[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_25":26},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5},"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","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_27":28,"_29":30},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[31,75,86,98],{"_32":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":73},"mediaId",6290087,"mediaKeyId","2531649-b75963927031b79478e04016c73c59bf","parentId",2531649,"title","Arizona House rejects measure allowing speed‑limiting devices for revoked licenses","audioSeconds",557,"startMs",2314000,"endMs",2871000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2531649-b75963927031b79478e04016c73c59bf&start=2314&end=2871","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2531649-b75963927031b79478e04016c73c59bf/thumbnail_2314000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6290087/Arizona/Arizona-House-rejects-measure-allowing-speedlimiting-devices-for-revoked-licenses","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6290087-9e7c4a25b1493efc78fc8dc6485c36b4/orig.mp4?Expires=1770015844&Signature=neZnTu~4LKYZrBDPZzmHFLdMyC5gyr-1IDL5IA-Lj8prr7uWlpYWZr0QbssNIqfEE5F3z3Bsy9fe9aFgr7PcosPY27ZhXyUFkAqSUrEJeiSIDCAjsBWUSc22oBcIYsJT5vLdt3kUhER4H0JABaMr5yycNJdilMSTk0t1agZuGYsvh-PanQ-oTpm2~nfb2dA9UCqqRQ-H1tL0JIx5SciyKHATDI35Irk9JJfSNtsvdUxDkIIfYDXVjN36P4F4vUkEwHOxZoo2yh8dJjXbZSLHJsvssPNBde0d~U87dztTcy8Vw7oRmg~qqCPVEUvVLpW1bPCgp3Hx-cw9kVf-bMYGaA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Arizona Legislature","date","2025-03-06T00:00:00Z","article","House Bill 2786 — described by supporters as a tool to let some drivers whose licenses were revoked continue driving to work using a court‑ordered speed‑limiting device — failed on third reading on March 6, 2025 after extended floor debate.

Representative Wynne, who spoke in favor of the measure, said the device would be voluntary for drivers and paid for by the person who receives it, and that it could allow people with license revocations to continue to access employment. “This is for the people who are getting their license revoked, and they need to to drive in order to make a living,” Wynne said, and added that the device and costs would fall to the individual rather than the state.

Opponents cautioned that introducing speed‑limiting devices into the consumer market raised safety and liability concerns and could open a ‘‘dangerous door.’’ One member said they were sympathetic to diversion alternatives but “get very, very nervous when there’s a piece of legislation that allows speed limiting devices to start getting put on cars and get introduced to our market.” Representative Caldin voted no and cited those concerns.

The clerk recorded 24 ayes, 30 nays and 6 not voting; the House declared HB 2786 failed. Representative Nguyen then moved to reconsider the action, and the House approved that motion, returning the bill to the third‑reading calendar.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Floor Session 03/06/2025","oneSentenceSummary","House Bill 2786, a proposal to authorize voluntary speed‑limiting devices for certain drivers with revoked licenses, failed on third reading in the Arizona House on March 6, 2025.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature Arizona, Arizona","taxId",78572,"location","Arizona","headline","","shortSummary",{"_32":76,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":77,"_40":78,"_42":79,"_44":43,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6290093,"Arizona House rejects bill setting 15‑day ticket-delivery requirement for primary sellers",611,1703000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2531649-b75963927031b79478e04016c73c59bf&start=1703&end=2314","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2531649-b75963927031b79478e04016c73c59bf/thumbnail_1703000.jpg","/articles/6290093/Arizona/Arizona-House-rejects-bill-setting-15day-ticket-delivery-requirement-for-primary-sellers","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6290093-ba2abe653fcc4fb5a8160aa5786edb78/orig.mp4?Expires=1770015844&Signature=cW4nsyNYymka-YDDKwMJRk9culWZAhsa-rY03o5vAQ0zG~MgJ2KV~KN15LPW7NHChsgHQx8pqHqbgBtDYe~b8VEJ6vUd1FWKs-zOEppZUD571tEzCuv63yjkFQ7poybYB5ZKCuFI-zJvUMrM8eTcbRXoioKE0kEEugbsxsi1Zp1N2oHZJjThs6qmaE00meckM35qZKsMQJY4ynijqbXjPKJ7A3arzFuLYeDunaF-dh8tbYt74FQ~yYU0yqgwQnvOAK5UQkJN0wxVFtBKJsdJdLnFtTVulwt036NkBOhuWbrTp4CRBzMsh3cjIfcATxr8C0d6oZoDQ~8J-Y4BmBSDFA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Arizona House on March 6, 2025 voted down House Bill 2748, legislation that would have required a primary ticket seller to deliver purchased tickets no later than 15 days before an event and require secondary-market sellers to disclose delivery timing.

Sponsor Representative Wenninger described the bill as a consumer‑protection measure intended to reduce last‑minute delivery failures that leave ticket buyers unable to attend or resell tickets. “This bill basically says … you will get your [ticket] 15 before the actual event,” Wenninger said on the floor, adding he had worked with sports teams and arts groups and that amendments had been made to accommodate small theaters and season-ticket arrangements.

Supporters related consumer anecdotes: Representative Biasucci recounted a case in which a resale vendor canceled an order 24 hours before an event after the buyer had already made out‑of‑pocket travel plans. “To say that you are okay with a company telling you 24 hours before the event that we’re not going to fulfill the order is insane,” Biasucci said. Representative Blackman framed the bill as consumer‑protection legislation and said the House has a duty to prevent Arizonans from losing money on purchases that are never delivered.

Opponents argued the bill inappropriately inserts government into private market agreements and that market pressure and consumer choice were preferable remedies. Representative Wilson said he supported the practice in principle but did not believe state law should tell independent sellers how to contract.

On final passage the clerk recorded 21 ayes, 33 nays and 6 not voting; the bill failed. Representative Wenninger subsequently moved to reconsider the House’s action and the motion to reconsider was adopted, returning the bill to third reading for future consideration.

","House Bill 2748, which would have required primary ticket sellers to deliver tickets at least 15 days before an event and to disclose delivery timing on resale platforms, failed on a 21–33 vote March 6, 2025. Sponsors said the change protects consumers and small arts organizations; opponents said it improperly regulates private contracts.",{"_32":87,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":88,"_40":89,"_42":90,"_44":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6290098,"Arizona House rejects bill to prohibit card processors from charging fees on sales tax",849,958000,1807000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2531649-b75963927031b79478e04016c73c59bf&start=958&end=1807","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2531649-b75963927031b79478e04016c73c59bf/thumbnail_958000.jpg","/articles/6290098/Arizona/Arizona-House-rejects-bill-to-prohibit-card-processors-from-charging-fees-on-sales-tax","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6290098-223bed1f466e6f4be50eea12b024a016/orig.mp4?Expires=1770015844&Signature=gHHnjkKHWNkW1A~VJNgw4oRLNSbkcVRydWor1RWEAjT3UpDLgdhrHO6YTITt8y4dkVtVpnacA8duD4l2WfzuWtR1C3MzdCGhwxMTCUt-goC9-Kf6IjjUTpROmhKnrOEOmwJ2dlk8i3WQshseOTn93FBeffNW2LMAKOQGxG7jvqUnMWakeGuB1PO-O700FbD0mNve9zGPWT7C7Vhm17IJuX~Ypr-b4TwjymyC40JmKUbCA0da88qpwyzghVqzD1iy-j54eHOn3gozK98APaHPP02XxXhySwvCmt3RM57F~YHZLEyv2FJ-kBQEZseudiN9VPSb2TQPxL2NkNcuKp6Yfg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Arizona House of Representatives on March 6, 2025 failed to pass House Bill 2629, a measure that would have limited credit-card processors from charging interchange or merchant fees on sales tax amounts that retailers collect for the state.

The bill’s sponsor, Representative Wininger, told colleagues the bill aimed to protect local merchants from “hidden” costs imposed by credit-card networks and banks. “I believe this hidden fee is unfair,” Wininger said on the House floor, arguing processors should not be able to collect fees on sales tax that businesses are mandated to collect.

The bill’s defeat came after floor debate that split members on questions of consumer protection, fraud prevention and the proper role of state law. Representative Quontay Cruz, explaining his no vote, said interchange fees help fund fraud-prevention and reimbursement systems that make consumers whole after identity theft. “The fees that we’re talking about … also go to support fraud prevention and to reimburse consumers when there is fraud using their account,” Cruz said. Representative Gress said he preferred to let ongoing litigation resolve the issue nationwide and worried processors would shift costs if the state acted first. Representative Olson said he sympathized with retailers but did not want government to intervene in private contracting between businesses and payment processors.

On the final roll call the clerk recorded 23 ayes, 31 nays and 6 not voting; the House declared that HB 2629 had failed. Later in the session Representative Wenninger moved — and the House agreed — to reconsider the earlier action and again place the bill on the calendar for third reading.

Background and context: the bill was described on the floor as an amendment to Title 44, Chapter 26, Article 1 (electronic transactions), as cited in the bill text. Sponsors framed HB 2629 as targeting interchange fees charged by major card networks, which members repeatedly identified in debate as Visa and Mastercard. Opponents warned that some portion of those fee revenues supports fraud-prevention and consumer reimbursements, and noted pending court cases in other states addressing the same issue.

What’s next: Because the House voted to reconsider its action, HB 2629 may return to the calendar for further consideration; no final engrossed version or effective-date language was adopted on March 6.

","On March 6, 2025, the Arizona House voted 23–31 to defeat HB 2629, which would have barred payment processors from charging interchange or merchant fees on the portion of purchases that represents sales tax. Sponsors said the measure would help small retailers; opponents cited fraud-prevention funding and preferred a national court resolution.",{"_32":99,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":100,"_40":101,"_42":102,"_44":103,"_46":104,"_48":105,"_50":106,"_52":107,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":108,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":109,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6290082,"Votes at a glance: committee reports and floor actions from Arizona House, March 6, 2025",484,483000,967000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2531649-b75963927031b79478e04016c73c59bf&start=483&end=967","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2531649-b75963927031b79478e04016c73c59bf/thumbnail_483000.jpg","/articles/6290082/Arizona/Votes-at-a-glance-committee-reports-and-floor-actions-from-Arizona-House-March-6-2025","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6290082-8ef0c3d1c6de289402e06ef978eefeeb/orig.mp4?Expires=1770015844&Signature=JzlWxjkUChc9UFY7noJwJh9tqlRiX9zwm7RhMYEFeSsnr1hxQkMb~RJDOP8QtYa~2RjvAcZIVWVnMmdMZrRGo5OPATOLP49ejJ4vuavkNx9N7SEy4Hex-jY99L7edYs51qUeJmlh1OwW~oOBOCHcanVGjIsZi9ZAHq4wN30LNPtwVkYfAokFqWX9Jqe4CEMISQ1-u-3RaJntBJg4a3wEY-Ao10qljCNXUAHn6CzhBGmlAeezNdnR1D8rhGYqXegNv51ZEeSX5laMOSnTEaw3JWXMlppi9mLSEMHfnvMjTnQJWXi4nzEM6anTQ0q9Jc5hQ6-fVWpaQkO~y2QXjj6FHQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Arizona House on March 6, 2025 took several procedural and substantive actions on multiple bills. Highlights:

• Committee report to engrossing: The additional Committee of the Whole reported that House Bill 2437 (as amended) and House Bill 2594 (as amended) do pass and were referred to engrossing. The clerk read the committee report into the journal.

• Third‑reading recorded outcomes: On third reading the House recorded the following outcomes (all votes shown are the roll‑call tallies read by the clerk on the floor):

– HB 2629 (electronic transactions/interchange fees): Failed on third reading, 23 ayes, 31 nays, 6 not voting. The House later adopted a motion to reconsider and returned the bill to third reading.

– HB 2748 (ticket sales/delivery timing): Failed on third reading, 21 ayes, 33 nays, 6 not voting. The House later adopted a motion to reconsider and returned the bill to third reading.

– HB 2786 (excessive speed/speed‑limiting device language): Failed on third reading, 24 ayes, 30 nays, 6 not voting. The House later adopted a motion to reconsider and returned the bill to third reading.

• Motions to reconsider: Members moved and passed motions to reconsider the failed third‑reading actions for the bills listed above; each motion ordered the bill again under the calendar for third reading. The clerk recorded the motions and their adoption on the House floor.

Why this matters: The committee report sends HB 2437 and HB 2594 forward in the House process; the failed third readings and subsequent successful motions to reconsider mean the bills remain active and may be rescheduled for further debate and votes.

","On March 6 the Arizona House reported two committee bills to engrossing (HB 2437 and HB 2594) and recorded final third‑reading outcomes on several bills (HB 2629, HB 2748, HB 2786), each of which failed on the floor; the chamber later voted to reconsider those failed third‑reading actions and returned the bills to the calendar for further action.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Arizona House rejects measure allowing speed‑limiting devices for revoked licenses

Arizona House rejects bill setting 15‑day ticket-delivery requirement for primary sellers

Arizona House rejects bill to prohibit card processors from charging fees on sales tax

Votes at a glance: committee reports and floor actions from Arizona House, March 6, 2025