Arizona Lawmakers Use 'Strike-Everything' Tactic to Resurrect Dead Bills, Transform Legislation

With the legislative session winding down, Arizona lawmakers are turning to a controversial legislative tool known as the "strike-everything" amendment to introduce new bills and resurrect failed measures, sidestepping normal legislative procedures and raising questions about transparency and public input.

A Controversial Legislative Workaround

The "strike-everything" amendment allows lawmakers to take an existing bill that has already passed through one chamber of the legislature and completely replace its contents with new text. The original bill's title and number remain, but the substance is entirely changed.

"Strike-everything" amendments are proposed by lawmakers to remove most of the language in a bill and replace it with something else entirely. If passed by a majority of committee members, the bill becomes transformed. They visually stand out from other bills, with each receiving a new title in parentheses disclosing what the bill now covers.

This practice has been used extensively in the current legislative session, with more than 100 "strike-all amendments" proposed so far.

Why Lawmakers Use It

The tactic serves different purposes for different lawmakers, depending on which party controls the chamber:

• Republican majorities use it to quickly advance legislation on time-sensitive issues or to retry bills that failed earlier in the session
• Democratic minority lawmakers use it to propose their ideas even if their bills aren't put up for a vote, since Democratic-sponsored bills are rarely picked up by Republican committee chairmen

"The 'strike-everything' amendment is a way for lawmakers to sidestep the normal legislative process and ram through new bills without proper public input or debate." — Helen Rummel, Politics Reporter at The Arizona Republic

Examples from This Session

The amendment has been used to transform bills in dramatic ways:

• Ballot measures about Arizona's minimum wage were transformed into teacher union restrictions
• Diversity, equity and inclusion bans were morphed into a law that would place federal immigration agents at polling places
• A bill originally focused on the state's citrus, fruit, and vegetable trust fund was replaced with a bill to expand property tax relief for veterans with disabilities
• A resolution originally intended to allow people facing homelessness to opt out of the state's minimum wage requirements became a ballot measure looking to bar the use of public funds by teacher unions

Specific Examples of Bills Affected

One notable example involves the proposed ballot measure HCR 2016, which would freeze municipal rate hikes for four years. The measure was initially proposed by State Rep. Justin Olson earlier in the legislative session but failed to advance out of the House.

"What we're doing with this bill is we're saying... 'Don't add to the problem. Let's prevent government from increasing tax rates for the next four years.'" — Justin Olson, State Representative

The measure was later resurrected as a strike-everything amendment to another bill. The proposed moratorium would block cities, towns, and counties from raising sales taxes, fees, and utility rates from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2030, with the exception of increases based on inflation or those approved by voters.

State Senator Lauren Kuby criticized the measure:

"This bill is dangerous. It's a dangerous ballot referral. It will restrict local governments and their ability to maintain essential services."

The Short-Term Rental Bill That Died

Another example involves Rep. Selina Bliss's effort to regulate short-term rentals. By the time the final Senate committee agenda was posted, it was too late to get her bill on the House appropriations committee agenda to add it to a previously-passed Senate measure in what's known as a strike-everything amendment.

"Bliss said she was getting mixed messages and was never able to speak to Petersen directly to hash out a way forward."

The bill died when it could not be advanced through the committee process using this amendment tactic.

Debate Over Transparency

Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs has criticized the practice, arguing that "strike-everything" amendments limit the amount of public debate on a bill.

"Some critics of the legislative mechanism, including Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, argue that 'strike-everything' amendments limit the amount of public debate on a bill."

Proponents counter that the tool is necessary to keep the Legislature nimble and able to respond to current events in real time rather than waiting for the next legislative session.

A Long-Standing Practice

The "strike-everything" amendment is a long-standing practice at the Arizona Capitol. Some bills introduced in the early days of the session are written to only make minor changes to statute with the intent of being used for a "strike-everything" amendment at a later point.

The specific type of amendment makes frequent appearances in the last weeks of the legislative session, when lawmakers return to issues that either stalled or were never put up for votes to begin with.

What's Next

As the legislative session nears its April 30 deadline, lawmakers will continue to use this tactic to advance their legislative agenda. Advocacy groups are calling for reforms to limit the use of "strike-everything" amendments and increase transparency in the Arizona legislature.

The next legislative session begins in January 2027, where the same debate over this legislative tool will likely continue.