Democrats: Not the transparency warriors they'd like to think they are
Are Katie Hobbs and Jake Hoffman aligned on this issue?
In the heart of Arizona's political arena, a contentious, but silent battle brewed over HB2593, a public records bill that promised to shape the landscape of transparency within the state.
It was a measure with the potential to redefine accountability and openness in governance, yet its journey through the legislative corridors looks likely to fall at the hands of the same gatekeeper who killed the same effort a year ago.
On Feb. 21, on the floor of the Arizona House of Representatives, 23 Democrats voted to halt HB2593 in its tracks — some of whom voted for the bill in committee, all without saying a single word.1
With calculated precision, they struck down the bill, casting their votes against it without explanation. The Democrats' swift and unified opposition seemed puzzling to many observers, especially given the lack of transparency in their decision-making process.
The act of voting no on a bill aimed at providing transparency shows a severe lack of accountability.
Among them was Jevin Hodge, a former rising star in the Democratic ranks, whose sudden resignation last week tarnished his future in politics with allegations of misconduct dating back to his college years.
Hodge voted for HB2593 in committee, and against it on the floor before changing his vote along with 11 others.
He told Fourth Estate 48 before the misconduct story broke that he didn’t like that the bill didn’t mention where money would go from the fines even though the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Michael Carbone, expressed in committee — in front of Hodge’s face — that the money would go into the General Fund. The bill did not change to this effect, but Hodge still switched his vote on the floor on March 4.
Hodge wouldn’t comment further and is now no longer a lawmaker.
One source said that the Democrats voted no in a petty way just because there weren’t enough Republicans on the floor. That day four Republicans were absent. If true, Democrats would rather make a mockery of the state’s public records law than vote for a good bill that serves their constituents well.
No other Dem lawmaker would provide comment on their vote switching or no votes. So as I am used to doing, I requested records to see who was telling them to vote no.
Two state agencies, the Arizona Association of Counties and the County Supervisors’ Association had expressed their concerns with the bill via email, citing potential complications and logistical challenges.
The legislative liaison for the Department of Administration sent the following email to Reps. Melody Hernandez, Lydia Hernandez, Mae Peshlakai and Hodge. All of them voted no the first time it was on the floor.
Only Melody Hernandez voted no the second time.
But it’s clearly not only Democrats preventing this bill from going further. Like any bill under a Republican-controlled legislature, they just need a majority vote in order for the bill to pass2. Seven Republicans voted against it the first time, but all 31 Republicans supported it on reconsideration. The 12 no votes all came from Democrats.
Meanwhile, in the Senate, Jake Hoffman, held the fate of the bill in his hands for the second consecutive year. As the Republican gatekeeper of the Senate, he remained steadfast in his apparent commitment to keep Arizona from being more transparent –– even his own “mortal nemesis” in Governor Katie Hobbs who has already come under a lot of scrutiny during her tenure on the Ninth Floor.
Hobbs, who had campaigned on a platform of transparency and accountability during her 2022 bid for office, has shown so far to fall short of it being a campaign promise.
Her administration's sluggish response to public records requests stands in stark contrast to the previous administration under Doug Ducey.
Never thought I’d say those words, did you reader?
Well, it’s true.
It took a full year waiting for simple records from Hobbs' office. I requested applications for the Commission on Appellate Court Appointments34 on Feb. 6, 2023. I got the records back on Feb.9, 2024 as seen in the screenshot above.
What would have taken mere weeks under Ducey's administration took 368 days to be exact under Hobbs.
The other state agency who was against the bill? The Department of Public Safety.
All this to say, HB2593 would penalize Hobbs’ office and administration (among any other government entity) “at least $500 to $5,000 for each occurrence” for not turning over records “promptly” as it already expresses in state law.
Given her office’s slow records response and two of her agencies advocating against the measure, it raises questions on whether Hobbs would even support the bill or if she directed the agencies to kill it.
“We are going to pass on commenting on the legislation for the moment,” her communications director Christian Slater said.
The House passed the similar effort in 2023 unanimously only to get caught by Hoffman in the Senate Government Committee5. It clearly is good policy; it’s just yet another example of politics getting in the way.
One of my biggest frustrations with state lawmakers is their refusal to speak up to defend their yes or no votes in committee or on the floor. There are so many bills that fly through the legislative process, and with the public tuning in, it’s a great show of transparency for elected officials to explain why they vote a certain way. Committee hearings are long enough as it is, but adding a layer of openness for the public (taxpayers, voters) to understand someone’s motives will only help inform everyday Arizonans; instead lawmakers are actively keeping people in the dark.
Of course if it’s not bipartisan, Hobbs won’t sign it into law.
If you’ve read my reporting at the Capitol Times, you’d know this is something I have covered relentlessly and wish someone else would take it on so I wouldn’t feel obligated to do so lol.
Senate President Warren Petersen shouldn’t get out of blame that easily. He chooses which bill goes where, after all.
Thank you for this important article and all of your record requests. I have been beating the drum of transparency related to governmental websites. There would be fewer records requests if the websites weren’t built on the DRIP model (data rich information poor). The Arizona Commerce Authority’s website is a prime example of lots of numbers but no real information. (Thank goodness for the Auditor General.) Voting in silence drives me crazy.