How to make Arizona more affordable? GOP, Dems are far apart

Arizona Central, Ray Stern | March 17, 2026 | original article

---

Republican state lawmakers are on board with affordability assistance, saying in their yearly plan it would “unleash economic prosperity.”

Affordability’s a top priority for Democrats, too.

Each side wants voters to believe they’ve got the answer and the other party only makes the crisis worse.

A recent hour-long debate in the state House of Representatives showcased the differences.

Mesa Republican Rep. Justin Olson forwarded his plan, backed by other Republicans, to stop towns, cities and counties from increasing most fees and taxes for four years unless they get approval from the area’s voters.

His legislation became a battle of amendments on the House floor March 11 in what’s known as the committee of the whole, when all 60 House members debate a bill before moving it forward for a vote.

Ben Scheel, executive director of Opportunity Arizona, a liberal advocacy group, said his group worked with Democratic lawmakers to bring forward ideas from bills that Republicans previously wouldn’t hear, repurposing them into amendments to counter Olson’s plan.

The opposing ideas are “meant to address those systematic problems with monopolies and unequal playing fields,” Scheel said, adding Republicans propose “gutting revenue for the state and for cities and towns,” which he believes will worsen economic problems.

Olson told The Arizona Republic that Democrats should support his tax-and-fee moratorium.

“They need to recognize the tax burden that is placed on Arizonans is part of the challenge that Arizonans are facing with affordability,” he said.

Answers to affordability problem split on party lines

Affordability, used heavily as a political buzzword in recent times, doesn’t have any precise academic definition but generally refers to inflation, housing costs and other economic conditions. It encompasses inflation, quality of life, inequality and other factors.

Use of the term on the internet and in news media has risen since December, when Trump spoke about its use as a Democratic talking point, spurring more Republicans to adopt it.

One of the most cited indicators of a lack of affordability in Arizona is the price of a home: In metro Phoenix. The median home price hit $450,000 in 2025, up from less than $300,000 in 2019.

Several reasons explain why affordability “has become so poor,” Arizona economist Elliott Pollack said. Those include high interest rates, the failure of workers’ income to keep up with home prices, red tape that delays housing supplies, and how the rising costs of insurance, maintenance and obligations like “HOA fees” are “through the roof,” he said.

Arizona's economy remained “stable” in 2025 but grew slower than usual, according to experts. Yet how to best address the lax economy in Arizona, where about one in five say they’re struggling financially, is in the eye of the beholder.

The split in how to address affordability comes down to beliefs about how government should work. Republicans tend to push for a smaller government, saying residents would be better off keeping potential tax dollars in their pockets. Democrats promote a more robust government that uses public money to help people, and they criticize so-called corporate welfare.

Debate brings out partisan differences on affordability

Olson says his idea helps affordability. A section in his legislation about the intent contends the proposal would “provide temporary relief to residents and businesses” during a time of “elevated inflation and economic uncertainty.”

His plan includes two proposed laws: One is a bill and the other a proposed ballot measure, both with the same content. Both advanced in the House but would need a majority vote by the full House and Senate to pass the Legislature. If successful, the potential ballot measure would go before voters in November, bypassing the need for Hobbs’ signature if Hobbs vetoes the bill.

Democratic lawmakers, with the help of Scheel's group, countered with a cluster of amendments during the March 11 debate, each striking out Olson's content and replacing it with a new idea.

Rep. Kevin Volk of Tucson proposed making "large” data centers pay for the electricity-making infrastructure to support them.

House Democratic Leader Rep. Oscar De Los Santos of Laveen filed an amendment to restrain corporations from buying up an excess of homes. He goaded Republicans by noting he and Trump appear to agree on the issue.

Rep. Stephanie Simacek of Phoenix offered a 10-page plan to introduce a new health care outreach plan and provisions to make insurance companies pay double the claim amount on claims they unfairly deny.

Her daughter had trouble walking at age 2, she explained to her peers, but her health insurance company stopped paying for physical therapy a pediatrician had prescribed. She worked with the PT company on a payment plan her family could afford, she said, and her daughter, who’s 11 now, “walks wonderfully.”

“I don't want any other Arizonans to have to go through what my daughter and I went through,” she said.

Rep. Neal Carter of San Tan Valley, the Republican House Speaker pro tempore, appeared frustrated as he chided Democrats over the amendments during the lengthy debate, accusing them of using procedural maneuvers to “circumvent” the state constitution, which requires a three-day process to introduce and then vote on new bills.

Olson’s “good affordability measure” is not about “creating some alternatives” or “punishing corporations,” Carter said.

In the end, the Republican majority shot down all of the Democratic amendments but added measures for exceptions to the moratorium for needs, including installing new water infrastructure and school facilities.

A House vote on the bill and ballot measure was expected in mid-March.

Tax cuts, public spending can include 'good and bad' results

Asked about the issue, House leaders conveyed their parties' philosophies on how to make the state more affordable.

“Republicans believe affordability starts with reducing the costs government creates — taxes, mandates, red tape, delays, and restrictions that drive up the price of housing, energy, and everyday life,” House Speaker Steve Montenegro of Goodyear told The Republic in an email. “We understand a basic economic reality: When government constrains supply, prices rise.”

De Los Santos, the House minority leader, disagreed, saying Democrats offer a more "comprehensive solution."

In an interview, he pointed to the fight between Democrats and Republicans over Hobbs' Middle Class Tax Cuts Package, which excludes corporations from state tax cuts that conform with those in Congress' Big Beautiful Bill. Republicans want to match state tax policy with nearly all of the federal tax cuts, including those for businesses, while Hobbs and Democrats have protested the hit those cuts would make to the state budget, affecting programs and services.

"Democrats are willing to cut taxes when and where it makes sense," De Los Santos said. "But you've got to balance that with the fact that you've got to pay for services. I mean, who's going to invest in K-12 education if we get rid of taxes entirely? Education is the gateway for people to climb the socioeconomic ladder."

Daniel J. Herbst, an assistant professor of economics at the University of Arizona, stepped cautiously around the question of which party is best on affordability.

"So, there are plenty of tax cuts that have sort of a high marginal return, like to society in general," he said. "And there are plenty that are very inefficient. The same is true for public spending. There are a lot of ways we can spend money that generate high social returns per dollar spent. There are a lot of things that don't do that, that seem to generate very low returns."

In both categories, Herbst said, "there's good and bad."