Arizona lawmakers vote to ban outside grants for elections amid concerns

Rep. Jake Hoffman, a Republican from Queen Creek who sponsored the bill, has argued it is simply meant to ensure “the utmost and maximum level of integrity, transparency and independence” in elections.

Just before the presidential preference election a little over a year ago, Coconino County Recorder Patty Hansen had a problem.

About a quarter of her poll workers had canceled.

It was the start of the pandemic, after all. And it made clear that 2020 would be a very unusual election year.

So, the county hired more temporary staff. With more interest in voting by mail due to the pandemic but concerns about slow delivery, Hansen’s office bought more drop boxes to set up everywhere from Sedona to Williams and Page. And the county staffed drive-thru voting and drop-off locations.

Hansen paid for these new expenses with a grant from the Center for Technology and Civic Life, a private nonprofit that gave over $5 million to help nine Arizona counties — some run by Democrats, some run by Republicans — to administer last year’s election.

“We could not have done all of this without that money,” said Hansen, a Democrat first elected in 2012.

While the county had not received grants to pay for elections in the past, the choice was easy for its recorder: There were no strings attached and it saved the taxpayers money, she said.

But the Arizona Senate voted along party lines Wednesday to ban such grants as Republican lawmakers have raised concerns about allowing private organizations to fund part of the voting process.

House Bill 2569 is similar to a provision included in Georgia Senate Bill 202, a sprawling piece of legislation that also limits the number of ballot drop boxes and gives the state’s Republican-controlled Legislature more control of elections after Democratic victories there.

But while the idea was rolled into one wide-ranging piece of legislation in Georgia, it is relatively obscure among the flurry of bills legislators here have introduced this year to change how Arizonans vote and how those votes are counted.

Ultimately, critics in Arizona argue that it and other bills would leave counties with fewer options to fund elections at the same time other proposed laws could make it more expensive to administer them.

GOP: Bill keeps election integrity

Democrats opposed the ban, noting it comes after high turnout and Democratic victories in major races last year.

For backers of House Bill 2569, though, prohibiting state and local governments from accepting private grants to run elections is a simple means of shielding elections from outside influence.

The bill goes now to Gov. Doug Ducey. Rep. Jake Hoffman, a Republican from Queen Creek who sponsored the bill, has argued it is simply meant to ensure “the utmost and maximum level of integrity, transparency and independence” in elections.

“I would not want a privately funded court system because it has the potential for — not necessarily that it did — but it would have the potential for influencing the administration and management of justice and that system,” he told the Senate Government and Elections Committee at a hearing in March.

Republicans also have highlighted the source of the funds Arizona counties received last year.

The Center for Technology and Civic Life touts itself as aiming to modernize American elections. But its key funders and partners include technology companies like Facebook and Google, which have become targets for conservative lawmakers, particularly after last year’s election saw high turnout and ended with Democrats winning key statewide races.

The Secretary of State’s Office said it also received a grant last year of about $4.8 million from the Center for Election Innovation and Research.

The organization is privately funded, with perhaps Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan its most highprofile donors.

Ducey’s office helped get money

While Ducey will decide whether to put a ban on such grants in the future, the Secretary of State’s Office said Ducey’s office was key to facilitating the state government’s receipt of the money last year.

The Secretary of State’s Office used the money to help recruit poll workers, promote early voting and the permanent early voting list, and counter misinformation about the voting process.

And the office contends the funding made an impact. For example, it used grant funding to operate and promote a website for people to sign up as poll workers. More than 30,000 did.

The backlash against these grants is widespread.

The national conservative advocacy group Heritage Action has announced it is spending $10 million in Arizona and seven other states to campaign for election-related bills, like Hoffman’s.

“Arizonans have the right to know their elections are being run without outside influence, and Gov. Ducey should promptly sign the bill into law,” said Jessica Anderson, the group’s executive director.

But Hansen contends there was no outside influence and that her office was free to use the funds for some basic needs.

Rather than banning such funds outright, Hansen argued the Legislature would do better by prohibiting counties from using such funds in a partisan manner that benefits one side or group in an election.

More costs, but no new funding

Meanwhile, the Legislature also is considering changing election laws in ways that county officials argue would make elections more expensive to manage.

One proposal would result in more recounts, for example — a costly and labor-intensive process. Another proposal would require election officials to remove voters from the permanent early voting list who do not vote early in four consecutive primary and general elections. But it would also require election officials to contact those voters by mail first.

All of those costs would fall on counties, not the state, Hansen noted.

And she added: “There is no money with these bills.”