and his team to convince them that the time for negotiations is over. Trump pushes Republicans to do 'the right thing' The bill would extend and make permanent various individual and business tax breaks that Republicans passed in Trump's first term, plus temporarily add new ones that Trump promised during the campaign, including allowing workers to deduct tips and overtime pay, and provide a new US$6,000 deduction for most older adults. In all, the legislation contains about $4.5 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years. The bill also provides some $350 billion for defence and Trump's immigration crackdown. Republicans partially pay for it all through less spending on Medicaid and food assistance. The Congressional Budget Office projects that it will add about $3.3 trillion in federal deficits over the coming decade. The House passed its version of the bill back in May, despite worries about spending cuts and the overall price tag. Now, they are being asked to give final passage to a version that, in many respects, exacerbates those concerns. The Senate bill's projected impact on federal deficits, for example, is significantly higher. Trump praised the bill profusely in a social media post, saying 'We can have all of this right now, but only if the House GOP UNITES, ignores its occasional 'GRANDSTANDERS' (You know who you are!), and does the right thing, which is sending this Bill to my desk.' The high price of opposing Trump's bill Speaker Johnson, R-La., is intent on meeting the president's July 4 timeline. He's also betting that hesitant Republicans won't cross Trump because of the heavy political price they would have to pay. They need only look to Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who announced his intention to vote against the legislation over the weekend. Soon, the president was calling for a primary challenger to the senator and personally attacking him on social media. Tillis quickly announced he would not seek a third term. Others could face a similar fate. One House Republican who has staked out opposition to the bill, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, is already being targeted by Trump's well-funded political operation. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said leadership was not entertaining the possibility of making changes to the bill before the final vote. He said the two chambers already agree on the vast majority of what's in it. 'It's not as easy as saying, 'hey, I just want one more change,' because one more change could end up being what collapses the entire thing,' Scalise said. Democratic lawmakers, united against the bill as harmful to the country, condemned the process as rushed. Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said there's no real deadline for getting the bill passed by July 4th. 'We're rushing not because the country demands it, but because he wants to throw himself another party,' McGovern said. 'This isn't policy. It's ego management.' Democrats warn health care, food aid are being ripped away House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries described the bill in dire terms, saying that cuts in Medicaid spending would result in 'Americans losing their lives because of their inability to access health care coverage.' He said Republicans are 'literally ripping the food out of the mouths of children, veterans and seniors.' 'House Democrats are going to do everything we can for the next few hours, today, tomorrow, for the balance of this week and beyond to stop this bill from ever becoming law,' Jeffries said. Republicans say they are trying to rightsize the safety net programs for the population they were initially designed to serve, mainly pregnant women, the disabled and children, and root out what they describe as waste, fraud and abuse. The package includes new 80-hour-a-month work requirements for many adults receiving Medicaid and applies existing work requirements in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to more beneficiaries. States will also pick up more of the cost for food benefits, with the amount based on their payment error rates, which include both underpayments and overpayments. The driving force behind the bill, however, is the tax cuts. Many expire at the end of this year if Congress doesn't act. 'Passing this bill means smaller tax bills and bigger paychecks for the American people — permanently,' said Senate Majority Leader John Thune. 'It will also help get our economy firing on all cylinders again.' The Tax Policy Center, which provides nonpartisan analysis of tax and budget policy, projected the bill would result next year in a $150 tax break for the lowest quintile of Americans, a $1,750 tax cut for the middle quintile, and a $10,950 tax cut for the top quintile. That's compared to what they'd face if the 2017 tax cuts expired. ___ Associated Press writer Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report. Kevin Freking And Lisa Mascaro, The Associated Press
