PHOENIX — Gov. Doug Ducey said Thursday his decision on whether to sign controversial voting bills won’t be swayed by fears of losing the 2023 Super Bowl.
And he blasted Major League Baseball for its decision to yank the All-Star Game out of Georgia after that state’s enactment of its own new voter laws.
“I’m going to sign good policy,” the Republican governor said when asked about the possibility of repercussions from laws that some have said will interfere with the right of Arizonans to vote.
The Greater Phoenix Leadership group sent an open letter to Arizona lawmakers saying three specific proposals “seek to disenfranchise voters.”
“They are ‘solutions’ in search of a problem,” wrote members of the organization. “They are attempts at voter suppression cloaked as reform — plain and simple.”
That letter is significant and relevant to the Georgia situation because one of the signers is Michael Bidwill, owner of the Arizona Cardinals. As an owner, he would have some say in any decision by the National Football League about whether to move the 2023 event elsewhere.
It’s not just the Super Bowl that could be at stake. Arizona also is in line to host the NCAA Men’s Final Four in 2024 and the Women’s Final Four two years later.
The NCAA has shown before it is willing to use its leverage to address political situations. In 2016, it disqualified North Carolina from hosting championship events after approval of legislation requiring transgender people to use bathrooms matching the sex on their birth certificate rather than their gender identity. The punishment was reversed the following year when the legislature repealed the law.
Ducey made it clear he thinks sports teams and their associations should stick to what they know.
“I think Major League Baseball made a big mistake,” he said Thursday. “I’d like to keep politics out of baseball.”
“I report to the people of Arizona and not a major sports league,” he continued. “And I’m going to make decisions on the policies that are put in front of me.”
The letter from Greater Phoenix Leadership singles out three measures its members find objectionable:
- Senate Bill 1485 would remove people from what is now called the “permanent early voting list” if they do not use their early ballots at all in two consecutive primary and general elections. People would remain eligible to vote, but would have to go to the polls.
- SB 1593 would prohibit the counting of any early ballot postmarked later than the Thursday before the election, regardless of whether it arrived by Election Day.
- SB 1713 would require someone who wants to vote early to include a separate affidavit with a date of birth or a voter ID number.
“These proposals are a concerted effort from those in Arizona — and across the nation — who wish to sow additional doubts about our elections in the minds of voters, and feed into the paranoia that has plagued our political discourse over the past several months,” the Greater Phoenix Leadership letter reads. “Disturbingly, each of these proposals have one thing in common: making it more difficult for Arizonans to vote.”
SB 1485 and 1713 already were approved by the Senate and await House floor debate; SB 1593 has yet to be debated in the Senate.
The group of Phoenix leaders dismissed claims by proponents that these are common-sense measures designed to promote election security and voter confidence.
“Arizonans already have confidence in the integrity of our elections and, by and large, find it easy to vote,” they wrote.
Ducey appeared to agree, noting that he signed the canvass on Nov. 30 formally certifying the 2020 election results. “All 15 of our counties certified the results,” he said. “They were audited. The votes were tabulated and determined to be accurate.”
Still, he said, the Senate is “a co-equal branch of government” and is free to pursue whatever changes it wants in election laws.
Ducey sidestepped questions about whether he thinks the measures are bad policy that he would veto. He suggested that any final decision will be based on what finally survives the legislative process. “And then I do have a role as the executive of whether I would determine it to be good policy,” he said.
