Longtime lawmaker shapes the debate as Arizona grapples with dwindling water supplies
At the crossroads sits Rep. Gail Griffin, a savvy and quietly assertive lawmaker who has for years used her status as the leader of key water and land use committees in the Republican-controlled Legislature to protect property owners' rights, deciding which bills live and die.
Griffin's iron fist has infuriated residents and other lawmakers worried that
unfettered groundwater pumping
is causing wells to run dry. The GOP lawmaker has also drawn the ire of Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, who considered her the barrier to
legislation that stalled
this year despite having others at the negotiating table.
Without the Legislature charting a path, Hobbs could tap her executive authority to carve out specific areas where regulations could be imposed, like she did in recent months with the
Willcox Basin
north of Douglas.
Fighting over a rural framework
At the start of this year's session, Hobbs
floated a proposal
to regulate pumping in rural areas but the bipartisan deal failed to get Griffin's support.
Griffin, however, did back a separate measure to let farmers transfer their pumping rights to developers, who can then access credits to demonstrate they have enough drinking water to supply future housing projects. It was one of the most significant pieces of water legislation to win approval this year.
Still, domestic well-owner Karen Weilacher and other residents are frustrated that efforts to expand Arizona's 1980 groundwater code have repeatedly failed despite pleas to address unchecked pumping as conditions worsen — in the state and
greater Southwest region
.
Arizona's code already allows for managing pumping in major metropolitan areas. The disagreement is over a framework for rural areas. Lawmakers also have clashed over who would govern the use of the water and pathways for future regulation.
Weilacher, earlier this year, addressed the natural resources committee led by Griffin. She pivoted to let the powerful panel read her shirt: 'Water is life.'
'I shall use the remainder of my time to do what Representative Griffin has done to us,' she told committee members, as she turned her back on them.
Griffin declined to comment specifically on her role in shaping Arizona's water policy, but she's adamant about her belief that Hobbs' proposal would devastate agriculture and rural economies.
'As we work with stakeholders, we will continue to support private property rights and individual liberty while ensuring that any legislative solution protects local communities and our natural resource industries, allowing rural Arizona to grow,' Griffin said in an emailed response to an interview request from The Associated Press.
Rural way of life
With a legislative tenure dating back to 1997, Griffin's convictions are anchored in preserving a rural lifestyle in which residents help each other and reject government mandates, said former GOP House Speaker Rusty Bowers, a friend of hers for decades.
'She was a hard-core believer in her principles,' Bowers said. 'And if you didn't respect it, then get the heck out of the way, she'll run over you like a Mack truck.'
Back home in Hereford, Griffin has been known to go on walks, armed with her gun and mobile phone. A member of the Arizona Farm Bureau and the Arizona Cattle Growers Association, she has referred to her ranching neighbors as 'true environmentalists' because they take care of the land year-round.
At a 2019 forum, Griffin recounted an exchange in which she was advised how to handle a bear busting into her home, questioning at the time whether calling authorities for help would be enough to keep her safe.
'And what will you do when I shoot and kill that bear?' Griffin had asked. She didn't like the answer she got — that prosecution, jail time and a fine would be likely.
Griffin won the crowd over with her rural sensibilities.
She told them the desire to give people the tools they need to protect themselves and their property is what first led her to run for public office. That hasn't changed.
Her stances resonate with voters who repeatedly send her back to the statehouse.
Cochise County farmer Ed Curry is one of them but wouldn't say whether he would do so next year as Griffin eyes a seat in the state Senate. He said he and other constituents have begged Griffin to usher in change, sharing stories at a town hall last year about wells drying up and the exorbitant costs residents face when digging deeper wells.
'She doesn't ask, she tells. She doesn't listen, she speaks,' Curry said of Griffin.
Curry, who serves on the governor's water policy council, said that even growing crops that don't require much water hasn't kept his wells from dropping. He said new regulations will help to ensure Arizona's future.
'Something has to be done,' he said.
___
The Associated Press' women in the workforce and state government coverage receives financial support from
Pivotal Ventures
. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's
standards
for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
AP.org
.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
21 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump injects new dose of uncertainty in tariffs as he pushes start date back to Aug. 7
WASHINGTON (AP) — For weeks, President Donald Trump was promising the world economy would change on Friday with his new tariffs in place. It was an ironclad deadline, administration officials assured the public. But when Trump signed the order Thursday night imposing new tariffs on 68 countries and the European Union, the start date of the punishing import taxes was pushed back seven days so that the tariff schedule could be updated. The change — while potentially welcome news to countries that had not yet reached a deal with the U.S. — injected a new dose of uncertainty for consumers and businesses still wondering what's going to happen and when. Trump has promised that his tax hikes on the nearly $3 trillion in goods imported to the United States will usher in newfound wealth, launch a cavalcade of new factory jobs, reduce the budget deficits and, simply, get other countries to treat America with more respect. The vast tariffs risk jeopardizing America's global standing as allies feel forced into unfriendly deals. As taxes on the raw materials used by U.S. factories and basic goods, the tariffs also threaten to create new inflationary pressures and hamper economic growth — concerns the Trump White House has dismissed. Questions swirl around the tariffs despite Trump's eagerness As the clock ticked toward Trump's self-imposed deadline, few things seemed to be settled other than the president's determination to levy the taxes he has talked about for decades. The very legality of the tariffs remains an open question as a U.S. appeals court on Thursday heard arguments on whether Trump had exceeded his authority by declaring an 'emergency' under a 1977 law to charge the tariffs, allowing him to avoid congressional approval. Trump was ebullient as much of the world awaited what he would do. Others saw a policy carelessly constructed by the U.S. president, one that could impose harms gradually over time that would erode America's power and prosperity. 'The only things we'll know for sure on Friday morning are that growth-sapping U.S. import taxes will be historically high and complex, and that, because these deals are so vague and unfinished, policy uncertainty will remain very elevated,' said Scott Lincicome, a vice president of economics at the Cato Institute. 'The rest is very much TBD.' The new tariffs build off ones announced in the spring Trump initially imposed the Friday deadline after his previous 'Liberation Day' tariffs in April resulted in a stock market panic. His unusually high tariff rates unveiled then led to recession fears, prompting Trump to impose a 90-day negotiating period. When he was unable to create enough trade deals with other countries, he extended the timeline and sent out letters to world leaders that simply listed rates, prompting a slew of hasty agreements. Swiss imports will now be taxed at a higher rate — 39% — than the 31% Trump threatened in April, while Liechtenstein saw its rate slashed from 37% to 15%. Countries not listed in the Thursday night order would be charged a baseline 10% tariff. Trump negotiated trade frameworks over the past few weeks with the EU, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia and the Philippines — allowing the president to claim victories as other nations sought to limit his threat of charging even higher tariff rates. He said on Thursday there were agreements with other countries, but he declined to name them. Thursday began with a palpable sense of tension The EU was awaiting a written agreement on its 15% tariff deal. Switzerland and Norway were among the dozens of countries that did not know what their tariff rate would be, while Trump agreed after a Thursday morning phone call to keep Mexico's tariffs at 25% for a 90-day negotiating period. European leaders face blowback for seeming to cave to Trump, even as they insist that this is merely the start of talks and stress the importance of maintaining America's support of Ukraine's fight against Russia. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has already indicated that his country can no longer rely on the U.S. as an ally, and Trump declined to talk to him on Thursday. India, with its 25% tariff announced Wednesday by Trump, may no longer benefit as much from efforts to pivot manufacturing out of China. While the Trump administration has sought to challenge China's manufacturing dominance, it is separately in extended trade talks with that country, which faces a 30% tariff and is charging a 10% retaliatory rate on the U.S. Major companies came into the week warning that tariffs would begin to squeeze them financially. Ford Motor Co. said it anticipated a net $2 billion hit to earnings this year from tariffs. French skincare company Yon-Ka is warning of job freezes, scaled-back investment and rising prices. It's unclear whether Trump's new tariffs will survive a legal challenge Federal judges sounded skeptical Thursday about Trump's use of a 1977 law to declare the long-standing U.S. trade deficit a national emergency that justifies tariffs on almost every country on Earth. 'You're asking for an unbounded authority,' Judge Todd Hughes of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit told a Justice Department lawyer representing the administration. The judges didn't immediately rule, and the case is expected to eventually reach the Supreme Court. The Trump White House has pointed to the increase in federal revenues as a sign that the tariffs will reduce the budget deficit, with $127 billion in customs and duties collected so far this year — about $70 billion more than last year. New tariffs threaten to raise inflation rates There are not yet signs that tariffs will lead to more domestic manufacturing jobs, and the U.S. economy now has 14,000 fewer manufacturing jobs than it did in April. On Thursday, one crucial measure of inflation, known as the Personal Consumption Expenditures index, showed that prices have climbed 2.6% over the 12 months that ended in June, a sign that inflation may be accelerating as the tariffs flow through the economy. The prospect of higher inflation from the tariffs has caused the Federal Reserve to hold off on additional cuts to its benchmark rates, a point of frustration for Trump, who on Truth Social, called Fed Chair Jerome Powell a 'TOTAL LOSER.' But ahead of Trump's tariffs, Powell seemed to suggest that the tariffs had put the U.S. economy and much of the world into a state of unknowns. 'There are many uncertainties left to resolve,' Powell told reporters Wednesday. 'So, yes, we are learning more and more. It doesn't feel like we're very close to the end of that process. And that's not for us to judge, but it does — it feels like there's much more to come.'
Hamilton Spectator
21 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Judge blocks Trump administration from ending protections for 60,000 from Central America and Nepal
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal judge ruled on Thursday against the Trump administration's plans and extended Temporary Protected Status for 60,000 people from Central America and Asia, including people from Nepal, Honduras and Nicaragua. Temporary Protected Status is a protection that can be granted by the Homeland Security secretary to people of various nationalities who are in the United States, preventing from being deported and allowing them to work. The Trump administration has aggressively been seeking to remove the protection , thus making more people eligible for removal. It's part of a wider effort by the administration to carry out mass deportations of immigrants. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem can extend Temporary Protected Status to immigrants in the U.S. if conditions in their homelands are deemed unsafe to return due to a natural disaster, political instability or other dangerous conditions. Noem had ruled to end protections for tens of thousands of Hondurans and Nicaraguans after determining that conditions in their homelands no longer warranted them. The secretary said the two countries had made 'significant progress' in recovering from 1998's Hurricane Mitch, one of the deadliest Atlantic storms in history. The designation for an estimated 7,000 from Nepal was scheduled to end Aug. 5 while protections allowing 51,000 Hondurans and nearly 3,000 Nicaraguans who have been in the U.S. for more than 25 years were set to expire Sept. 8. U.S. District Judge Trina L. Thompson in San Francisco did not set an expiration date but rather ruled to keep the protections in place while the case proceeds. The next hearing is Nov. 18. In a sharply written order, Thompson said the administration ended the migrant status protections without an 'objective review of the country conditions' such as political violence in Honduras and the impact of recent hurricanes and storms in Nicaragua. If the protections were not extended, immigrants could suffer from loss of employment, health insurance, be separated from their families, and risk being deported to other countries where they have no ties, she wrote, adding that the termination of Temporary Protection Status for people from Nepal, Honduras, and Nicaragua would result in a $1.4 billion loss to the economy. 'The freedom to live fearlessly, the opportunity of liberty, and the American dream. That is all Plaintiffs seek. Instead, they are told to atone for their race, leave because of their names, and purify their blood,' Thompson said. Lawyers for the National TPS Alliance argued that Noem's decisions were predetermined by President Donald Trump's campaign promises and motivated by racial animus. Thompson agreed, saying that statements Noem and Trump have made perpetuated the 'discriminatory belief that certain immigrant populations will replace the white population.' 'Color is neither a poison nor a crime,' she wrote. The advocacy group that filed the lawsuit said designees usually have a year to leave the country, but in this case, they got far less. 'They gave them two months to leave the country. It's awful,' said Ahilan Arulanantham, an attorney for plaintiffs at a hearing Tuesday. Honduras Foreign Minister Javier Bu Soto said via the social platform X that the ruling was 'good news.' 'The decision recognizes that the petitioners are looking to exercise their right to live in freedom and without fear while the litigation plays out,' the country's top diplomat wrote. He said the government would continue supporting Hondurans in the United States through its consular network. Meanwhile in Nicaragua, hundreds of thousands have fled into exile as the government shuttered thousands of nongovernmental organizations and imprisoned political opponents. Nicaragua President Daniel Ortega and his wife and co-President Rosario Murillo have consolidated complete control in Nicaragua since Ortega returned to power two decades ago. In February, a panel of U.N. experts warned the Nicaraguan government had dismantled the last remaining checks and balances and was 'systematically executing a strategy to cement total control of the country through severe human rights violations.' The broad effort by the Republican administration 's crackdown on immigration has been going after people who are in the country illegally but also by removing protections that have allowed people to live and work in the U.S. on a temporary basis. The Trump administration has already terminated protections for about 350,000 Venezuelans , 500,000 Haitians, more than 160,000 Ukrainians and thousands of people from Afghanistan and Cameroon. Some have pending lawsuits at federal courts. The government argued that Noem has clear authority over the program and that her decisions reflect the administration's objectives in the areas of immigration and foreign policy. 'It is not meant to be permanent,' Justice Department attorney William Weiland said. ___ Ding reported from Los Angeles. Marlon González contributed from Tegucigalpa, Honduras. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
CNN
22 minutes ago
- CNN
GOP lawmaker faces raucous crowd in Wisconsin, critical questions over tariffs and immigration policy
Republican Rep. Bryan Steil faced a rowdy crowd at a town hall-style event in Wisconsin on Thursday, with attendees angrily confronting him over a wide range of topics, including tariffs, President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful Bill,' the war in Gaza and immigration policy. Audience members frequently interrupted Steil as he spoke, often drowning him out with boos and yelling, though there were also moments where the congressman's remarks were met with applause. The event – which the congressman's office described as a 'listening session,' comes as House members have returned to their districts for a weekslong district work period for the month of August. It featured a number of critical questions from the audience over the treatment of immigrants under the Trump administration. At one point, an audience member started chanting, 'We are all immigrants,' as the congressman discussed border security. 'It's not politics, it's morality,' one audience member told Steil, saying, 'I care about people, and what I see happening to our immigrant population embarrasses me, and you have not raised a voice to complain about it. Where do I see your leadership? I see no leadership, I see following Trump 100% of the time.' A different attendee told the congressman, 'I am so disappointed. I am so disappointed in how you represent us as the citizens of Walworth County. Southeast Wisconsin has not been represented by you. President Trump seems to run Southeast Wisconsin through you.' Another audience member said that his 'main concern' is tariffs. 'I was under the impression that Congress was responsible for issuing tariffs,' he said. 'I really feel that this is a terrible tax that's going to be placed on the citizens of the United States.' The congressman began to respond, by saying, 'This really at its core needs to be an opportunity to make sure that other countries are treating the United States fairly,' a remark that was met with booing. 'What we need to do is work with our allies, put trade agreements in place,' he said as he was repeatedly interrupted by yelling from the crowd. 'I think part of this is what gives Trump the authority to put in place the tariffs. The authority that he's operating under is, as it relates to the imbalance of trade,' Steil said. 'There's a court case that's going on right now where there'll be more clarity provided on this, but that's the authority that he's operating under.' The event's moderator had to interject on multiple occasions in an effort to get the crowd to quiet down. At one point, the moderator interrupted a yelling outburst by jokingly asking if the crowd would'rather the congressman go to lunch and you get to shout for the next 45 minutes?' and called out a specific audience member as 'very obnoxious and very disrespectful.' At one point, the congressman said, 'The civil discourse that is a cornerstone of our democracy is challenged right now.' Not long after, he said, 'I don't support anybody denigrating anyone else. People have a right of free speech. But a lot of our discourse, writ large, is really challenged. It's challenged on all sides. So I think we have a real opportunity to improve our discourse a little bit. I'd say the overwhelming majority of people here want to learn and understand my perspective, want to hear the questions, and then there's a small group of people that are challenging and are booing and yelling at each other. The same occurs in Washington. I share the frustration.' On Trump's sweeping tax and spending law known as the 'big, beautiful bill,' one person asked what is being done to protect individuals who are not wealthy, raising concerns that tax breaks under the legislation will only accrue to higher-earners. The congressman responded, 'In part, I would disagree with the way you framed it. As I look at the provisions of the bill, and what was in large part done, was keeping the 2017 tax reforms in place, that's the bulk of the bill,' but was soon interrupted by shouting from the crowd. He added, 'It builds onto that additional tax reforms for hard-working families.' Towards the end of the event, a man jumped up from his seat to question Steil on the war in Gaza. 'Two million people in Gaza are starving – what do you have to say about that?' the man shouted, then stood up and waved his arms in the air. A police officer approached the man, who then sat back down. The officer appeared to say something to the man and then walked away. Shortly after the outburst, a different audience member pressed the congressman to answer the earlier question. 'To me, the easy answer to address this crisis is for Hamas to surrender and release the hostages. That ends the war tomorrow,' Steil said. 'Israel was unfairly, unjustly attacked, their civilians were killed and kidnapped by Hamas terrorists.' Steil said, 'Israel has a right to defend itself,' but paused amid shouting from the crowd. Soon after, amid continued disruptions from the audience, the moderator moved to conclude the event, saying 'We're gonna close it off here because there's no point in continuing.' Separately, Rep. Mark Pocan, a Democrat, told a crowd at a different event Thursday night he knew it was 'a little douchey' to hold a town hall in the Wisconsin congressional district – and hometown – of neighboring Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden. But Van Orden is 'missing in action,' refusing to hold town halls of his own, and Democrats need to push back harder against the GOP's massive tax and domestic policy bill, Pocan said. 'I think doing, bluntly, town halls in Republican districts where they refuse to do them is one of the best things we can do,' Pocan said. He called himself an 'early adopter' of the tactic and said other progressive lawmakers are following suit. 'I think this is what we need to do. I mean, is this in your face. Is this a little douchey? Yes,' he said. 'But you know what? Taking away your health care and taking away your education funding and adding $4 trillion to the national debt so that the richest people are getting a tax cut is enough that we need to push back.' Pocan told CNN after the town hall that he'd come to Prairie du Chien to goad Van Orden into publicly defending the GOP bill that President Donald Trump signed into law on July 4. 'Come on down the road, Derrick,' he said. 'If you really think this bill's as good as you've been saying it is, not in front of people, let's have an actual debate. Let's talk about the various parts of it. The fact he won't doesn't pass the Wisconsin smell test.' Pocan's hour-long town hall, in front of an audience of about 50 people in the town of about 5,000 was a friendly one with none of the fiery exchanges that other town halls across the nation have featured. Pocan was asked questions largely from the left, about ways Democrats can be more aggressive in taking on Trump. He was also asked about immigration policies, the sustainability of Social Security and Medicare, and about whether he fears Trump will declare martial law and cancel upcoming elections. He focused most of his comments on railing against Trump's so-called 'big, beautiful bill' — but peppered the entire hour with jabs at Van Orden for failing to host town halls. Van Orden's office did not respond to CNN's request for comment on Pocan's town hall.
