KJZZ’s Friday NewsCap revisits some of the biggest stories of the week from Arizona and beyond.
Paul Bentz of HighGround and Matt Grodsky of Matter of State Strategies joined The Show to talk about Gov. Katie Hobbs’ bill moratorium, the shaping up of a likely three-way race for governor later this year and more.
Full transcript
RUBEN GALLEGO: That clouded my judgment. My friendship with him, our family’s friendship together with him, clouded my judgment. And I was wrong. I deeply, deeply regret that.
WARREN PETERSEN: We’re about ready to put a budget on her desk and it’s something we need to do. So we’ll let our members know that that’s where they’re at, see if they want to keep moving their bills or not.
RALPH HEAP: Well, I’m hoping he doesn’t take that position so, and as far as I know he is not going to.
REPORTER: The question confronting the court is: Did Mr. Lytle's nomination paper and petitions substantially comply with the applicable statutes? And the answer is yes.
KRIS MAYES: This is a U.S. Attorney alongside a candidate for this office who is trying desperately to curry favor with Donald Trump as he comes to town on Friday where he’ll undoubtedly continue to lie about his loss in Arizona.
DAVID SCHWEIKERT: I’m sorry it hurt some people’s feelings, but have an honest conversation. Heaven forbid we were to lose again or lose the state legislature because we nominated a candidate that’s unelectable.
MARK BRODIE: And with me to talk about Governor Hobbs’ bill moratorium, the shaping up of a likely three-way race for governor later this year and more are Paul Bentz of HighGround. Paul, good morning.
PAUL BENTZ: Good morning.
MARK BRODIE: And Matt Grodsky of Matter of State Strategies. Matt, good morning to you.
MATT GRODSKY: Good morning.
MARK BRODIE: So guys, U.S. Senator Ruben Gallego, Arizona’s junior senator, faced a lot of scrutiny this week over his friendship — best friendship, he has said in the past — with now-former Congressman Eric Swalwell, who is accused of a number of incidents of sexual harassment and abuse and that sort of thing. Paul, I’m curious, like we’re not going to get into like what the rumors are, what the allegations are potentially with Senator Gallego, but obviously this is not great for somebody who has openly talked about thinking about running for president. What might the political implications of all this be, of course, not knowing sort of what’s happening now?
PAUL BENTZ: Well, first of all, he was a shining example in 2024 in a very dismal year for Democrats. And you know, part of the thing they pointed to is his blue-collar, rough-and-tumble personality and that how that appealed to some of these independent voters and made him somebody, you know, they said he’s somebody you want to have a beer with. And so I think those are the benefits that he drew during that race, but some of those seem to be coming back to bite him a little bit. You know, the New York Times just put out that he is probably the most vulgar Twitterer of all of the for the Senate.
MARK BRODIE: A lot of F-bombs.
PAUL BENTZ: Yes, on the — for the Senate. And I think that’s part of his personality, so it makes him susceptible to these things. But I mean long-term, I don’t know if he was a viable candidate for 2028. I think that’s more of getting into the mentioning game. It’ll certainly hurt in his mentioning game early on here, but he’s still fairly young. I think he’s got time to recover from something like this, but it certainly — it’s a pretty hot spotlight and it’s probably the first time he’s experienced it. He came from a legislative or a congressional district that was a very, you know, majority Democrat, majority-minority district, did not have a lot of pressure on him, had not seen a lot of really hard races until he went against Lake in the Senate race in ‘24. So I think this is a real big test for him.
MARK BRODIE: And Matt, his personal life has certainly come up in the past. Paul mentioned Kari Lake; she got his divorce records unsealed during that during that Senate race, hoping to see something salacious, and there really wasn't anything in there. Does this affect him in the long term, of course, again, not really knowing what the future might hold?
MATT GRODSKY: Yeah, I don’t think so. I mean, I think the right wing has been after him for a long time on stuff like this. I think the news cycle, especially with the Trump administration, it’s like ten years every day, right? So I think if you think two years out from now, I don’t think this is relevant. Um, you know, these things are rumored. I think that he went out there and it’s hard to admit that, you know, you were blindsided or lied to by your friend, right? So I think he’s owned that as difficult as it is. But what I just find crazy is, you know, a lot of the folks that are pointing at him and coming up with all these rumors, they’re the same folks that, you know, advocated for putting a convicted sexual predator back into the White House and an admitted one, too. Um, so I just think the double standard there is interesting. So we’ll just have to wait and see, but no, I don’t think it affects him long-term.
MARK BRODIE: Did you see him, Matt, as a viable candidate for president in 2028 if he chose to run?
MATT GRODSKY: Oh, surely, yeah. I mean, I think we’re — if we’ve got an embarrassment of riches right now between Senator Gallego and Senator Mark Kelly, regardless of what either of them decides to do, I think they’ve both been pretty clear that they’re focused on serving the people of Arizona as senators right now and they’ve been doing a good job.
MARK BRODIE: All right, let’s move on to stuff at the state Legislature. Paul, Governor Hobbs this week told legislators: stop sending me bills until you make your budget public. The governor, of course, in the Constitution it says the governor has to release their budget. She did, you know, the first week of session. We’ve heard from Republican legislative leaders calling this political theater. Of course, lots of governors put bill moratoriums in place for various reasons. Does this speed up the process at all? Does this lead to maybe a faster budget resolution, do you think?
PAUL BENTZ: I think it’s a step in the process. We saw Governor Ducey do it, we saw Governor Brewer do it, we’ve seen other governors do it. This is not sort of out of the norm these days. It’s sort of, unfortunately, feels a little like when we see these federal government shutdowns. Shutdowns seem to be becoming more of an actual part of the process, unfortunately, as opposed to just political theater. And so, um, you know, I think the governor does have to put out a budget and in the past what we’ve seen is the Republicans react to it or use it to negotiate. Now what she’s saying is, no, you’re going to have to come forward with what you want. We’ve got a shortfall, we’ve got challenges financially that need to be addressed. I want to see what your priorities are instead of just reacting to what I say. Put your money where your mouth is, tell us what you want to do so that she can then do the reaction game. I don’t think it’s going to make—I think we’re in for a long session no matter what. The only thing driving these folks is the fact that our primary was moved up to July 21st and so they need to get out and start campaigning. But short of that, I mean, we’re still really at a deadlock right now and this is part of it, but I don’t know if it’s going to motivate people to work any faster.
MARK BRODIE: Well, Paul, to your point about the reaction game, Republicans pretty early on basically said these numbers don’t add up, they’re relying on money that isn’t there or that we don’t think is going to be there. There’s obviously in any budget there’s going to be stuff that the other party likes and doesn’t like, but Republicans were pretty critical of this particular budget. And yet, as the governor is saying, we don’t really know—we have some sense of what they would like, but I mean is there—is it a fair argument, do you think, for the governor to say, look, we should all be able to see my plan and your plan and then, you know, we’ll figure it out?
PAUL BENTZ: Well, that’s generally part of negotiating. You know, right? You don’t negotiate against someone who doesn’t tell you what they want and you just keep throwing things out at them hoping for the best. That doesn’t ever work, really. I mean, you’ve tried that at the car dealership, it’s a terrible day at the car dealership, right? So, I think, you know, that’s what she’s saying. Listen, tell me what you want to do. Of course, I mean, certainly the budget that she put forth had some budget gimmicks and tricks like not deploying some of the tax cuts that the Republicans wanted, but I think there’s, you know, some more fundamental things that were in there that they didn’t agree with, but she’s saying, hey, listen, you tell me what you want then so that we have a place to start. And so we’ll see what they come forward with.
MARK BRODIE: Well, so Matt, the clock is ticking. I mean, usually we don’t get to May before we start saying the clock is ticking on the budget that has to be done by the end of June. But, you know, given that this is an election year, given as Paul said the primaries moved up, there’s motivation to maybe end a little sooner. Does this, do you think, maybe jumpstart the talks at all?
MATT GRODSKY: I think it could. I mean, I agree with Paul, it’s part of the process, less gamesmanship. I think the Republican caucus has to decide amongst themselves what they want. And I would say in terms of narrative control, I think that this is a good play on the governor’s part, right? The majority of Arizonans aren’t paying attention to every line item in these budget negotiations; they’re busy, they’re dealing with their lives. So I think it’s a very simple thing for them to understand is she’s saying: show me your guys’ budget so we can actually have a negotiation, right? And when they stall and kind of, you know, move around on it, um, it just makes them look like they’re out of touch, right? So I think it’s a good play on her end. We’ll see if it jumpstarts it. I know everybody wants to get done early; I didn't ever think it was going to get done early and I think Paul would agree with that.
PAUL BENTZ: I definitely do.
MATT GRODSKY: So we just gotta buckle up and see what happens.
MARK BRODIE: How much is Proposition 123 sort of gumming up the works, if that’s the right phrase? Like it seems like that is a pretty significant area of disagreement.
MATT GRODSKY: It’s been an area of disagreement for a couple years now, right? Um, and I think it’ll continue to be a hot button issue. How they navigate around it, I think that remains to be seen. Um, but again, it’s going to have to be part of the conversation over the next few weeks. Um, you know, and if she’s got this leverage of she’s not signing anything until they get their house in order, you know, the pressure’s on them. So we just gotta see.
MARK BRODIE: Paul, is there any — is there any indication that the Republican caucus is on — like on the same page? Like is there something to be said that maybe if the legislative Republicans haven’t put a plan together, maybe it’s because their members aren’t all totally in lockstep here?
PAUL BENTZ: That’s a big question and certainly the Freedom Caucus has been known to not be in lockstep with other Republicans, and in particular Republicans who are in key swing districts and have much more competitive races. You remember that not every legislative district in Arizona is competitive; in fact, several of them, many of them, are either dominated by Republicans or dominated by Democrats. And so in the Republican-dominated districts where the Freedom Caucus members don’t ever really have to win anything besides a primary, they’re not as interested in negotiating. They’re interested in making points and scoring points. And so I think that there’s challenges. It’d be interesting to see, I know they’ve had a couple of closed-door meetings, um, you know, that has been described as sort of, you know, rough and tumble brawls. So I will see, um, but you know, if they can come out together, they’ve voted together on several other bills that now the governor is vetoing. But, um, you know, I think that’s part of what’s the delay here.
MARK BRODIE: Obviously crystal balls are often cloudy. Do you think Prop. 123 ultimately is part of this budget or is that can continue to be kicked down the road?
PAUL BENTZ: Well, unfortunately, I think they had a better chance of solving it last year when they left they said: oh, we have the money in the budget and we don’t need to deal with it. And now it’s, uh, you know, they don’t have as much money and it’s a bigger challenge for them and, you know, uh, Gress has said himself that he doesn’t think it’s going to get done and he’s been sort of the big driver behind it. So I tend to believe no, unfortunately. Um, they’ve got major issues including the aggregate expenditure limit that they just keep kicking down the — they’ve got a place to negotiate and create sort of a, I think, a compromise, but I’m just not sure they’re there yet.
MARK BRODIE: Matt, do you think it’s ultimately part of the — part of the budget or something else this year?
MATT GRODSKY: I think it gets kicked in some form or the other. I agree. I think their best shot was a couple years ago, but who knows.
MARK BRODIE: Guys, a judge this week allowed the — what I guess we’re not calling again, the No Labels Party candidate for governor, Hugh Lytle, to be on the ballot. A couple of challenges to his candidacy were rejected. So in theory now, we’re going to have a three-way race. And this came after there was a lawsuit, of course, by Adrian Fontes against — dealing against Adrian Fontes — whether or not the No Labels Party could be called the Arizona Independent Party, and it can’t be.
Matt, the conventional wisdom here is that a Lytle candidacy would siphon votes more away from Governor Hobbs than it would be whichever Republican comes out of the primary. If you are in Governor Hobbs' campaign, which you’re not — you’re part of Adrian Fontes' campaign, we’ll say that — you’re not a part of Governor Hobbs' campaign, but if you were, would you be nervous about this?
MATT GRODSKY: I wouldn’t be, just given the dynamics. I think it’s clear that she’s prepared to face anybody on the ballot regardless of who emerges from the Republican primary and now that, you know, the Lytle's through, great, we’ll see what happens. I think most Arizonans are tracking the stakes in this election and they don’t want to waste their vote, right? And I don’t think they want to just toss it to, assuming it’s Biggs, right? I don’t think they want more chaos in Arizona that’s, you know, playing off of what’s happening in Washington, right? So I don’t think it’s as big of a risk as it might have been had her election been in 2024, right? So, um, you know, he’s getting through, whatever. I think they’re prepared for it and she’s got a ton of money. So she’s going to be able to compete regardless of what happens.
MARK BRODIE: But you’re not — you wouldn’t be concerned even with that very, very narrow margin of victory? I mean, even if, you know, even if Lytle gets, you know, what, three, four percent of the vote, that could in theory be the difference.
MATT GRODSKY: You can’t take it for granted, but the way I operate is you should always look like you’re running five points behind, right? And then overperform. So I think it’s good to have a little bit of the competition here, you know, keeps you motivated. Um, you just got to shore up those other votes. But she’s got a good team, this is not her first rodeo. Um, I think they’re ready for it and they’ve been preparing, so let’s see.
MARK BRODIE: So let me ask the pollster in the room, Mr. Bentz: should Governor Hobbs' team be worried about this?
PAUL BENTZ: Well, I think both candidates should be worried about it. There’s only two ways to run, as Matt was referring to: you either run scared or you run unopposed. And so both teams need to be mindful of what he brings to the table. He’s certainly independently wealthy, seems to want to put forth a pretty good campaign. Um, the challenge for Democrats is that to win statewide office, it’s been a pretty proven formula because they have such a registration disadvantage to Republicans, um, that they need to win a large portion of the independent vote. Uh, Governor Hobbs won the race by what, 17,000 votes last time? Um, and certainly we could see a spot where Lytle does seem to siphon off some of those independent-leaning, unaffiliated voters, folks that don’t want to vote for Biggs but can’t bring themselves to — and I again agree with Matt that I think Biggs is the frontrunner — but can’t vote for the Republican and want to find somewhere else to go. But, um, you know, certainly the nice thing is that the Governor right now is unopposed in her primary. So she can start appealing to those voters now. That’s the methodology we saw in every successful Democratic race, whether it was Sinema or Kelly or her the first time, is that they’ve got a lot more runway while Biggs has to win a primary. And so, you know, Biggs is going to be on the stage with Trump at the rally, you know, later today. Yeah, and those are the sorts of things that we see that Republicans have to do to win that primary. Trump is very effective in the primary; his benefits in the general are much more mixed. Hobbs has got a lot more runway then to go out and appeal to those unaffiliated voters now and she should be to build that coalition that’s won Democrats in the past.
MARK BRODIE: Well, and I guess even advancing that point a little bit, Paul, like even Lytle has a primary, right? I mean, there’s another No Labels candidate on the ballot. So I don’t know how competitive that race is going to be, but in terms of runway, it seems like Governor Hobbs has it and the the other two don’t.
PAUL BENTZ: Right. I mean, I think there’s certainly a challenge there she’s got and they’ve seen the playbook. I mean, like Matt said, it’s not their first rodeo, they’ve seen the playbook that works. I think they know affordability’s going to be the big issue, right? Right now, and it’s not just inflation or high prices or, you know, high interest rates; it’s actual like the pocketbook issues. And survey after survey I’ve done recently, people are talking about household stretch thin, can’t afford basic necessities like groceries and gas. And I think that’s going to be — she needs an answer to that and it needs to be a little bit more than just "it’s Trump’s problem, Trump did this," because, you know, articulating against Trump gets you so far, but they got to articulate at some point what they’re for.
MARK BRODIE: Does the — does the name of the party on the ballot matter? Like does it help, hurt, or not affect Lytle or whoever wins that primary in any event if it’s under the No Labels Party or the Arizona Independent Party?
PAUL BENTZ: I think — they seem to think so, that’s why they wanted to change the name. I mean, right? So I would go as far as that; they seem to think so. You know, the issue with independents is most independents don’t want to be of a party. You know, they want to be independent small "i." So I don’t know, I haven’t taken that into account yet, but it is an interesting question.
MATT GRODSKY: I think because you haven’t seen droves and droves of people go and sign up under it, I think that answers your question, right? I think to Paul’s point, they like being unaffiliated, you know. They don’t want to be — literally don’t want to be a label even if it says "no labels." So I don’t think it’s got that that attraction even when they had the name changed for five minutes, right? Uh, so I think they want to be unaffiliated, they don’t want to feel like they’re owned by a certain brand. Um, so yeah, that’s my two cents on party names.
MARK BRODIE: Sure. Matt, let me stick with you on news that we got this week that the DOJ is looking into allegations from Senate President Warren Petersen that the secretary of state and the attorney general are interfering in a federal investigation when they told county recorders not to turn stuff over based on the 2020 election. The U.S. Attorney for Arizona seems to be looking into this. I hate to keep asking like is so-and-so concerned, is so-and-so concerned. I guess like what do you make of the fact that DOJ is apparently investigating this?
MATT GRODSKY: Yeah, our mind folks again, I am on the Fontes campaign team. Look, I think there’s not a lot of concern with this other than the fact that, unfortunately, it’s a bit of a perversion of the Office of U.S. Attorney and quite frankly the Senate president, right? Um, it’s unfortunate to see the politicization of these offices. Um, the attorney general and the secretary of state are bound by law to protect Arizonans' privacy. So they did not do anything wrong by trying to make sure that, hey, don’t turn this stuff over; it’s going to violate the law, right? Um, the DOJ is playing games, as is the Senate president to try and appease Trump as the attorney general spelled out in the clip you played at the top of the show. So: not concerned, just disappointed.
MARK BRODIE: Paul, we’ve been talking maybe six years on this show. Every time you come on, talking about how the 2020 election is not a great election issue, especially for Republicans. Is it surprising to you that here we are in 2026 still talking about it?
PAUL BENTZ: It’s surprising because it’s still a bad idea. This is 100% Trump-driven, and I suspect when he’s in town today he’ll talk about it because he’s still sore that he lost Arizona in 2020 and that’s why he’s bringing it back up. And he’s also bringing it back for the utility of: if they lose in November, um, if they lose the house or if they lose Arizona, um, they can point to the previous fraud and start to bring that back up. They’re trying to dig up these fraud allegations to try to keep that in people’s mind. But it was a loser then and it’s a loser now. It’s the same thing with banning early voting. Early voting is incredibly popular in the state and most people have faith that the election was conducted well. Going back to those topics is not moving forward; it’s moving backward, and those aren’t — those will not erase economic concerns that we have, concerns about immigration, other things that are going on. Talking about the 2020 election is not a winning strategy for Republicans.
MARK BRODIE: And yet I think — I assume that both of you believe that we’ll be hearing about it later today when Trump takes the stage and other candidates come up with him.
PAUL BENTZ: Oh, yeah.
MATT GRODSKY: Definitely.
PAUL BENTZ: I think so, but one thing I will say is that Biggs has been very smart to not be focused on that. I think that’s one of the biggest issues that Kari Lake had — every time she ran as she harped on that, that was one of her big talking points and she kept going back to the well. I mean, we saw she lost twice. It’s a — it’s not a winning strategy and I think smart Republicans understand that.
