ARIZONA SENATE VOTES TO ADJOURN
Call to end legislative session puts pressure on House
After weeks of back-and-forth over how to manage legislative proceedings during a pandemic, the Arizona Senate has finally thrown down the gauntlet.
On Friday, senators voted 24-6 to end the annual session — a largely symbolic move designed to force the House’s hand, according to Senate President Karen Fann.
“We’re sending a message,” Fann, R-Prescott, told senators after the vote, which followed nearly three hours of debate. “This is our way of saying, ‘We still want to work with you, but we are putting the ball in your corner.’ We’re saying, ‘Either sine die and let us start our special session, or get your (priority) bills together … and we’ll come back.’”
Both chambers had recessed indefinitely March 23, as COVID-19 was spreading throughout the state. Fann and House Speaker Rusty Bowers, R-Mesa, had hoped to swiftly bring a formal close to the annual session and await better data on an expected budget shortfall they could address in a special session later this year.
But many rank-and-file Republicans resisted that idea, given that it would effectively kill hundreds of bills covering a host of topics. A glimmer of a possible deal in the House had emerged Thursday, when Bowers announced the chamber would also reconvene Friday. But within hours, he’d reversed course.
“Members of the House Republican Caucus believe that there is important work for us to do on behalf of the people of Arizona,” he said in a statement. “We intend to remain in session and, together with the Senate and governor, work in support of the safe and expeditious reopening of our society, our economy, and protection of our state’s small businesses and communities.”
Rep. Ben Toma, R-Peoria, confirmed Thursday night that “a majority of the House majority” party had expressed a desire to “get some work done before we sine die.”
“I think the universal desire is to focus (legislative efforts) on the virus,” he said.
House Republicans indicated that plan hadn’t changed as of Friday afternoon, though they were unsure when the chamber would formally reconvene. Some members could begin working on preliminary legislation as early as next week.
In the meantime, the Senate’s vote to adjourn sine die won’t amount to anything beyond a recess unless the House reconsiders. Under the state Constitution, neither chamber can end the session without the other’s permission.
Granted, that’s exactly what happened at the end of the 2015 session, when — after growing tired of waiting for the House to wrap up proceedings — Senate members chose to sine die without giving notice first, prompting the House to follow suit.
But that year, lawmakers had largely finished the work they’d set out to do, rather than having the session abruptly cut short; the extraordinary circumstances surrounding this year’s pandemic have left lawmakers in “weird” and “murky” territory, according to the House clerk.
GOP senators question move
Though the conflicts in the House have taken center stage in recent days, there has been plenty of disagreement in the Senate on how to proceed.
Several senators raised concerns about with what they viewed as Gov. Doug Ducey’s heavy-handed actions to control the pandemic, arguing that ending the annual session would amount to eliminating a check on the executive branch.
One of those senators, Chandler Republican J.D. Mesnard, said he didn’t understand why the Senate was forcing a decision Friday in the first place.
“We’re three weeks out from when we ended last year, and there wasn’t even a pandemic last year,” he said. “We don’t know what’s going to happen next week or next month, and yet we’re going to foreclose a lot of our options if we end the session.”
Mesnard also decried the optics of shutting down just as the state is starting to reopen.
“It looks terrible,” he said. “I guarantee you, most people out there are not going to get it.”
Sen. David Farnsworth, R-Mesa, similarly said the Legislature would look like it was abandoning its responsibilities to constituents if it adjourned now.
“We are encouraging anarchy, because there are people out there who say: ‘I don’t trust my government,’ he said. “‘That’s a terrifying thought to me.”
Following Mesa Rep. Kelly Townsend’s lead, Sen. Michelle Ugenti-Rita, R-Scottsdale said she wanted to introduce a resolution to overturn Ducey’s emergency declaration and associated executive orders. But Fann did not allow her to do so.
Nor did Fann let Sen. Eddie Farnsworth, R-Gilbert, introduce a proposal to protect people and businesses who defy pandemic-related executive orders, despite it having broader support than the emergency declaration resolution. She said Ducey was interested in having the Legislature address pandemic-related liability issues in a special session.
Fann also suggested lawmakers could redraft and fast-track any 2020 bills derailed by the pandemic for the 2021 session. In the meantime, the Senate in August will create task force committees to address the state’s “most pressing” pandemic-related issues, including its economic recovery and the stability of its health care system.
Alston: ‘Staying alive’ more important than passing legislation
Ultimately, Senate Democrats and all but six Senate Republicans — Ugenti Rita, Mesnard, both Farnsworths, Sylvia Allen and David Livingston — voted against the sine die motion.
Sen. Lisa Otondo, D-Yuma, and Sen. Lupe Contreras, an Avondale Democrat who tested positive for COVID-19 last month, voted remotely.
Livingston’s vote followed an impassioned speech highlighting the country’s latest unemployment numbers, saying he couldn’t think of anything more important than helping Arizonans get back to work.
“We have work to do,” the Peoria Republican told his colleagues. “We have people counting on us to get work done.”
Sen. Lela Alston, D-Phoenix, acknowledged the hardships faced by Arizonans, her constituents and her own family. But she challenged Livingston’s conclusions.
“As the oldest member of this body and the longest-serving member of this body, I am
compelled to share with you, Mr. Livingston and others: Staying alive, in my opinion, is more important than going back to work,” she said.
Other Democratic lawmakers have largely said they’d support reconvening to address the state’s response to the coronavirus, but not other legislation. Both chambers adjourning sine die would effectively allow them to kill many of the Republican bills they’d opposed.