[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6331802,"mediaKeyId","2309589-cbf2baafd49b1a41e0b19fd18299fa7b","parentId",2309589,"title","Committee advances grant program for pregnancy‑support centers with extensive public debate and promised amendments","audioSeconds",2457,"startMs",2663000,"endMs",5120000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2309589-cbf2baafd49b1a41e0b19fd18299fa7b&start=2663&end=5120","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2309589-cbf2baafd49b1a41e0b19fd18299fa7b/thumbnail_2663000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6331802/Arizona/Committee-advances-grant-program-for-pregnancysupport-centers-with-extensive-public-debate-and-promised-amendments","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6331802-b689c26483dbfed64dba78e1bd4ba7f1/orig.mp4?Expires=1775453305&Signature=H7lR-FK0UfhKaA804g6ECxXVxKZhsxcPqth7b5Iq~1HwRhzVvmVVF0eyDtA5j48sujrbiWnXU0Jon1C34ERHJX4MInojnNEEA5HDMvMpt8Ai1aOaTxacia5JslOGilpM1EYIUkJW0pP1kNWulL8nnn6LsoRyOYuEunySymOwdH0O7Y0uTNIgX9-OwCONLt~YK-VwP8KUS4aVM4VULfqdpmgcZcqfMT~qddeT4Aflz2AXwd5ye0ET0qcr6zKY64s9weZ3-Mwd5Ir8nkuPHTyEYdG8BgAq9qZUbQbvS6FVeQUl1NDu8I~rAR0ckqdFXdOuk5DARCqEOuxzr6oynjNANA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Arizona Legislature","date","2025-02-12T00:00:00Z","article","The House Government Committee returned House Bill 2216 with a due pass recommendation after a lengthy hearing that featured more than a dozen witnesses on both sides of the bill.

Sponsor Representative (Chair) Walter Blackmon framed HB 2216 as a grant program to support pregnancy‑support and parenting programs — including job placement, parenting classes, child‑development services, and material assistance such as cribs and formula — for people who choose to continue pregnancies and parent. He said the grants would be administered by the Department of Health Services (DHS) under statutory oversight and that the program’s intent is to provide resources to parents who decide to keep their children.

Supporters — including Jody Liggett (Reproductive Freedom for All opposed the bill; Jody Liggett and Eloisa Lopez (Pro Choice Arizona Action Fund) argued the bill would limit access to full, neutral medical information and noted concerns about unregulated medical services (such as ultrasound) provided at some pregnancy centers. Planned Parenthood Advocates (Jean Woodbury) and other witnesses said the bill could exclude experienced providers and that eligibility language should be broadened so the best providers in every community can access funds. Daryl Groves and Garrett Riley, who represent pro‑life networks, described pregnancy center services that provide parenting classes, ultrasounds and material assistance and urged support, citing statewide activity and usage.

Department of Health and Department of Child Safety officials discussed oversight and operational questions. Committee members pressed for clarifications about how DHS would administer grants, what medical oversight would be required for ultrasound and other clinical services, and whether the program would duplicate or divert funding from existing state or county programs that provide similar services. Several members asked for amendments to add medical oversight and clearer distribution and accountability language; the sponsor said he would accept amendments and continue stakeholder discussions.

After extended discussion, the committee recorded a recommendation of four ayes and three nays and returned HB 2216 with a due pass recommendation. Some members recorded their vote as present or reserved the right to change their vote on the floor while the sponsor and others said they would work on statutory language, oversight and funding flow amendments before floor action.

Votes at a glance: HB 2216 — Motion: return with a due pass recommendation; outcome: due pass recommendation; committee tally: 4 ayes, 3 nays.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","02/12/2025 - House Government","oneSentenceSummary","The House Government Committee returned House Bill 2216 with a due pass recommendation after a lengthy hearing featuring proponents, opponents and agency witnesses about a proposed grant program for pregnancy‑support services.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature Arizona, Arizona","taxId",78572,"location","Arizona","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6331805,"Committee gives HCR 2042 a due pass after debate over race‑based policies and DEI",1821,2543000,4364000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2309589-cbf2baafd49b1a41e0b19fd18299fa7b&start=2543&end=4364","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2309589-cbf2baafd49b1a41e0b19fd18299fa7b/thumbnail_2543000.jpg","/articles/6331805/Arizona/Committee-gives-HCR-2042-a-due-pass-after-debate-over-racebased-policies-and-DEI","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6331805-dcdf97a4e3a3d96b1aec08028d2bfeff/orig.mp4?Expires=1775453305&Signature=opZVokPyKTXnblrULsogcl3M1qZJtrumx64s3bxeG3mDuvJRhykbhSE2NK0hpYhbGasXwuZbp47yNq-HMdrsbhF5Wq6LPbnK2qhUY~yKhXNB4-FNK1W6ftxcmjBfzsrgS5dmBzifi7i9MwZCwWM3~swpvMG17IoXJjiSkP7aU5Rqc3g-DAhVXGll73KqqdrcFspQq1uU4KLLCYCbWa9NbEzXVd-YuVFUv2a5~-TfYKqfXLUONgnT89m5notptE-bGP3Qo5VcZQGqdg8Pk-hfp6WYdrgmqOMK2syzpKzavgn6Yswtej0qcwuVxs85VQN9KAXpABzHlaRSSnkBIfPF8Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Concurrent Resolution 2042 received a due pass recommendation from the House Government Committee following extended floor‑level debate and public testimony for and against the measure.

The sponsor, Speaker Montenegro, told the committee HCR 2042 is intended to prohibit preferential treatment and discrimination based on race and ethnicity in public education, contracting and hiring, and to align state practice with what he described as the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision on affirmative action. He said the resolution seeks to “restore color blindness to our institutions” and prevent what he described as coercion to adopt race‑based or racially divisive ideologies.

Witnesses opposing the resolution argued it would eliminate tools used to address systemic disparities and could restrict basic school policies and training. Vania Guevara (representing CHISPA Arizona), Jean Woodbury of Planned Parenthood Advocates, and others said the resolution’s language could limit teacher training and school practices that address racial and ethnic disparities. Matt Bienberg of the Goldwater Institute testified in support, saying the measure reaffirms Arizona’s constitutional ban on state‑sponsored racial discrimination.

Committee members debated the measure at length. Some members called the resolution a defense of equal opportunity and merit; others warned it would interfere with employer, university and local decisions on training and workplace standards. Several members explained their floor‑roll choices during the recorded vote. Representative Marquez said organizations with diverse workforces have strategic advantages; Representative Gillette provided a lengthy explanation tying opposition to DEI to broader ideological arguments. Chairman Blackmon and other members framed their support as a merit‑based principle. The committee recorded four ayes and three nays and sent the resolution forward with a due pass recommendation.

Votes at a glance: HCR 2042 — Motion: return with a due pass recommendation; outcome: due pass recommendation; committee tally: 4 ayes, 3 nays.

","House Concurrent Resolution 2042, which would expand prohibitions on race‑ or ethnicity‑based preferences in government education, contracting and hiring, received a due pass recommendation after proponents and opponents debated whether the measure would restrict training, teacher development, and institutional discretion.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6331810,"Committee advances HB 2671 after amendment to require DCS kinship searches and monthly reports",1403,1017000,2420000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2309589-cbf2baafd49b1a41e0b19fd18299fa7b&start=1017&end=2420","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2309589-cbf2baafd49b1a41e0b19fd18299fa7b/thumbnail_1017000.jpg","/articles/6331810/Arizona/Committee-advances-HB-2671-after-amendment-to-require-DCS-kinship-searches-and-monthly-reports","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6331810-521d0697bce1a9bf5d97fddad00528d1/orig.mp4?Expires=1775453305&Signature=kathaYWxjVlstXapJIQsxF7-exE2d7i4lLdN9r2cjf2AiCr9-MqId6FQZ-PdAFXXMTECysGICI3c--fECP1YGKnSrLJdebPgAwf~T5c~SdRVZVBPDb3GGSb5pX7No3T-0t4TUlyZ5FR0fJbdT6VywW3h~eSss-AoY0QT7XtRMR~KO74ZM~r7lUgUA33d-FVc4YdYlTQOCSZG7p9NAWUVt77F-ozEna3OgqKiponrPuUewmwpuGiqkJds2hSKC-yIJKRGzho5BaOy6pVAPwYzmKfEkkjsSZ3CLq0CDLbwRYFxVu~8oPpnwl0ouvFO2SJX3a7dwd7BMBrowlv1bnDs~g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Government Committee adopted an amendment and returned House Bill 2671 as amended with a due pass recommendation after hearing sponsors, kinship advocates and Department of Child Safety staff.

Representative Fink, sponsor of the bill, and committee members argued that children fare better when placed with relatives or extended family rather than non‑relative foster homes. The amendment in Representative Fink’s name (a 15‑page amendment dated Feb. 10) requires DCS to file specified documentation with the court at least every 30 days for a minimum of six months, adds extended relatives and persons with a significant relationship to the child to lists of people the department must notify, and specifies that kinship foster homes be included among placement options.

Multiple witnesses spoke in favor of expanding and prioritizing kinship placements. Morgan Butters, a nonprofit director and foster/adoptive parent, and Hanika (Anika) Robinson described personal experiences in which extended family were not timely notified or considered; both said kinship placements reduce trauma and improve educational and social stability. The committee also heard from Chris Gustafson of the Department of Child Safety, who described practical challenges in locating kin and the agency’s current practices: DCS begins with immediate relatives and, when necessary, contracts with search firms but can be limited by common names and incomplete records. Gustafson said DCS aims to increase kinship placement rates (he referenced a goal of roughly 70 percent kinship placement) but faces obstacles including family dynamics, poverty and safety concerns.

Committee members discussed potential federal funding consequences. Representative Stahl Hamilton and others asked whether changing the statutory best‑interest language or placing a prioritization on kinship placements could affect Title IV‑E federal foster care funding; DCS staff said the state must remain compatible with federal best‑interest requirements to receive foster‑care reimbursement but did not say the amendment would necessarily break those rules. Members sought additional clarification on placements involving caregivers with criminal histories and on ways to ensure kin placements are safe and appropriately supported.

The committee adopted Representative Fink’s amendment by voice vote and then returned HB 2671 as amended with a due pass recommendation. The roll call showed four ayes and three nays.

Votes at a glance: HB 2671 (as amended) — Motion: return with due pass recommendation; outcome: due pass recommendation; committee tally: 4 ayes, 3 nays.

","House Bill 2671, which would expand mandated consideration and notification of extended family and persons with a significant relationship when children enter foster care, was advanced by the committee with a major sponsor amendment requiring Department of Child Safety (DCS) documentation every 30 days for six months and other changes.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6331813,"House committee gives HB 2296 due pass after emotional testimony on prioritizing child’s best interest",363,607000,970000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2309589-cbf2baafd49b1a41e0b19fd18299fa7b&start=607&end=970","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2309589-cbf2baafd49b1a41e0b19fd18299fa7b/thumbnail_607000.jpg","/articles/6331813/Arizona/House-committee-gives-HB-2296-due-pass-after-emotional-testimony-on-prioritizing-childs-best-interest","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6331813-dd46698ec670c35f08fd42032a07820d/orig.mp4?Expires=1775453305&Signature=Mbu0nKwFeMR4Vrmaaomq0yNP8YeyPPFOps4FbWZdBpLxCHPYPorllpDGmbNNHZbaAr4Dyr77sDxkPpwnj6PQSSs2NFQ38FoxAC5BCSGv7N51n1Q3qhisv908xpdZ6~pMwNnSwnHTo3RvqMf94fui-TcQTHrE8ZWd0tQ8UYBFFAhqioMZQjvHFabe6TDa74iZUMID7FtQrnBdfIXukK1mO1vK30a-URN1ap~saDuuLJm9YTRrgeJDNzcXtScem9dBkRqn6kceVMzQl5TOPz12slP7NTK5OkYSd5HD00Oh1DiEaMgunMgbmUxBHCo9B4jp78RFIZRdoDMj3vUZi6XpEA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Government Committee Chairman Walter Blackmon said the committee returned House Bill 2296 with a due pass recommendation after sponsors and several public witnesses urged the committee to prioritize children’s needs in family-court custody decisions.

Supporters told the committee the current statute (ARS 25‑403 was discussed repeatedly) and practice effectively prioritize parental rights or presumed shared parenting and, they argued, can harm children by disrupting primary caregiver bonds. Representative Keshel, a sponsor of the family‑court package of bills, told the committee lawmakers are responding to a rising number of family‑court cases that, she said, “often prioritize parental rights and not necessarily the children’s best interest.”

The bill’s proponents framed HB 2296 as a technical but important change that would remove presumptions that shared parenting time is automatically in a child’s best interest and instead allow courts to focus on attachment and primary caregiving. Silver Newton of Arizona Advocacy Summit told the committee ARS 25‑403 currently “penalizes the parent who is viewed by the child as the primary caregiver” and urged a yes vote. A public commenter, who identified herself as Sofia and said she has been through repeated custody proceedings with her sister, described the emotional and educational harm she said her family experienced after a court‑ordered custody change. “HB 2296 makes sure that a child’s best interests are prioritized,” Sofia said.

Committee members asked sponsors about next steps. Several members said they supported moving the bill forward but expect amendments and further work with stakeholders, including domestic‑violence advocates and the courts, to address safety and implementation questions. Representative Keshel and other sponsors said they are preparing amendments and stakeholder meetings.

On the roll call for the committee recommendation, members recorded six ayes, zero nays and one present. Chairman Blackmon said the committee would continue to work on amendments and stakeholder meetings as the bill moves through the process.

Votes at a glance: HB 2296 — Motion: return with a due pass recommendation; outcome: due pass recommendation; committee tally: 6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 present.

Local context: supporters argued the change reflects research about adverse childhood experiences and attachment to a primary caregiver. Opponents (not present in force at this hearing) — and some members — asked for further consultations with domestic‑violence stakeholders and the courts to ensure statutory language does not create unintended consequences for child safety or federal funding compatibility.

","The Arizona House Government Committee voted to give House Bill 2296 a due pass recommendation after sponsors and supporters argued the measure would refocus family-court decisions on the child’s best interest. Public commenters described long, traumatic custody fights that they say the bill would help prevent.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee advances grant program for pregnancy‑support centers with extensive public debate and promised amendments

Committee gives HCR 2042 a due pass after debate over race‑based policies and DEI

Committee advances HB 2671 after amendment to require DCS kinship searches and monthly reports

House committee gives HB 2296 due pass after emotional testimony on prioritizing child’s best interest